he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu Linguistic and historical evidence* Bart Jacobs Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München his paper deals with the linguistic and historical relationships between Papiamentu and Upper Guinea Creole as spoken on the Santiago island of Cape Verde and in Guinea-Bissau and Casamance. In the linguistic section, the hypothesis that Papiamentu is a relexiied ofshoot of an early Upper Guinea Creole variety is lent support by focusing on the structural correspondences of the function words in ive grammatical categories (pronouns, question words, prepositions, conjunctions and reciprocity and relexivity). In addition, salient data from several early (18th and 19th century) Papiamentu texts is presented. he historical section provides a framework that accounts for the linguistic transfer from Upper Guinea to Curaçao in the second half of the 17th century. Keywords: Papiamentu, Upper Guinea Creole, relexiication, function words, 17th century slave trade, irst Dutch West India Company, Gorée, Sephardim 1. Introduction his paper is concerned with the Afro-Portuguese origins of Papiamentu (PA). To clarify these origins I will focus on both the linguistic and historical relationships between PA and the Upper Guinea branch of Portuguese-based Creole (UGC) as spoken on the Santiago island of Cape Verde (SCV), and in Guinea-Bissau and * I owe a large debt of gratitude to Lucille Berry-Haseth, Ulrich Detges, Anthony Grant, Toby Green, Tjerk Hagemeijer, Rigmar Haynes, John Holm, Richard Hooi, Silvio Jonis, Sidney Joubert, Ellen-Petra Kester, Wim Klooster, Mirto Laclé, Annette Mantlik, John McWhorter, Mikael Parkvall, Matthias Perl, Sebastian Postlep, Josep Quer, Nicolas Quint, Joseph Salmons, Armin Schwegler, Ronnie Severing, Bastiaan van der Velden, Florimon van Putte, Igma van Putte-De Windt and the anonymous Diachronica reviewers for valuable comments, suggestions and other help. Translations of quotes are my own. Diachronica 26:3 (2009), 319–379. doi 10.1075/dia.26.3.02jac issn 0176–225 / e-issn 1569–971 © John Benjamins Publishing Company 320 Bart Jacobs Casamance (GB).1 he hypothesis that these creoles share a common origin will be examined by comparing the function words of ive grammatical categories of the creoles in question. he paper closes with a presentation of little-known historical data, which in a straightforward manner account for the linguistic transfer from Upper Guinea to Curaçao. Ever since Lenz’ (1928) pioneering description of PA, its mixed Spanish-Portuguese vocabulary has provoked heavy debate.2 Lenz’ plea for PA’s Afro-Portuguese origins (“Su gramática … es ‘negro-portuguesa’ en primer lugar” (323)) received support from prominent scholars such as Navarro Tomás (1953), Van Wijk (1958), Valkhof (1966) and Voorhoeve (1973), but linguists defending PA’s Spanish roots (e.g., Maduro 1965, 1966, 1969, DeBose 1975 or Rona 1976) have been similarly numerous. hat the debate is far from settled is noted by Lipski (2005: 282), who asserts that up to present “scholars are … evenly divided as to the Spanish vs. Portuguese origins of Papiamento”. Typical of this division is that in 1996, Munteanu fervently painted PA as an originally Spanish creole, while in that same year Martinus, no less passionately, defended PA’s Afro-Portuguese roots. Because of the controversy over its origins, it is safest to call PA an Iberian-based creole language. However, as Kramer (2004: 100) comments: “Dieser glückliche Terminus enthebt einen dennoch nicht der Suche nach einer Erklärung für die teils spanische, teils portugiesische Prägung des Wortschatzes” (“his fortunate term does not relieve us of the search for an explanation of the partially Spanish, partially Portuguese character of Papiamentu”). Goodman’s (1987) attempt to provide such an explanation has become known as the Brazilian Creole Hypothesis and consists of the claim that in Brazilian sugar plantations a Portuguese creole was spoken, which, ater the recapture of Pernambuco by the Portuguese, found its way to Curaçao. Although this theory had some 1. Although on rare occasions kinship between SCV and GB has been disputed (e.g., MoraisBarbosa 1975: 150, D’Andrade & Kihm 2000: 108), I will depart from the generally accepted idea that the two creoles have shared origins. Quint (2000b: 99–117) presents a concise comparison between SCV and GB that leaves little room for doubt. Recently, Baptista et al. (2007) have further explored the similarities between the two creoles and have established a 90% correspondence of grammatical features, measured by Holm & Patrick’s (2007) comparative creole chart. From both a linguistic and a historical point of view, UGC is likely to have come into being on the island of Santiago, from where it was taken to the mainland by Cape Verdeans settling in and around Cacheu (see Jacobs forthcoming b). 2. Both Busche (1993) and Ferrol (1982) give concise overviews of the state of the question of PA’s origins. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 321 impact on PA studies, evidence of a former Brazilian creole has never been found (cf. Rougé 2008, Joubert & Perl 2007: 46, Parkvall 2000: 137, Maurer 1998: 198).3 Martinus (1996) deserves much credit for being the irst ater Lenz (1928)4 to compare PA into some detail with Cape Verdean Creole.5 He ends up arguing for a common origin for Cape Verdean Creole, PA, Gulf of Guinea Creole (GGC), Palenquero (PL) as well as the Surinam creoles, a monogenetic hypothesis the nature of which remains unclear (cf. Martinus 2007).6 It is nevertheless important to stress that Martinus planted the seeds for subsequent research into PA’s AfroPortuguese origins. Contrary to Martinus (1996), Quint (2000b: 119–196) classiies PA, SCV and GB as a linguistic family of creoles separate from all other Iberian-based creoles. Ater systematically exposing striking linguistic correspondences between PA and SCV at all levels of the grammar, he concludes (Quint 2000b: 196, 197): Le papiamento et le badiais [SCV] sont étroitement apparentés et ont une origine commune … . L’importance des emprunts faits par le papiamento à l’espagnol est probablement due à une relexiication partielle, favorisée par l’usage de l’espagnol comme langue religieuse et de prestige (“PA and SCV are closely related and have a common origin. he importance of the Spanish borrowings in PA is probably 3. Furthermore, crucial parts of Goodman’s historical framework are denied by Martinus (1996: 91–93), Ladhams (1999a, b) and Arends (1999). 4. Between Lenz (1928) and Martinus (1996), various other linguists have, to diferent extents, alluded to the similarities between PA and Cape Verdean Creole and/or other Portuguese-based creoles. In this respect, the articles of Van Wijk (1958, 1968, 1969) and Birmingham (1975) deserve mention. Carreira (1983) also stands out for hinting at a possible link between PA and Cape Verdean Creole: on the back-cover of his history of Cape Verdean Creole an excerpt from an article written in PA is printed. Maduro, furthermore, presented a juxtaposition of a PA text with its translations in Palenquero (1987a) and Santo Antão Cape Verdean Creole (1987b) respectively. Interestingly, the objective of the latter was “to demonstrate the immense distance — or should I say the unbridgeable gap? — between PA and Cape Verdean Creole” (Maduro 1987b: 22). herefore, the publication seems in line with his resolute rejection of all PA’s Afro-Portuguese theories in earlier work (e.g., Maduro 1965, 1966, 1969, 1971). Subsequently, Maduro would continue to defend PA’s Spanish origins (e.g., Maduro 1991). 5. It is noted that Martinus (1996) does not distinguish between the Barlavento and Sotavento varieties. For chronological reasons (see, for instance, Bartens (2000) on the difusion of Cape Verdean Creole from Santiago to the other islands), the former are highly unlikely to have played any role in the formation of PA. See Quint (2000b), Veiga (2000) and Pereira (2000) for details on dialectal variation. 6. See Bickerton (1999) for a (too) critical discussion of Martinus (1996). 322 Bart Jacobs due to a partial relexiication supported by the use of Spanish as the language of religion and prestige”). his claim, however, did not ind any resonance in related publications: Lipski (2005: 285), for example, asserts that PA, “apart from some general similarities to Cape Verdean Creole, is not clearly related to any West African creole”, while Munteanu (2007: 442), regarding PA, declares: “Algunos estudiosos ponen en tela de juicio su origen hispánico y deienden su iliación portuguesa, pero en la actualidad esta posición ha perdido mucho terreno” (“Some scholars doubt its Spanish origin and defend its Portuguese ailiation, but nowadays this position has lost much ground”). here is a remarkable absence of references to Quint (2000b) (and, for that matter, to any of the striking correspondences between PA and UGC therein) in recent works concerned with placing PA in a cross-creole perspective. he present paper tries to ill this lacuna in the research on PA’s origins. 2. Structure of this paper and working hypothesis he paper has both a linguistic (§3) and a historical (§4) component and aims to linguistically and historically underpin the hypothesis that PA is a (partially) relexiied ofshoot from early UGC. §3 compares PA and UGC across ive grammatical categories: the pronominal system (§3.1), question words (§3.2), prepositions (§3.3), conjunctions (§3.4) and reciprocity and relexivity (§3.5) and closes with the presentation of salient data from several early (18th and 19th century) PA texts. §4 presents historical data which, to my knowledge, have never been related to the history of Curaçao let alone to the origins of PA, but which fully account for the linguistic transfer from Upper Guinea to Curaçao: §4.1 analyses the irst Dutch West India Company’s dominant role in Upper Guinea and presents little-known data on the slave trade from Gorée and Cape Verde to Curaçao in the crucial period from 1659–1677. §4.2 highlights the underexposed but pronounced presence of a Sephardic Jewish community in Cape Verde and emphasizes their social and trading networks with Amsterdam and Curaçao. hese historical data allow for the possibility of at least two (slave) trading networks linking Upper Guinea and Curaçao (§§4.1 and 4.2 respectively). Convergence of and collaboration between both these networks allowed for an early but fully ledged variety of UGC to be brought into Curaçao in the second half of the 17th century. It is important to emphasize that ater 1677 slaves to Curaçao were imported almost exclusively from Kwa- and Bantu-speaking areas. Since Curaçao was settled by the Dutch from 1634 onwards, the linguistic transfer from Upper Guinea he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 323 to Curaçao must have occurred in the period between 1634 and approximately 1677. I claim, then, that ater 1677, when slaves from Kwa- and Bantu-speaking areas became numerically dominant on Curaçao, an ofshoot of early UGC had already established itself as a contact language on the island of Curaçao. Both the Kwa and Bantu substrate as well as Spanish (and to a lesser extent Dutch and possibly several other (contact) languages) would then have contributed signiicantly to the modiication and relexiication of this ofshoot, although leaving intact a structural part of the original UGC grammar and function words. 