Less Amerindians, more African or future Kreyòl speakers

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Sociolinguistic challenges related to translation

In the realm of translation, written text in isiZulu and written text in Haitian Kreyòl face similar sociolinguistic challenges. Biblical and religious documents were first translated into isiZulu and Haitian Kreyòl more than a century ago. Since then, the respective languages of both South Africa and Haiti have developed significantly. A review of the orthography of these early isiZulu and Haitian Krèyol translated documents demonstrate the sociolinguistic challenges.
The question posed by these early documents, is whether they should be considered as “translations” or as production of a new literature in both languages? This same relevant question must be asked of educational materials as well. It is evident that Haitians utilize more books written in French rather than books written in Kreyòl. Likewise, AmaZulu use more books written in English rather than in isiZulu. Now that the two languages are official in their respective country there is greater hope for accelerating the process of production in the field of literature. It is generally possible to discover papers and articles written in Haitian Kreyòl that have been translated from their original French. Haitian Kreyòl represents more a target language (TL) for French. The translation of documents from Haitian Kreyòl to French occur less frequently, and then, primarily to record interventions in internal Haitian affairs. This reality confirms that the two languages do not share an equal relationship within Haitian society and have, thus far, been unable to create a balanced equation between (SL) and (TL).

An evolutionary perspective

A central claim of evolutionary psychology is that the brain and therefore the mind evolved to solve problems encountered by the hunter Ancestors during the upper Pleistocene period, a time known as the Environment Evolutionary Adaptation (EEA). The fundamental assumption of evolutionary psychology is that the human mind is the product of evolution. In others words, “evolutionary psychologists regard the human mind as an information-processing device that evolved over millions of years to meet specific environmental challenges” (Fitness and Sterelng 2003, 127). To better understand the mind, a better understanding of the evolutionary pressure that shaped it is needed. Evolution is defined as “a change of one form into a different form through sequences of cause and effect, due to the interaction of internal and external forces” (Shimer 1929, 9). What scientists describe as the Age of Humanity (the Pleistocene epoch) is the period of time that human beings first evolved. This epoch is the most recent interval of earth’s history, beginning about 1.6 million years ago. During this period, the Ancestors would find a margin of adaptation to their environment. We suppose that humans are part of the natural world. They plainly have the capacity to solve certain problems” (Chomsky 1998, 149).

Natural selection: Linguistic diversity

The color or race of that common Ancestor may not be known. In the African conception of Ancestor are color and race important? How this common Ancestor evolved through the human chain, resulting in the racial, linguistic, and cultural diversity that exists today, is answered by numerous theories. Foremost is the theory of natural selection. According to Charles Darwin, natural selection implies first heritable variation. That means that all of us, different from one another, are cable of transmitting to our offsprings these differences. Second, because of these differences some of us leave more surviving offsprings than others. This is what Darwin described as differential reproductive success. “Darwin’s idea of natural selection was that animals should end up with physical and behavioural characteristics that allow them to perform well in the ordinary processes of life such as competing with their rivals, finding food, avoiding predators and finding a mate” (Cartwright 2001, 27).

Savage selection and pathological language

To these two categories of selection, natural and artificial, I would add a third: savage selection implying pathological language. What does that mean?

Natural selection is the opposite of savage selection, a term used here to describe the

violent process of choosing human beings for enslavement. African ancestors were its subject, leading to the inhumane atrocities that were inherent to the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, as described in Chapter Two. Alongside these atrocities, a wide range of sociolinguistic pathologies were experienced. Language pathology is defined to include all forms of abnormal linguistic behaviour (Crystal 1999, 190). Because of the slave trade’s enormous scale and longevity, there was a significant impact on the evolution of language. In addition, the enslaved Ancestors were under verbal fire, verbal furor and verbal violence from the colonists.

CONTENTS :

• Declaration
• Acknowledgement
• Abstract
• Chapter One
  • Introduction
  • 1.1. Background and purpose of the study
  • 1.2. Aim and approach to the study
  • 1.3. Scope of the study
  • PART I: Historical and Genetic Relationships
• Chapter Two
  • Historical Roots – Linguistic Roots
  • A. Historical and Linguistic Roots
  • 2.1. Historical roots of the first inhabitants of Haiti
  • 2.2. Linguistic roots of the first inhabitants of Haiti
  • 2.3. Social changes and sociolinguistic factors
  • 2.4. Language contact, language loss
  • B. From African Roots to Kreyòl Roots
  • 2.5. African roots of Haitian Kreyòl
  • 2.6. Less Amerindians, more African or future Kreyòl speakers
  • 2.7. Conclusion
• Chapter Three
  • Bantu Languages, IsiZulu’s Family
  • 3.1. W.H. Bleek and Bantu languages
  • 3.2. Tracing isiZulu roots through African languages
    • 3.2.1. Afro-Asiatic languages
    • 3.2.2. Nilo-Saharan languages
    • 3.2.3. Khoisan languages
    • 3.2.4. Niger-Congo
    • 3.2.5. Joseph Greenberg’s classification
    • 3.2.6. Guthrie’s definition of Bantu languages
  • A. Principal criteria
  • B. Subsidiary criteria
  • 3.2.7. Guthrie’s classification of Bantu languages
  • 3.3. Bantu expansion
  • 3.4. Comparative roots: IsiZulu – Haitian Kreyòl
  • 3.5 Conclusion
• Chapter Four
  • Genetically Related: Kreyòl – French – Latin
  • A. Kreyòl and Creoles
  • 4.1. Kreyòl between two revolutions
  • 4.1.1. Kreyòl ngomoya wamagama
  • 4.1.2. The Haitian Constitution of 1801 (English)
    • 4.1.3. Toussaint’s letter to Napoléon regarding the 1801Constitution
    • 4.1.4. Napoléon’s letter to Toussaint Louverture (1801)
    • 4.1.5. The Proclamation of Saint-Domingue by Leclerc (1802)
      • 4.1.5.1.Napoléon’s special Kreyòl
• 4.1.6. Letter by the French Minister of the Marine to the Fort de Joux Commandant (1802)
• 4.1.7. Act of Independence
• B. French-Latin: Historic Roots
• 4.2. Gaulish language
• 4.3. Celtic languages
• 4.4. Oïl languages
• 4.5. Old French
• 4.6. From Old French to Modern French: Nouns and Verbs
• 4.7. The influence of the Frankish language
• 4.8. French, the product of linguistic evolution
• C. Comparative Method
• 4.9. Cognate list (Kreyòl-French- Latin)
• 4.10. Conclusion
• PART II: IsiZulu-Haitian Kreyòl
• Chapter Five
• PART III: So far yet so close: IsiZulu-Haitian Kreyòl
• Chapter Six
• Chapter Seven
• Chapter Eight

GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT
UMOYA WAMAGAMA (THE SPIRIT OF THE WORDS)