2.1 A case for (partial) relexiication of an Afro-Portuguese Creole in the Caribbean realm he choice to build the linguistic section of this paper around function words is based on Muysken & Smith’s (1990: 883) assertion that “Function words … are normally less susceptible to replacement … than content words, as is demonstrated in the study of Indo-European languages”. Similarly, Cardoso & Smith (2004: 118) observe that in a case of relexiication “one would expect a much slower replacement … among function words”. herefore, if PA and UGC do indeed have a common origin, we would expect to ind the evidence for this precisely in the correspondence of their function words. In the comparison that follows below it will become clear that most of PA’s function words resemble those of UGC not only in form, but also in semantic range and syntactic use. To emphasize the idiosyncrasy of some of the correspondences, I will provide contrasting data from other Iberian-based creoles (mainly PL and GGC). 2.2 Where does the Portuguese come from? Obviously, the claim that all shared features and items discussed below are unique to PA and UGC is untenable; many can probably be shown to also appear in one or another (overseas) variety of Spanish or Portuguese and some researchers have made a hobby out of showing just this (e.g., Barme 2003), oten with the purpose of playing down the (Afro-)Portuguese elements in PA’s core grammar, as illustrated by Wood’s (1972: 19) discussion of Maduro (1965, 1966): Maduro, a strong opponent of the Afro-Portuguese hypothesis, has demonstrated the practical weaknesses of the theory … by refuting the many dubious Portuguese etymologies proposed by Lenz, and suggesting … derivations in 17th century Spanish, in other dialects of the Peninsula, or in the dialects of the adjacent countries, notably Venezuela, Colombia and the Dominican Republic. he residue of 324 Bart Jacobs speciically Portuguese loanwords and phonological similarities Maduro ascribes to the Portuguese Jews who settled in Curaçao (Wood 1972: 19). Kramer (2004: 104), however, explains why this tendency is problematic: Den primär portugiesischen Charakter des nichtkastilischen iberoromanischen Anteils am Papiamento-Wortschatz darf man … nicht durch Verweis auf das Autauchen desselben Wortes in mal dieser, mal jener Sprachform der iberischen Halbinsel wegdiskutieren: Etwa ein Sechstel des Papiamento-Wortschatzes ist eindeutig portugiesischer Herkunt, darunter durchaus Elemente des Grundwortschatzes und Strukturwörter (“he primarily Portuguese character of the nonCastilian Iberian part of PA’s vocabulary should not be ignored by pointing to the occurrence of the same word in one or the other Iberian speech variety: about one sixth of PA’s vocabulary, mostly core vocabulary items and structure words, is clearly of Portuguese origin”). Indeed, as Maurer (1998: 198) points out: “es poco probable que el gallego o el catalán / valenciano hayan tenido alguna inluencia en la formación del papiamentu, pues no se menciona la presencia en Curazao de catalanes, valencianos o gallegos en las fuentes históricas” (“It is unlikely that either Galician, Catalan or Valencian played any role in the formation of PA, since the presence on Curaçao of Catalans, Valencians or Galicians is not mentioned in historical sources”). Moreover, before arguing that the Portuguese ethnolect of the Sephardic Jewish settlers of 17th century Curaçao might have provided the Portuguese elements in PA’s core grammar, one should note the following: – – We do not know whether the Curaçaoan Jews spoke Portuguese amongst each other: “It is … extremely diicult to draw conclusions regarding what language Sephardic immigrants may have spoken” (Joubert & Perl 2007: 48).7 Even if they did speak (a variety of) Portuguese, their number would at any time have been too small to exert a linguistic inluence strong enough to affect PA’s core grammar. Maurer (1986: 98), for instance, assures us that the Sephardim “n’ont jamais possédé plus du 15 % des esclaves” (“never possessed more than 15% of the slaves”) (cf. Joubert & Perl 2007: 46). his suggests that, in a hypothetical Curaçao-situated PA birth, the linguistic contribution of the Sephardim would always have been smaller than that of the Dutch, who owned the remaining 85% of the slaves. Still, the number of Dutch-derived functional elements in PA can be counted on the ingers of one hand and all seem to be relatively recent borrowings. 7. Similarly, Wood (1970: 8, 9) had already observed that “there is no proof that Portuguese was ever the vernacular among the Sephardic Jews of Curaçao”. De Haseth (1990) and De Granda (1974) also address this issue. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 325 – hirdly, a signiicant set of salient Old (15th–16th century) Portuguese features can be identiied in PA’s core grammar (see details in Jacobs forthcoming a). Since, to my knowledge, we lack detailed descriptions of what Curaçaoan Jewish Portuguese looked like, we cannot tell whether the Old Portuguese features were present at all in the ethnolect.8 In short, attempts to attribute the Portuguese features in PA’s core grammar to diferent Iberian speech varieties are bound to remain purely speculative.9 he remainder of this paper, thus, seeks to shake of the speculation that so oten surrounds the debate on PA’s origins, by showing that all Portuguese-derived functional elements in at least ive core grammatical categories can be traced back to one source, namely UGC, and that, in addition, the same is true for many of the indecisively Spanish- or Portuguese-derived items. he most exclusive ‘feature’ presented below, therefore, is the structural correspondence of PA and UGC throughout the grammatical categories discussed. 3. Correspondences between PA and UGC in ive grammatical categories he shared features are by no means limited to the ive categories discussed in this paper; my choice to discuss these — and not, for instance, quantiiers, TMA markers or modal verbs — is indeed to some extent an arbitrary one, but irst and foremost a choice limited by space. It should be noted, therefore, that the data presented below form part of an ongoing research project, of which the present paper is a irst fruit, one to which I hope to provide proper continuity in future publications. a 8. Jacobs (forthcoming a) discusses the Old Portuguese features in PA’s core grammar and demonstrates that all of these can be traced back to UGC. 9. Not discussed here is the tendency to attribute apparently Portuguese features in PA (e.g., the preservation of the phoneme /ʃ/) to Old (15th–17th century) Spanish (e.g., Maduro 1966, Munteanu 1996). Quint (2000b: 184–185), however, presents compelling linguistic evidence against Old Spanish participation in PA’s formation, which is discussed in more detail in Jacobs (forthcoming a). 326 Bart Jacobs 3.1 Pronominal system: Simple and emphatic forms Table 1. Simple (post-prepositional) and emphatic (with preixed /a/) pronouns10 PA11 SCV GB 1sg (a)mi (a)mi (a)mi 2sg (a)bo (a)bo (a)bo 3sg e ~ el (a)el el 1pl (a)nos (a)nos (a)nos 2pl (a)boso (a)nhos (a)bos 3pl (a)nan (a)es (a)elis Besides stressing the obvious correspondences of the forms in bold, it is relevant to observe the following: 3.1.1 2pl SCV nhos his form derives from P senhores “gentlemen” (Rougé 2004: 259). Table 1 makes it tempting to assume that an early 2pl SCV *bos once existed alongside, or instead of, SCV nhos (cf. Quint 2000b: 137). his idea is supported by the fact that 2sg SCV bo has the polite variants nhu / nha (< P senhor(a) “lady / gentleman”) (Rougé 2004: 24). 3.1.2 Clitic features Although PA does not have a clitic pronominal system to the extent that UGC does,12 PA displays two salient clitic features that are reminiscent of UGC. Both are illustrated in (1a, b): irstly, the /o/ of the 2sg becomes [u] in object position; secondly, disyllabic verbs, stressed without exception on the irst syllable in PA as 10. Martinus (1996: 183) compared PA’s pronouns with those of GB; Quint (2000b: 136–138) did the same for PA and SCV. See, for instance, Veiga (2000: 172, 173), Scantamburlo (1999: 180– 182) and Dijkhof (2000: 65–67) for more details on pronouns in SCV, GB and PA respectively. 11. he emphatic plural pronouns anos, aboso and anan are attested only in Aruban PA, which can therefore be said to be more conservative in this respect (Martinus 1996: 183). 12. For details on UGC’s clitic pronouns, see, for instance, Rougé (2004: 22, 24) or Baptista et al. (2007: 77) as well as the references mentioned in footnote 17. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 327 well as in SCV,13 undergo a stress shit from the irst to the last syllable when the verb is followed by a pronoun:14 (1) a. PA mi ta ˈmira + bo > mi ta miˈra bu 1sg IMP look 2sg > 1sg IMP look 2sg “I see you” b. SCV m ta ˈodja + bo > m ta oˈdja (b)u 1sg IMP look 2sg > 1sg IMP look 2sg “I see you” (Quint 2000b: 138) 3.1.3 Emphatic pronouns Noteworthy is the use in PA, SCV and GB of at least ive emphatic subject pronouns comprising the simple pronoun plus a prosthetic /a/- (see Table 1). For GB, Kihm (1989: 360fn) remarks: “Such formal contrasts of two pronominal sets (not so clear in other creole languages) is a general feature of the substrate”. Indeed, this morphosyntactic category seems present in the Atlantic branch of African languages spoken in Upper Guinea (cf. Intumbo 2006: 113, 2007: 48, 49, 2008: 273, 274) and sets PA and UGC apart from the other Iberian creoles (see below). Although the prosthetic /a-/ could have come about through analogy with the lexiier’s dative constructions (S a mí, P a mim, etc.), the behavior and use of the emphatic pronouns is in no way reminiscent of Portuguese or Spanish. For instance, in PA, UGC and Balanta the emphatic pronouns cannot occur in direct or indirect object position (Intumbo 2007: 48), while Iberian a mí ~ a mim, etc., only occur in object position.15 Kihm (1994: 152) also believes that “the substrate languages probably supplied the overall pattern of contrasting non-A with A-pronouns. Such a pattern is invisible in Portuguese”. 13. Quint (2000b: 142) was the irst to note that in both PA and SCV “les verbes (…) dissyllabiques d’origine romane sont accentués sur l’avant denière syllabe à l’actif présent”. he level of exclusiveness of this feature seems high: to my knowledge, in all other Iberian-based creoles (with the possible exception of GB) disyllabic verbs bear stress on the inal syllable: for PL see De Friedemann & Patiño (1983: 91), for GGC see Ferraz (1979: 20), for SM see Cardoso & Smith (2004: 138, 140). 14. For GB, matters seem more complicated: Wilson (1962: 19) noted that, “While the stress in disyllabic verbs is normally on the irst syllable, when an object pronoun is suixed, this stress is shited to the last syllable”, suggesting that disyllabic verbs in GB behave just as in PA and SCV. Both Quint (2000a: 88) and Kihm (1994: 14), however, believe that, contrary to PA and SCV, all verbs in GB usually bear stress on the inal syllable. Birmingham (1975: 67), on the other hand, in line with Wilson, stated that GB “tends to place the stress on the next-to-last syllable of an ininitive”. 15. Note also that, contrary to the French emphatic pronouns moi and toi for example, the PA, UGC and Balanta emphatic pronouns cannot follow a preposition (Intumbo 2006: 113). 328 Bart Jacobs It is a fact that the emphatic 1sg ami is found in a wider range of Afro-Iberian speech varieties, such as Cuban Bozal Spanish and GGC (cf. Lipski 1991). hat leaves unchallenged, however, the exclusivity of having ive emphatic pronouns, as do PA and UGC: while Principense (PRI) has three emphatic singular pronouns (ami, atxi, eli) (Rougé 2004: 27), Sãotomense (ST) has two (ami, ele) (Hagemeijer 2007: 21). In Angolar (ANG) as well as in PL emphatic pronouns are absent (Rougé 2004: 27, Schwegler 1998: 260, Schwegler 2002). he sum of these data suggests that the use of ive emphatic a-pronouns constitutes an Upper Guinea substrate feature in PA. In the canonical literature on PA, Mande and Atlantic languages are rarely, if ever, considered as contributors to PA’s substrate. Maurer (1991: 126, cf. Barme 2003: 237, Munteanu 1991: 22) sums up this consensus: “Es sind vor allem Bantudialekte aus der Region Kongo/Angola und Kwadialekte aus der Region, die sich von Ghana bis Nigeria erstreckt, die als afrikanische Basissprachen des Papiamentu in Frage kommen” (“Primarily Bantu dialects from the Congo/Angola region and Kwa dialects from the region stretching from Ghana to Nigeria can be considered as PA’s African base languages”). 3.1.4 PA nan One reason why the similarities between PA and UGC in the pronominal system have been largely neglected in recent studies on the origins of PA is without a doubt the presence of the 3pl nan, which also functions as a nominal pluralizer. Because of its marked character and strong resemblance in form and use to the GGC 3pl pronouns (also nominal pluralizers), PA nan has oten been at the center of attention in the literature on PA’s possible West African origins and seems to have overshadowed the relationships between PA and UGC in the pronominal category, however striking they are. A good case in point is Birmingham’s (1971: 301, cf. Valkhof 1966: 96) discussion of PA nan: nan is one of the few African morphemes in Papiamentu. As a point of fact, the plural morpheme nan appears as well in at least one Portuguese dialect still spoken along the west coast of Africa. Part of my dissertation attempts to prove that Papiamentu originated in and around the Gulf of Guinea and that its basis is a Portuguese lingua franca spoken in that area in the days of the slave trade. Similarly, Maurer (2002) discusses the correspondences between PA nan and GGC’s 3pl pronouns and the genetic relationships that these suggest, but makes no mention of the fact that the remainder of PA’s pronominal system shows a oneto-one correspondence with UGC. Although its position as a pluralizer is postnominal (versus prenominal in GGC), it is well possible that PA nan is related to (one of) its GGC equivalents. However, this does not present any obstacle to the hypothesis that PA’s pronominal he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 329 system, minus nan, derives completely from early UGC, which, as will be argued below, probably arrived at Curaçao without a distinct 3pl pronoun and without plural marking morphology, allowing for PA nan to be introduced in a post-formative phase. 3pl pronouns are typically unstable in a creole’s development. A irst indication of this is that the 3pl pronoun is not identical in SCV (es) and GB (elis) either. Signiicantly, just as in PA, in PL also an African 3pl pronoun (ané < Kikongo ba ne “they (over there)”) managed to establish itself amongst a set of pronouns of Iberian origin (Schwegler & Green 2007: 299, 300).16 Moreover, if we may believe Da Silva Rêgo (1998: 66), in Kristang, an Asio-Portuguese creole, “desapareceram as formas tu e êles” (“the forms tu and êles disappeared”). Quint (2000b: 204) also put forward the possibility of an early UGC pronominal paradigm without a distinct 3pl pronoun: “On peut … se demander si une telle forme a vraiment existé … : on peut très bien imaginer un stade ou *EL PISKÁ … aurait signiié il a péché ou ils ont péché en fonction du contexte” (“One may wonder if such a form really existed: one can easily imagine a stage in which *EL PISKA would have meant either “he has ished” or “they have ished” depending on the context”). Again, a look at PL serves as conirmation: in PL, the 3sg pronoun ele “occasionally has a third-person plural function” (Schwegler 1999 in Parkvall 2000: 106, cf. Schwegler & Green 2007: 300). In addition to lacking a distinct 3pl pronoun, the plural marking morphology is also likely to have been ‘vacant’ in early UGC / early PA. Maurer (2002: 131fn), for instance, remarks: “No está claro desde cuándo se empezó a emplear el marcador –s en el criollo de Cabo Verde y en el kriôl” (“It is not clear when the [plural] marker -s was brought into use in Cape Verdean Creole and GB”), raising the idea that UGC initially lacked plural morphology, like many (creole) languages. In Korlai, an Indo-Portuguese creole, for instance, “there is no plural marker” (Clements 2007: 167), and Parkvall (2000: 158, emphasis added), when giving estimates of the time span needed for certain African syntactic features to fully integrate into a (Atlantic) creole’s syntax, summarizes: nominal plural marking might potentially be a case of late substrate inluence. Its absence in many of the world’s languages proves it to be a feature that human language, regardless of whether it has gone through pidginization or not, can manage without. Indeed, overt plural marking has been shown to be a late development in the Indian Ocean FCs … and it was moderately grammaticalised in Negerhollands DC, which could be taken to suggest a relatively late development. 16. But note also PL’s 2pl enu, which is found besides 2pl utere (< S ustedes “you (pl)”) and whose Kikongo origin is discussed in Schwegler (2002: 309–312). See both Schwegler & Green (2007: 298–300) and Bickerton (2002) for further (diachronic) analyses of PL’s pronouns. 330 Bart Jacobs In the light of these data, it does not seem far-fetched to assume that the early UGC variety brought to Curaçao was lacking a distinct 3pl pronoun and had, if any, no pronounced plural marking morphology. As a consequence, there seems to have been scope in early PA for the 3pl pronoun / plural marker nan to be introduced post-formatively by speakers of Kwa languages (and/or GGC) when these became numerically dominant on Curaçao.17 PA boso and bosonan: Convergence of UGC features with a Kwa / Bantu substrate Besides PA nan, there are two other aspects of PA’s pronominal system that suggest that this system results from the subtle modiication and extension of the original UGC pronominal system by speakers of Kwa / Bantu languages (and/or GGC): 3.1.5 – – he 2pl PA boso seems to result from the paragoge of a vowel to the UGC form bos. he paragoge of vowels to restore a /CV/ syllable pattern is typical of GGC rather than of UGC. PA boso can be pleonastically marked for plural, forming PA bosonan. he latter form is analytically similar to the ST 2pl (i)nan-sé, with sé < P você(s) “you (pl)” and (i)nan marking plurality (Tjerk Hagemeijer, p. c.). 3.1.6 Concluding remarks on the pronominal system Regarding the hypothesized ST origins of the PL 3pl pronoun ané, Bickerton (2002: 40) — oten at his best when arguing against Afro-European inluence in Caribbean creoles — comments: “Pero ésta es una forma africana, y no se puede eliminar la possibilidad de que ané venga directamente de alguna lengua africana …. Y aun, si de veras viene del santomense este vocablo, aquí … se trata meramente de un vocablo suelto, no de un sistema” (“But this is an African form and it cannot be discarded that ané derives directly from some African language. And even if this form does derive from ST, here we are merely dealing with a single form, not with a system”). It is revealing to note that exactly the same is true for PA’s 3pl nan and its equivalent in Annobonense, but that PA and UGC, on the other hand, do in fact share a system. he pronominal resemblances exposed above are unattested between PA and any language other than UGC. Admittedly, some of the material can without a doubt be shown to also exist in some other Iberian variety or creole, but, to link up 17. Note that the same argumentation can be applied to two other features that distinguish PA from UGC: irstly, the use in PA of heavy verbal serialization versus relatively modest verbal serialization in UGC (cf. Quint 2000b: 178–180) and secondly, the overt preverbal perfective aspect marker PA a where UGC has a zero marker. he absence of these features in early UGC allowed for them to be introduced in PA in a post-formative phase. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 331 with Parkvall (2000: 101), “A pronoun paradigm is simply not assembled from bits and pieces in ive diferent languages”. 3.2 Question words Table 2. Question words18 (cf. Quint 2000b: 141, Kihm 1994: 209) PA SCV19 GB GLOSS ken20 ken21 kin “who?” (na) unda (na) unde nunde (na + unde) “where(to)?” ki ki ki “who, what?” ki ora ki dia ki tempu ki ora ki dia ki tempu kal ora kal dia kal tempu “when?” (lit. “what hour ~ day ~ time?”) he following lexemes in PA’s inventory are likely to be Portuguese-derived: ken < P quem (≠ S quien), unda < P onde (≠ S donde), tempu < P tempu (≠ S tiempo). he question words for “how?” and “why?” are diferent in all three creoles: the forms most commonly used are SCV modi, GB kuma and PA kon (but kum in the fossilized idiom kumbai? “how are you?”) for “how?”, and SCV pa modi, GB purke and PA pa kiko (but <pa kiku> in various early PA texts, e.g. Conradi 1844) for “why?”. Furthermore, besides PA / UGC ki, the creoles each have a distinct bimorphemic form for “what?”: GB ke ku, SCV kusé and PA kiko (but <ki ku> in some early PA texts, e.g. Lenz 1928: 162). 18. When the question words function as relative pronouns, they can occur optionally with the relative marker ku: PA ken ku “who?”, unda ku “where?”; SCV ken ki “who?”, unde ki “where?”, etc. (Kouwenberg & Ramos-Michel 2007: 328, Baptista et al. 2007: 78). 19. According to Baptista et al. (2007: 78), all UGC’s interrogatives are accompanied by relative ki (SCV) ~ ku (GB). Quint (2000a: 216) reines this by pointing out that in SCV this is true only for the monosyllabic interrogatives. In any case, there are reasons to assume that this pleonastic ku results from post-formative contact with Portuguese: it is attested more frequently in urban SCV speech, where inluence from Portuguese is more noticeable. Because of this, and simply to facilitate comparison, I have taken the simple UGC forms as a point of reference. 20. PA also has (originally bimorphemic) kende (< ki + hende). Bimorphemic “who” is common cross-linguistically (Parkvall 2000: 101), but its existence in PA alongside monomorphemic ken could point towards Kwa or Bantu inluence. 21. SCV also knows the form kenha (Quint 2000a: 215). 332 Bart Jacobs 3.2.1 Early PA *kantu, kal = UGC kantu, kal In a previous stage PA and UGC interrogatives are likely to have corresponded even more closely. his can be induced from the monophthong in PA kalke “any” < UGC kalker, which occurs in free variation with diphthongized PA kualke.22 One can thus hypothesize about the early PA forms *kantu “how much?” and *kal “which?”, similar to UGC kantu and kal, whereas modern PA has kuantu and kual. 3.2.2 Bimorphemic and monomorphemic question words in exactly the same cases While both PA and UGC have a semi-transparent (mixed bi- and monomorphemic) question word system, it is important to point out that they are either transparent (e.g., bimorphemic “when”) or non-transparent (e.g., monomorphemic “who” and “where”) in exactly the same cases. Although bimorphemic question words for “when?” are common to many (creole) languages, the same is true for bimorphemic question words for “who?” and “where?”,23 and so much so, that the development of bimorphemic “who” and “when” is oten referred to as a universal tendency among pidgins and creoles (Lipski 2005: 260). It is all the more signiicant that both PA and UGC rather chose monomorphemic forms (derived from the same Portuguese etyma quem and onde) to express “who?” and “where?”. 3.2.3 PA unda, SCV unde and GB nunde Salient is the stressed [u] instead of etymological /o/ in PA unda and UGC unde, whereas ST and ANG have andji “where?” (Fontes 2007, Maurer 1995: 64).24 Spanish-based creoles PL and Zamboangueño provide extra contrast, with the forms a(d)onde and donde respectively (Schwegler 1996: 421, Lipski & Santoro 2007: 394). Note, moreover, that several 19th century authors writing in PA used the form <unde> (e.g., Putman 1849, Niewindt 1837). Consider also the striking compositional resemblance between PA na unda, SCV na unde and GB nunde (< na + unde) (all “where (to)?”) and PA pa unda and SCV punde (both “where to?”). To emphasize the exclusiveness of these constructions, recall the PL form a(d)onde “where(to)?”, composed of Spanish a + donde. 22. he monophthong in the second syllable of PA kalke~kualke shows that the etymon of this adverb is Portuguese qualquer rather than Spanish cualquier. 23. See for example Holm (2000: 226) or Parkvall (2000: 101, 2001: 199–203). 24. PA unda and UGC unde suggest an early Portuguese form *unde instead of modern onde, an idea strengthened by Korlai un “where?” (Clements 2007: 170). he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 333 3.3 Prepositions Table 3. Simple prepositions (cf. Quint 2000b: 140, Kouwenberg & Murray 1994: 52, Baptista et al. 2007: 79) PA UGC GLOSS di di “from” ku ku “with” na na “in, to” pa pa “for, by” riba riba, ruba “on, over” te te, ti “until” den ~ denter dentu “in” he simple prepositions listed above are those, which do not require combining with di in PA (Kouwenberg & Murray 1994: 52). As it happens, with the exception of SCV dentu,25 the same prepositions are singled out by Quint (2000a: 201)26 as representing “les prépositions du vieux fonds créole traditionnel” (“the prepositions of the old traditional base of the creole”). Two items of probable Portuguese origin can be identiied (PA na < P na (em + a) ≠ S en la; PA te < P até ≠ S hasta) versus none of probable Spanish origin. his renders incorrect Munteanu’s (1996: 387) airmation that PA’s prepositional system represents a slightly simpliied continuation of the Spanish system. Considering the fact that function words, and thus prepositions, are relatively resistant to replacement (cf. §2.1), it seems unnecessary to go into syntactic and semantic detail: one is inclined merely on the basis of the phonological correspondence to assume that the prepositional systems have one and the same origin. I go into such detail here (a) to emphasize the structural correspondence of PA’s and UGC’s prepositions and (b) to weaken hypotheses that adduce decreolization to account for the correspondences (e.g., Endruschat 2004: 66, 2005: 193). 25. he inclusion of SCV dentu in Table 3 is justiied, though, since it does occasionally occur as a simple preposition, as in SCV dentu-loja “in(side) the store” (Mendes et al. 2002: 168), which equals PA den pakus (with pakus < D pakhuis “warehouse”). 26. Quint presents SCV sen as a seventh simple preposition. In fact, PA sin should also have been included in Kouwenberg & Murray’s list of simple prepositions, since it does not require combining with di. 334 Bart Jacobs Prepositional abundance in PA and UGC versus prepositional scarcity in Bantu-inluenced varieties It is noteworthy that neither PA nor UGC has integrated derivatives of the Iberian prepositions por, sobre and a (see also §3.3.3). In spite of this, however, both creoles are characterized by a relatively high number of prepositions compared to Bantu-inluenced speech varieties. Bantu-inluenced Saramaccan and Panamese Bozal Spanish, for instance, according to Lipski (1989: 76), display a “massive reduction of the prepositional system”, which seems directly related to the fact that most Bantu languages employ other syntactic devices to express prenominal relations (Endruschat 2004: 47, Lipski 2005: 274). For ANG, a creole with a recognized Bantu substrate, the prepositional scarcity is illustrated by the omission of a locative preposition in (2), whereas in a similar context in PA (despite the undeniable Bantu component in its substrate) and in UGC (no Bantu substrate) we would ind na, as in (3a, b).27 3.3.1 (2) ANG N taba lotha kwin anu. 1sg work plantation ten year “I worked on a plantation for ten years”. (Lorenzino 2007: 22) (3) a. PA Mi ta traha na un agencia di biahe. 1sg IMP work in IND agency PREP voyage “I work in a travel agency”. b. SCV N ta trabadja na un instituison di saudi. 1sg IMP work in IND institute PREP health “I work in a health institute”. In PL, a creole with a heavy Kikongo substrate, the locative adverbs akí, aká, aí and ayá take on a prepositional function. heir meaning is contextually determined: PL akí kasa, according to the context, can be translated as any of the following: “in the house ~ on the house ~ around the house ~ at the house ~ to(ward) the house” (Schwegler 2007: 302). Kouwenberg & Murray (1994: 52) have also highlighted the fact that “Papiamentu is fairly rich in prepositions, in contrast with other Caribbean creole languages”. It has therefore been suggested that PA’s prepositional system results from decreolization (e.g., Endruschat 2004: 66).28 However, if the frequent use of prepositions in PA and UGC were due to decreolization, this would leave the following 27. In ST, considerably less Bantu-inluenced, we would ind ni (Lorenzino 2007: 22). 28. PA’s prepositional abundance leads Endruschat (2004: 66) to the remarkable conclusion that PA is not only decreolizing, but that this decreolization is due to “contacto estreito com o português” (cf. Endruschat 2005: 193). Papiamentu is in contact with Spanish, Dutch and English, but not with Portuguese (Sanchez 2005: vi). he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 335 cases unaccounted for, in which the creoles’ prepositional behavior difers neatly from that of the lexiiers, while coinciding in PA and UGC.29 3.3.2 Two cases of semantic extension: PA / UGC riba (di) and pa he use and meaning of the preposition PA / UGC riba (di) is distinct from and wider than its etymon arriba “above”, which occurs mostly as an adverb in modern mainstream Spanish and Portuguese (but see Lipski 2005: 274). PA / UGC riba (di), in phrases such as riba (di) mesa “on the table”, would translate into mainstream Spanish and Portuguese as en(cima de) / em(cima de) or sobre. In PA and UGC, then, riba has made relexes of Iberian sobre “over, on” redundant.30 PA / UGC pa covers the semantics of both S / P para and por. his deserves mention, since in various other Iberian-based creoles — although on the whole endowed with a less extensive prepositional system — a relex of Spanish or Portuguese por has in fact been retained, as for example in ST, PRI (Rougé 2004: 236), Korlai (Da Silva Rêgo 1998: 68) and PL (Schwegler & Green 2007: 302).31 3.3.3 Zero preposition In PA, SCV and GB the directional verbs “to go” (PA bai, UGC ba~bai), “to come” (PA bin~bini, GB bin, SCV ben) and “to arrive” (PA yega, UGC txiga)32 occur 29. To further underscore the originality of the prepositional systems, the prepositional behavior in the oldest known written PA documents (from 1775 and 1776, published in Maurer 1998: 203–206) is similar to that of modern PA. Similarly, for UGC, the prepositional system presented here is typical of the rural and more basilectal variety of SCV described by Quint (2000a, b). 30. Although in SCV we ind sobri, Quint (2000a: 205, 206) emphasizes that this preposition “semble d’origine assez récente … et son champ lexical se réduit pour l’instant à des emplois abstraits, tandis que riba …, plus ancien, garde des acceptions plus concrètes”. 31. On a syntactic level, PA / UGC pa is used as a complementizer in constructions of the type pa + ‘subject pronoun’ + ‘ininitive’ following verbs of desire and demand (Quint 2000b: 141, cf. Muller 1989: 495, 496, Doneux & Rougé 1988: 57), where modern mainstream European Portuguese and Spanish would employ que as a complementizer. A similar construction (para + ‘subject pronoun’ + ‘ininitive’) is, however, with varying frequency, attested in PL, Brazilian Portuguese and various varieties of (Latin American) Spanish (Lipski 2005: 298). Nevertheless, the feature further underpins the structural congruence of the prepositional systems of PA and UGC. 32. he three verbs just mentioned allow to demonstrate the signiicant fact that — fully consistent with the case for relexiication made in this paper — PA’s functional (i.e., modal and auxiliary) verbs can all be traced back to UGCP, while the bulk of the content verbs, on the other hand, have a pronounced Spanish character (see Jacobs, forthcoming a). he content verb PA yega “to arrive”, thus, derives from Spanish llegar, while the auxiliary verb PA bai is homophonous to 336 Bart Jacobs without a preposition when followed by a location (4a–c). In most varieties of Spanish and Portuguese either a or para would be employed. (4) a. PA Majan mi ta bai Suriname. tomorrow 1sg IMP go Surinam “Tomorrow I’m going to Surinam”. (Lenz 1928: 175) b. GB I fala i na bai Portugal. 3sg say 3sg PROG go Portugal “He said he was/is going to Portugal”. (Scantamburlo 2002: 494) c. SCV Mininus Ø bai párki. children PERF go park “he children went to the park / garden”. (Lang 2002: 46) By contrast: in PL, “[Motion verb + place] consistently requires the presence of a locative preposition … or a locative adverb” (Schwegler & Green 2007: 303), while also in the Zamboangueño variety of Chabacano “prepositions are required ater the verbs of motion and before expressions of place” (Lipski & Santoro 2007: 395). 3.3.4 Combinatory possibilities Some identical combinatory possibilities involving prepositions surface in both PA and UGC. Consider, for instance, the directional adverbs PA (bai) paden / pafó / patras / pariba “(to go) inside / outside / upstairs” (Dijkhof 1993: 218) = SCV (bai) padentu / pafora / patras / pariba (Lang 2002). Although the construction ‘motion verb’ + para + ‘adverb’ is common to Portuguese and also attested in various (non-standard) varieties of Spanish, this cannot be said of the related adverbial constructions PA di patras / di pafó / di paden, etc. “from behind / from outside / from within” = SCV di patras / di pafora / di padentu: Iberian equivalents are generally of the type S por detrás / P por trás, etc. Remarkable is the occurrence of compound nouns of the type pa(rti) di + ‘directional adverb’: PA parti di patras ~ pa di patras “back” = SCV parti di patras ~ pa di pa tras; PA parti di paden ~ pa di paden “inside, interior” = SCV parti di padentu ~ pa di padentu (Mendes et al. 2002, VPDW 2005). Finally, we single out the frequently applied construction ‘possessive pronoun’ + ‘adverb/noun’ to indicate direction or location (Kihm 1994: 68, Lang 2002: xxxvii), as shown in (5a–c). his construction frequently substitutes the Iberian construction ‘composed preposition’ + ‘object pronoun’ (e.g., S / P tras de ti “behind you”). UGC bai. Typically, the verb “to come”, when used as an auxiliary, translates as PA bin, identical to GB bin, while when used a content verb, Spanish-derived bini (< S venir) is more common. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 337 (5) a. PA Mi ta bai su tras. I IMP go POS behind “I’m going ater him”.33 (Rigmar Haynes) b. GB Garandi multidon na bai si tras. big multitude PROG go POS behind “A big multitude is going ater him”. (Scantamburlo 2002: 417) c. SCV Tudu algen dretu ta kóre si tras. all person right IMP run POS behind “All good people run ater him”. (Lang 2002: 692) (6) a. PA Tur kos ta bo dilanti. all thing COP POS front “You have everything ahead of you”. (Rigmar Haynes, p.c.) b. GB Kamiñu sta bu dianti road COP POS front “he road is ahead of you”. (Doneux & Rougé 1988: 19) 3.3.5 Composed prepositions 3.3.5.1 PA / UGC banda di. he composed preposition PA / UGC banda di “next to, close to, around” deserves special attention. Regarding its use in UGC, Rougé (2004: 74) indicates: “En Guinée … comme à Santiago, la locution banda di, qui vient d’une ancienne locution portugaise banda de, … signiie ‘aux environs vers’ et est employée aussi bien pour le lieu que pour le temps” (“Both in Guinea and in Santiago, the locution banda di, which derives from an ancient Portuguese locution banda de, means “around” and is used with both locative and temporal reference”). Indeed, as in UGC, PA banda di is used with both locative (7a, b) and temporal (8a–c) reference. (7) a. PA b. UGC (8) a. PA b. SCV c. GB banda di kas “next to the house, close to the house, around the house” banda di kasa “next to the house, close to the house, around the house” banda di dos ora “around two o’clock” banda di des i meia “around ten thirty” (Lang 2002: 49) banda di seti ora “around seven o’clock” (Rougé 2004: 75) 33. Although this is a widespread feature in PA, to my knowledge, it has not been described in grammars. 338 Bart Jacobs While banda de seems to have been typical of ancient (and probably maritime) Portuguese, it has been fully replaced by locutions such as ao lado de, perto de (both locative), sobre and por volta de (both temporal).34 By means of contrast, it is noted that there is no trace of a relex of S banda (de) in PL (Armin Schwegler p. c.). In GGC banda “side, place” exists, but only as a noun (Fontes 2007: 55, Fontes & Holm 2008, Rougé 2004: 75). 3.3.5.2 PA for di: Convergence of UGC fora di and GGC fo. PA for di (< P fora de “out(side) of ” ≠ S fuera de) has a locative use similar to its Portuguese etymon and the UGC equivalent fora di, but, contrary to these, can also be used with the temporal meaning “since”: PA for di dos luna “two months ago” (≠ P desde dois meses, SCV désdi dos més). his use is reminiscent of the GGC verb fô “to leave”, which occurs as a preposition with the same temporal meaning (Maurer 1995: 121, Maurer 2005).35 Maurer (2005: 58) believes that the semantic extension of PA for di results from convergence with the GGC verb fô and therefore might constitute “una prueba más de los lazos genéticos que unen el papiamento con los criollos del Golfo de Guinea” (“another piece of evidence for the genetic ties between PA and GGC”). However, he does not mention that the composed preposition PA for di is, irst and foremost, reminiscent of UGC fora di. In addition to the phonological correspondence, PA for di has not lost any of the original syntactic and semantic value of UGC fora di. It can well be imagined that, as in the case of the integration of PA nan (§3.1.4), the semantic (temporal) extension of PA for di results from late substrate inluence. Moreover, a UGC origin for PA for di is circularly supported by the complete correspondence of PA’s core prepositional system to that of UGC. Finally, note that in various early PA texts — e.g. Niewindt (1833: 3), Putman (1850: 6), the Aruban letter from 1803 published in Martinus (1996: 33, 34) — one inds the regular use of PA <des di> ~ <desdi> ~ <desde> “since” (= UGC desdi) instead of PA for di. his could indicate that desdi was more commonly, if not regularly, used in early PA instead of or alongside for di and that, when large numbers of Lower Guinea and Angolan slaves (and possibly speakers of GGC) were brought into Curaçao, its use would slowly but surely have become marginal in favor of PA for di. 34. In fact, besides banda di, various other items and features typical of Old Portuguese (14th– 16th century) can be identiied in PA’s core grammar. For chronological reasons, these features can only have entered PA by ways of UGC, where, unsurprisingly, the same Old Portuguese features are attested (see Jacobs, forthcoming a). 35. Rougé (2004: 164) thinks convergence of P fora and P foi “he/she went” might account for this. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 339 One might be tempted to argue that the use of PA desdi in these early texts could relect a Spanish bias on the part of the authors, but the fact that it was included as a preposition (with for di as a variant) in Sintiago’s (1898) PA grammar — “DESDE, (for di, foi) ta determina e or ku un cos ta socedé …, també den es locución adverbial: desde awé [‘since today’], for di awor [‘since now’]” (“Desde (for di, foi) determines when something happens, also in the adverbial locution desde awé [‘since today’], for di awor [‘since now’]”) (30, 31) — as well as in Van De Veen Zeppenfeldt’s (1928) PA grammar — “desde di (desdi) ‘sinds’ ” (1928: 72) — speaks against this, and, moreover, suggests that PA desdi was possibly still in use at the beginning of the 20th century. 3.3.6 Final remarks on the prepositions It remains unclear why, with the exception of Quint (2000b: 140), the correspondences in this category have been consistently overlooked by PA specialists. Munteanu (1996: 387), for instance, declares: “Las preposiciones más usadas en papiamento representan, en nuestra opinión, una continuación un tanto simpliicada del sistema preposicional español, sin la intervención de las demás lenguas participantes en su gestación” (“he most frequently used prepositions in PA represent, in our opinion, a slightly simpliied continuation of the prepositional system of Spanish, without the intervention of the other languages that contributed to its formation”). In light of the above data, this seems incorrect. It is not so much the exclusivity of each shared prepositional feature and form — some obviously found in other (overseas) Iberian speech varieties as well — as the systematicy of their correspondence that is most striking, and not found between PA and any language other than UGC. 3.4 Conjunctions 3.4.1 ‘and’ Both PA and UGC make use of two distinct coordinate conjunctions: ku and i. he latter coordinates independent clauses36 and appears in some fossilized wholesale borrowings, e.g. numerals, time indication and some adverbial expressions such as SCV / PA i tal “and so on”. PA / UGC ku, on the other hand, is employed in case of grammatical equality of the joined constituents: 36. Quint (forthcoming: 16), however, presents the results of recent ieldwork, which suggest that in basilectal SCV the conjunction i is largely absent: “la coordination des unités prédicatives se fait très généralement sans conjonction”. 340 Bart Jacobs (9) a. PA ami ku bo, abo ku mi 1sg CON 2sg 2sg CON 1sg “you and me, me and you” (Quint 2000b: 140) b. SCV ami ku bo, abo ku mi 1sg CON 2sg 2sg CON 1sg “you and me, me and you” (Quint 2000b: 140) (10) a. PA kanta ku balia sing CON dance “(to) sing and dance” (Quint 2000b: 140) b. SCV kanta ku badja sing CON dance “(to) sing and dance” (Quint 2000b: 140) (11) a. PA pretu ku blanku black CON white “black and white” b. SCV pretu ku branku negro CON blanco “black and white” It is true that in many African languages and creoles we ind equivalents of the preposition ‘with’ functioning as a conjunction (Holm 2000: 227, Parkvall 2001: 199). However, various subtle characteristics of conjunctive ku set PA and UGC apart from other Iberian-based creoles. In PL, for example, ku only conjoins “elements that are [+human]” (Schwegler & Green 2007: 302), such as PL ele ku yo “he and I”. his means that the use of ku in phrases (10) and (11) is considered ungrammatical in PL. In ANG, conjunctive ki “ne peut pas conjoindre deux adjectifs” (“cannot conjoin two adjectives”) (Maurer 1995: 65). As was shown in (11a, b), contrary to ANG ki, PA / UGC ku can indeed conjoin adjectives. 3.4.2 Subordinate conjunctions 3.4.2.1 ‘when’. he combination ‘hour’ + ‘that’ is at the base of the PA / UGC bimorphemic conjunction that equals “when”: PA ora ku (VPDW 2005), SCV ora ki ~ óki ~ óras ki (Mendes et al. 2002: 337) and GB ora ku (Kihm 1994: 205). Spanish and Portuguese have monomorphemic cuando and quando respectively.37 37. Both in PA as well as in GB a relex of Iberian cuando ~ quando “when” is unattested (Rougé 2004: 241). Unlike PA and GB, SCV falls back on kantu ~ kandu < P quando to introduce clauses situated in the past, and seems to use ora ki only as a prospective conjunction (Nicolas Quint, p. c., cf. Lang 2002: 291). he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 341 (12) a. PA Ora ku e Ø yega … hour REL 3sg IRR arrive “When he arrives …” (Maurer 1988: 200) b. SCV Ora ki m Ø da grandi … hour REL 1sg IRR give big “When I grow up …” (Mendes et al. 2002: 337) c. GB Ora ku n Ø riba … hour REL 1sg IRR return “When I return …” (Kihm 1994: 205) he construction seems typically Afro-Portuguese rather than Afro-Hispanic: in Portuguese-based GGC we ind ST ola ku “when” (Fontes 2007: 74) and ANG ola kutxi “when” (Maurer 1995: 64), while there is no trace of the construction in Spanish-based PL, that uses kuando “when” instead (Schwegler & Green 2007: 285, Schwegler 1996: viii). 3.4.2.2 ‘until’. Both UGC and PA make use of the trimorphemic conjunction composed of etymological P até + ora + que to express “until”: (13) a. PA … te ora ku el a bai. until hour REL 3sg PERF go “… until he let”. (Rigmar Haynes, p.c.) b. SCV … ti ora ki el Ø abri porta. until hour REL 3sg PERF open door “… until he opened the door”. (Lang 2002: 520)38 c. GB … te ora ku i Ø fura. until hour REL 3sg PERF pierce “… until it pierced”. (Kihm 1994: 206)39 In PL, a similar construction is not found. Tjerk Hagemeijer (p. c.) indicates that ST antê ku ola (lit. “until that hour”) is attested but appears to be very rare, with antê (ku) being most common: (14) ST … antê ê bi da tudu kwa se40 di 1953. until 3sg come give all thing SP of 1953 “… until all those things of 1953 occurred”. (Hagemeijer 2007: 184) 38. In SCV, te ora ki is commonly realized as tóki. 39. In GB, the composition te ora ku is commonly realized as tok. 40. ST se serves as a speciic marker. 342 Bart Jacobs 3.4.2.3 ‘before’. PA and UGC make use of an equivalent of “irst” to express “before”:41 (15) a. PA Promé (ku) e Ø yega, … irst REL 3sg IRR arrive “Before he arrives, …” (VPDW 2005: 365) b. SCV Purmeru (ki) bu Ø kumesa, … irst REL 2sg IRR start “Before you start, …” (Quint 2000a: 271) Crucially, Brito (1887) still used the early SCV form prômeru “irst”, a variant not found in Lang (2002), Mendes et al. (2002) or Rougé (2004). If we consider, furthermore, that the PA form attested in most 19th century texts is promer (15c), the development P primeiro > early SCV prômeru42 > early PA promer > PA promé seems plausible. (15) c. PA A pasa basta anja promer el por a drenta. PERF pass many year before 3sg could PERF enter “Many years passed before he could enter”. (La Union 1889, 19–04) he use of “irst” to express “before” is attested neither in PL (Armin Schwegler p. c.) nor in GGC. In ST, for instance, to express “before”, a construction built up of “then” + “for” (ST zo pa ~ zao pa ~ so pa) is employed: (16) ST Zon kume zo pa ê bêbê. Zon eat then for 3sg drink “Zon ate before he drank”. (Tjerk Hagemeijer, p. c., cf. Hagemeijer 2007: 180) 3.4.2.4 ‘how’. In the following cases, where PA and UGC use manera (ku~ki), Spanish and Portuguese would use conjuntive como “how”: 41. Although by no means frequent, Portuguese primeiro (que) and Spanish primero (que) can occur with this meaning. Nevertheless, one can reasonably suspect substrate-inluence to account for this feature. In any case, there is no trace of Iberian antes (de que) “before” in PA, which supports the originality of promé as a conjunction. 42. he early SCV form prômeru suggests that in the more common process of velarization the /e, i/ of the etyma passed through an [o] before passing to [u], which, in turn, allows for the hypothesis that, in an earlier phase, modern SCV forms such as purdon “pardon” (< P perdão) and ruspondi “(to) answer” (< P responder) were realized as *pordon and *rospondi, remarkably close to their PA cognates pordon and rospondí. he link between SCV ruspondi and PA rospondí is further strengthened by the fact that both verbs have been nominalized (SCV ruspondi “answer (noun)” = PA rospondi “answer (noun)”) with relexes of P resposta and S respuesta strikingly missing in both creoles. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 343 (17) a. PA Bo a mira manera ku hende ta mira? 2sg PERF look way REL people IMP look? “Did you see how they were watching?” (Rigmar Haynes, p.c.) b. GB Bo Ø oja manera ku n Ø pirdi kurida? 2sg PERF see way REL 1sg PERF loose race “Did you see how I lost the race?” (cf. Kihm 1994: 182) c. SCV Dja m Ø skesi manera ki el txoma. already 1sg PERF forget way REL 3sg be called “I have (already) forgotten his name”. here are no relexes of Portuguese maneira attested in GGC (Rougé 2004: 198), where mo(du)~mo(di) “how” fulils this function (cf. 3.6.4), nor derivatives of Spanish manera in PL (Schwegler 1996: x), that uses kumo “how” instead (Schwegler & Green 2007: 291). 3.4.3 PA ma, o, si = UGC ma, o, si he homophonicity between the conjunctions PA / UGC ma “but”, o “or” and si “if ” is not surprising considering the lexiiers’ equivalents (S / P mas, o ~ ou, si ~ se). hey do, however, add to the overall correspondence between PA’s and UGC’s function words and contrast with, for instance, the GGC forms maji~madji~meji “but” (< P mas) and xi “if ” (< P se) (Rougé 2004: 201, 258). Although in modern PA pero “but” (< S pero) becomes more and more frequent, there is no trace of this item in the 18th and 19th century PA texts, where only ma “but” is used. 3.5 Reciprocity and relexivity his grammatical category is no exception to what we have seen so far, namely that the function words in the category can be traced back directly to UGC. Reciprocity in PA and GB is expressed with a lexeme meaning “other”: (18) a. PA Nan ta stima otro. 1pl IMP love other “hey love each other”. (Dijkhof 2000: 87) b. GB no na oja un utru 1pl FUT see DET other “We’ll see each other”. (Kihm 1994: 168) he correspondences between PA and GB also concern relexivity, which in both creoles can be expressed with the equivalent of “body” (19a, b). his feature is common to various other creoles and African languages (Parkvall 2000: 57–60, 2001: 199–203), but the raising of the stressed etymological /o/ to [u] in both GB 344 Bart Jacobs kurpu and PA kurpa (< P corpo “body” ≠ S cuerpo) sets these forms apart from, for instance, ST klôpô < P corpo (Rougé 2004: 120)”. he lowering of the unstressed etymological /o/ to [a] in PA kurpa can also be seen, for example, in PA biña “wine” and bisiña “neighbor” from Portuguese vinho and vizinho (= GB biñu and bisiñu). In other words, it is likely that PA kurpa was once homophonous to GB kurpu. (19) a. PA laba kurpa wash body “to wash oneself ” (VPDW 2005: 673) b. GB tudu dia i ta laba kurpu all day 3sg IMP wash body “he washes himself daily” (Scantamburlo 1999: 167) Both PA kurpa and GB kurpu combine optionally with a possessive pronoun: (20) a. PA defendé su kurpa defend POS body “to defend oneself ” (Maurer 1988: 44) b. GB alimenta si kurpu feed POS body “to feed oneself ” (Scantamburlo 2002: 455) Note, however, that in the GB examples (19b) and (20b) the notion of ‘body’ is quite literally present. When this is less obvious, GB, contrary to PA, employs relexive kabesa: a concept such as “to commit suicide” translates into GB as mata (si) kabesa (lit. “kill (one’s) head” ≠ PA mata (su) kurpa). One could thus say that GB kurpu grammaticalized only moderately and that GB kabesa is the ‘true’ relexive pronoun. Convergence with Kwa patterns might be responsible for the grammaticalization of PA kurpa into a ‘full’ relexive: in various Kwa languages as well as in GGC, the relexive pronoun is an equivalent of “body” (Parkvall 2000: 59). In ANG and ST, for instance, we ind relexive onge and ubwe (both “body”) respectively (Lorenzino 2007: 20). Note, however, that these words are of African origin, and that the ST form klôpô (< P corpo) cited earlier is used only to denote the content word “body”. Modern SCV distinguishes itself from both PA and GB with reciprocal kompanheru “companion”. Regarding relexivity, according to Nicolas Quint (p. c.), just as GB, SCV can employ korpu in quasi relexive syntagms, e.g., laba korpu “to wash oneself ”).43 43. Lang (2002: 744, 760, 795), for instance, provides some examples that, judging by the relexive Portuguese translation, suggest some, if moderate, grammaticalization of SCV korpu as he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 345 PA and UGC also coincide in that they make use of relexive constructions made up of a ‘verb’ + ‘personal pronoun’ + ‘self ’: PA mi mes, bo mes = SCV mime, bo-me (Kouwenberg & Murray 1994: 40, Baptista 2002: 56, Quint 2000a: 176). he exclusivity of this feature seems limited, but again, as with PA kurpa, we see a Portuguese-derived function word (PA mes < P mesmo ≠ S mismo) with a cognate in UGC. 3.6 Early PA features If there is truth in the hypothesis defended in this paper, we expect early PA to have been more similar to UGC than modern PA. Data drawn from a series of 18th, 19th and early 20th century PA texts and grammars (see examples in §3.3.5.2 and §3.4.2.3) demonstrate that this is indeed the case. 3.6.1 Early PA relative ki = SCV ki (21) a. PA Bo marido ki tanto ta stima bo. 2sg husband REL so much IMP love 2sg “Your husband, who loves you so much”. (1775, in Maurer 1998: 204) b. PA Mi a tende ki su señor a haña 1sg PERF hear REL POS mister PERF ind dos karta two card. “I have heard that his master received two cards”. (1776, in Maurer 1998: 205) c. PA Na tempo ki lo yega. in time REL FUT arrive “In the time ahead”. (1803, in Martinus 1996: 33) Examples (21a–c), drawn from the earliest known written PA documents dating from 1775, 1776 and 1803, show that early PA’s relative marker was not ku but ki, as it still is in SCV. Lenz (1928: 115) expressed a similar suspicion: “Es posible que también en Curazao se haya usado primitivamente un relativo ke o ki, como en las islas de Cabo Verde. Algunos textos antiguos … usan ki por ku” (“It is possible that relative ke or ki was initially used on Curaçao, as on the Cape Verde Islands. Some old texts use ki instead of ku”) (see also Martinus 1996: 36). a relexive: SCV stáfa (si) korpu = P estafar-se “to strain / exert oneself ”, SCV suste korpu = P manter-se de pé “to remain standing”, and SCV torse korpu = P espreguiçar-se “to stretch oneself ”. Brito (1887: 394), moreover, employs ê largâ korpu (lit.) “(s)he let body”, accompanied by the relexive Portuguese translation deitou-se “(s)he went to sleep”. 346 Bart Jacobs 3.6.2 Early PA es = UGC es (22) a. PA es nigrita “the / this black girl” (1775, in Maurer 1998: 203) b. PA es carta “the / this letter” (1776, in Maurer 1998: 205) c. PA Ees falso tistimonio “he / this false testimony” (1803, in Martinus 1996: 34) Examples (22a–c) reveal the early PA demonstrative es fulilling the role of both the modern deinite article PA e and of the modern demonstrative PA e + ‘noun’ + ‘locative adverb’ (aki / ei44 / aya), e.g. e idea aki “this idea”. he use of early PA es in these examples as an element halfway between a deinite article and a demonstrative is highly reminiscent of the UGC demonstrative es. Kihm (1994: 139), for example, notes that when GB es precedes a noun, it is oten diicult to determine whether it functions as a true demonstrative or as a deinite article. Similarly, for SCV Quint (2000a: 186) observes: “Le démonstratif … tend à acquérir la valeur d’article déini” (“he demonstrative tends to acquire the function of a deinite article”). As mentioned, the modern PA demonstrative is an obligatory combination of the deinite article e with a locative adverb (e.g., e homber aki “this man”). In early PA, however, the demonstrative es occurred freely without locative adverb (22a–c) and only combined with such adverbs to create a strong deictic contrast, as in (23): (23) PA solamente na ees caso allie “only in that case” (1803, in Martinus 1996: 34) his pattern is still the norm in UGC, where es karu “this car” and es karu li “this car (over here)” can both occur, with the adverb li merely adding deictic emphasis (Quint 2003: 222, Wilson 1962: 16). Saliently, as late as 1928 the pattern was described for PA by Lenz (1928: 114), who provides PA es kas and es kas aki, both translated as Spanish esta casa “this house” (cf. modern PA e kas “the house” versus e kas aki “this house”).45 PA es must have dropped the /s/ in the course of the 20th century: while Putman’s (1849: 23) grammar provides only PA es, Van De Veen Zeppenfeldt’s (1928: 22) and Lenz’ (1928: 97) grammars mention the variation between PA es 44. PA ei derives from Spanish ahí “there”. he older variant PA <a(h)i> is steadily used in the early PA texts and ai is still attested in Bonairean PA (VPDW 2005). 45. Increasing contact with Dutch and Spanish (both languages with a strict separation between deinite article and demonstrative) seems responsible for the emerging of the ‘pure’ deinite article e and its contrast with demonstrative e…aki / ei / aya in PA in the 20th century. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 347 and e; Goilo’s method (1951), inally, makes no more mention of the form with /s/.46 Furthermore, the early PA texts provide several examples of es functioning as an autonomous demonstrative pronoun (24a, c), a use considered ungrammatical in modern PA, which recurs to the composed forms esaki, esei and esaya instead. he autonomous use of es is still common to GB47 (24b, d).48 (24) a. PA Nos ta irma es 1pl IMP sign DEM “We sign this” (from the 1803 letter, in Martinus 1996: 34) b. GB n misti es 1sg want DEM “I want this / it’s this I want” (Wilson 1962: 33) c. PA es di Sra Sara DEM of Miss Sara “the one of Miss Sara” (1776, in Maurer 1998: 206) d. GB I es ku -u na buska? COP DEM REL 2sg PROG search “Is this what you are looking for?” (Doneux & Rougé 1988: 71) he similarities between early PA es and UGC es lead Martinus (1996: 36) to conclude: “It is hard to believe any kind of … ‘Spanish derived creole’ would go to the such a length to invent the same analytic deictic system as CV [Cape Verdean] …, while it could simply stick to an equally transparent system as the Spanish one”. 46. Kouwenberg & Ramos-Michel’s (2007: 323) statement that PA’s deinite article e “is assumed to derive from the masculine form of the superstrate singular deinite article el” is remarkable in ignoring authors such as Martinus (1996: 34) and Maurer (1998: 155) who have convincingly shown that PA e derives not from the superstrate’s deinite article, but rather from the superstrate’s demonstrative S / P este or ese/esse. his can be induced not only from the occurrence of es in early PA texts, but also from modern PA fossilized compositions such as the autonomous demonstratives esaki, esei, esaya “this one, that one” or the adverb turesten “all this time”, allowing for only one conclusion, namely that “la etimología del artículo deinido del papiamentu no proviene del artículo deinido español, sino del determinante demostrativo portugués o español este o esse/esse” (Maurer 1998: 155fn). 47. In SCV, on the other hand, just as in modern PA, only composed forms (e.g., es-li “this one” rather than simple es) are used autonomously (Baptista et al. 2007: 74). Note, furthermore, that PA has just one demonstrative root, e(s), and distinguishes between proximity and distance by means of a suixed locative adverb only. UGC, on the other hand, distinguishes between proximal es “this” and distal kel “that” (< P aquel “that”), the former combining exclusively with the adverb li, the latter with either li or la (Baptista et. al 2007: 74, 75 provide full details). Relexes of Iberian aquel did not integrate (or were not preserved) in PA’s deictic system. 48. Similar observations were made by Martinus (1996: 35). 348 Bart Jacobs Indeed, Spanish-based PL contrasts with PA (and thus with UGC) in that it adopted the Spanish demonstratives ete (< S este “this”), ese (< S ese “that”) and aké (< S aquel “that”) (Schwegler & Green 2007: 293). To close, I focus briely on Quint’s (2008) discussion of Brito (1887) and the analysis therein of “la locution conjonctive explicative pâ ês” (Quint 2008: 136) meaning “therefore”. his adverb, “Dans la langue moderne …, n’existe pas (ou plus)” (2008: 136). SCV pâ ês (25a) still has its equivalent in PA pesei (25b), which should diachronically be analysed as pa + es + ei. In Conradi (1844) and Van Dissel (1865), the early, not yet contracted form <pa (e)es ahi> is commonly used (25c). (25) a. SCV Pâ ês nu ta tratâ di kada ũ separadamenti. therefore we IMP treat of each one separately “herefore, we will treat each one separately”. (Brito 1887: 362) b. PA Pesei nos ta alsa bos. therefore 1pl IMP raise voice “herefore, we raise (our) voice”. c. PA Pa ees ahi mi ta bisa bosonan … therefore 1sg IMP say 2pl “herefore, I tell you …” (Conradi 1844: 25) 3.6.3 Subordinate conjunction ‘because’ For PA, Lenz (1928: 140) observed that “pa bia di (por vía de) se usa en el sentido ‘por causa de’ ” (“pa bia di (‘through way of ’) is used in the sense of ‘because of ’ ”). Although this conjunction is no longer used in modern PA (VPDW 2005, Richard Hooi, p. c.), its presence in Lenz’ grammar provides yet another valuable piece of evidence in support of PA’s Upper Guinea origins. Scantamburlo (2002: 458, cf. 1999: 184) presents pabia (di) as a “locução conjuntiva subordinativa que indica [causalidade]; por causa de” (see examples of its use in Do Couto 1994: 112–114, Doneux & Rougé 1988: 56). Lang (2002: 529) provides SCV pabiâ “because”, with the interesting speciication “do crioulo muito fundo” (“proper to very basilectal SCV”). Rougé (2004: 284) gives Portuguese por via as etymon and, in line with Lang, notes that SCV pa bia (di) “fait igure de archaïsme”. 3.6.4 Early PA modi In at least two early PA texts, the use of the early PA comparative conjunction modi is striking (26a–d): it is reminiscent of the SCV comparative conjunction mo(di) (26e), a derivative of the Portuguese noun modo “manner, way”. Early PA modi is non-existent in modern PA (VPDW 2005, Richard Hooi, p. c.) and has been fully substituted by manera “manner, way” (cf. 3.4.2.4). In phrases equivalent to (26a–e), Spanish and Portuguese would use como “as, like, how”. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 349 (26) a. PA blanku modi sneu white manner snow “as white as snow” (Conradi 1844: 73) b. PA E tabata bistí modi un di nan. 3sg PAST IMP dressed manner IND of them “He was dressed like one of them”. (Conradi 1844: 14) c. PA Papiamentu ta lenga mo’i tur otro. Papiamentu COP language manner all other “Papiamentu is a language like any other”. (Hoyer in Lenz 1928: 74) d. PA … modi bosonan kerementu ta. manner 2pl faith COP “… how your faith is”. (Conradi 1844: 20) e. SCV pa mostra modi es ta prununsiadu to show manner 3pl IMP pronounced “to show how they are pronounced” Examples (26a) and (27) suggest that the comparative conjunctions modi and manera were in free variation in early PA, as they still are in SCV (Lang 2002: 451).49 (27) PA blanku manera sneeu white manner snow “as white as snow” (Van Dissel 1865: 33) he Portuguese noun modo integrated with comparative qualities not only in PA and UGC, but also in GGC: PRI mo~modi (ki), ST mo~modu (ku). Rougé (2004: 208) suggests that the occurrence in these creoles of mo(di) with the meaning “as (if), like how” might be due to convergence with Portuguese como “as, like, how”. 3.7 Discussion of the results 3.7.1 he smoking gun: Structural correspondence A strong Portuguese character in all of the ive PA categories discussed is visible, with the number of core function words of probable Portuguese origin (at least eight)50 clearly exceeding those of probable Spanish origin (none). Although 49. he comparative conjunctions SCV sima and GB suma (< Old Portuguese assi coma “as, like”) (Rougé 2004: 68) are not discussed here. 50. List of PA function words discussed in this paper of probable Portuguese etymology: PA nos “we” PA ken “who” PA unda “where” PA kurpa “body (rel.)” < P nós < P quem < P onde < P corpo ≠ S nosotros ≠ S quien ≠ S donde ≠ S cuerpo 350 Bart Jacobs Lipski (2008: 547) believed that “he source(s) of the Portuguese elements in Papiamentu may never be determined with certainty”, it has been shown above that those function words of probable Portuguese origin can all be traced back to one source, UGC, whose cognates show not only formal resemblance but also identical syntactic and semantic properties. As importantly, the same appears true for most core items of indecisive Portuguese / Spanish origin. While one can point to the occurrence of certain shared PA / UGC forms or features in one or the other Iberian (overseas) speech variety or creole, it is the structurality of the correspondences that constitutes the ‘smoking gun’ evidence. To illustrate this more directly, consider Bickerton (2002: 37) again, who argues against PL’s alleged Afro-Portuguese roots: si verdaderamente existiera una lengua de contacto afroportuguesa en Hispanoamérica, dicha lengua hubiera tenido su propia estructura, más o menos bien hecha, con sus propias subestructuras …. En tal caso, se esperaría hallar, en el palenquero actual, por lo menos algunos vestigios de estas estructuras y subestructuras (“if an Afro-Portuguese contact language had really existed in Spanish America, this language would have had its own structures and substructures. In that case, we would expect to ind, in modern PL, at least some remnants of these structures and substructures”). While Bickerton might be right for PL, it seems more diicult to contend that UGC structures and substructures are not found in PA. Valid rebuttal is provided if one can show either (a) that PA and a language other than UGC share the same amount of structural correspondences or (b) that innate processes of language acquisition can produce such similarities. Both options, however, seem unlikely and since historical data exist which account for the language transfer from Upper Guinea to Curaçao (§4), it is not the claim of a common origin, but rather its denial, that should be labelled as speculation. For those unconvinced by the function word correspondences, the similarities in the phonology, the lexicosemantics, the morphosyntax and the TMA / verbal system are at least as abundant. Many of these correspondences have been addressed by Quint (2000b), others I intend to address in future studies (cf. Jacobs forthcoming a). PA mes “self (rel.)” PA na “in, to” PA te “until” PA for di “out(side) of, since” < P mesmo < P na (em + a) < P até < P fora de ≠ S mismo ≠ S en+ la ≠ S hasta ≠ S fuera (de) he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 3.7.2 Pidgin or Creole? An additional conclusion can be drawn from the data above. If it is true that “pidgins … have very few functional items” (Bickerton 2001: 1104, cf. Veenstra 1996: 259, Muysken 2008: 190), we can assume, given the number and complexity of the correspondences in the functional categories, that the UGC variety taken to Curaçao was a fullledged creole and that it was passed on by native speakers. hese assumptions are supported by the fact that probably as early as in the late 15th century a pidgin was already current on Santiago (cf. Lang 2001, 2006),51 which would have had plenty of time to stabilize and nativize before being transferred to Curaçao in the second half of the 17th century. It is implied that we can discard hypotheses according to which an ill-deined (Afro-)Portuguese trade pidgin or jargon would be responsible for the (Afro-)Portuguese elements in PA (e.g., Birmingham 1976, Kramer 2004: 122–138). 4. Accounting historically for the linguistic correspondences between PA and UGC In a critical discussion of supposed substrate inluence in Saramaccan, Bickerton (1994: 65) commented that “one must show that the right speakers were in the right place at the right time”. Although in most cases (such as the present) the linguistic data should provide the conclusive proof of whether the right speakers were in the right place at the right time, there is an obvious additional need to show that the right speakers were at least going to the right place at the right time. Here, this means demonstrating that slaves were transported from Upper Guinea to Curaçao in the 17th century, the aim of the next section. §4.2 uncovers triangular trade networks between the Sephardic Jewish communities in Upper Guinea, Amsterdam and Curaçao. First, in §4.1, attention is drawn to the Dutch dominance in 17th century Upper Guinea. Moreover, littleknown data is presented which, to my knowledge, have never been associated with the 17th century settlement of Curaçao, but which show that in the peak period 51. Lang’s primary argument for a late 15th, early 16th century birth of SCV is the high number of Wolof features in all levels of SCV’s grammar. More than 90% of the Wolof-speaking slaves were taken to Santiago before 1500. herefore, to account for the many Wolof features, we must assume that creolization in Santiago started before 1500 (Lang 2006: 57). Parkvall (2000: 111) has pointed out the consequences that the shared Wolof features in SCV and GB have for the debate on UGC’s place of origin (insular versus continental, cf. Rougé 1994): since there has never been a signiicant number of Wolof speakers in Guinea-Bissau, the Wolof features can only have entered GB by way of Santiago. 351 352 Bart Jacobs of slave imports into Curaçao, up to 1677, the island received several shippings of Senegambian52 slaves. 4.1 Dutch slave trade from Upper Guinea to Curaçao up to 1677 he importation of slaves to Curaçao presumably started in the 1650s and would end in the mid-18th century (Buddingh 1994: 35). Parkvall (2000: 136, 137) provides a summary of the origins of the slaves who were imported into Curaçao between 1660 and 1730. he summary indicates a meager 1% ratio of Senegambian slaves. Crucial, however, is Parkvall’s (2000: 137) comment that, “unfortunately, there are no data for pre-1674 arrivals”. he principal reason for this lacuna is that the irst Dutch West India Company (WIC) went bankrupt in 1674: most of its documents on the slave trade were subsequently lost or destroyed, in spite of the foundation of the second WIC in that same year. Parkvall (2000: 137) adds that, as a consequence of the lack of data for pre-1674 arrivals, “we will have to make do with Postma’s (1990: 112) estimated igures for the early period [1660–1674]”. hese estimates are based on the assumption that there were no systematic deviances in the Dutch slave trade before and ater 1674. Because ater 1674 the Dutch slaving activity in Upper Guinea was virtually negligible, Postma (1990: 57) estimates a similarly negligible percentage of Upper Guinea slaves for pre-1674 arrivals and assumes that, in general, “the Senegambia region held little signiicance for the Dutch slave trade” (cf. Emmer 1998: 40). Below it is argued that this consensus on the Dutch slave trade in 17th century Upper Guinea needs adjustment. Despite the supposed loss of most slave trading data of the irst Dutch WIC (i.e., pre-1674 data), De Moraes (1993, 1995, 1998a, 1998b, 1998c) has recovered and analyzed various archival documents related to the irst Dutch WIC which provide crucial information on “la traite des esclaves efectuée par les Hollandais à Gorée” (“the slave trade efectuated by the Dutch at Gorée”) (De Moraes 1998b: 41) from roughly the 1620s to the late 1670s and directly links this trade to Curaçao. Gorée lies just below the Cape Verde peninsula, at the same latitude as the Cape Verde Islands. Similarly, Curtin (1975), Barry (1988), Boulègue (1989), Guèye (1998), Mark (2002), Brooks (2003), Benoist & Camara (2003), Hawthorne (2003) and Green (2007), amongst others, speak frankly about the prominent Dutch (slave) trading 52. Following Kihm (1994: 4fn), the term Senegambia is used to refer to “the region encompassing the so-called Petite Côte south of Dakar, the Gambia, Casamance, and Guinea-Bissau”. he Petite Côte, in turn, refers to the part of the Senegalese coast that stretches from Dakar to the Gambia river. In the present paper, however, this area is mostly referred to as the Cape Verde region. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 353 activities in the 17th century along the Upper Guinea Coast with Gorée as a key import and export center. It is therefore remarkable that references to Gorée are absent in writings concerned with the historical relations between Curaçao and West Africa (e.g., Martinus 1996, Fouse 2002 & 2007, Kramer 2004) as well as in standard works on the Dutch slave trade (e.g., Emmer 1998). By no means, however, will I refute the existing data on the origins of the slaves imported into Curaçao by the second WIC: it is very likely that, ater the loss of Gorée in 1677 to France, these were drawn almost exclusively from Lower Guinea and Bantu-speaking areas (cf. Postma 1990: 112). In fact, this is important for understanding linguistic transfer from Upper Guinea to Curaçao: given that Curaçao was settled by the Dutch from 1634 onwards, transfer must have occurred in the period from 1634 to 1677. (See §4.1.2 on the areal shit in the Dutch (slave) trade.) 4.1.1 Pre-1677: Dutch dominance in and around Gorée he canonical sources on the 17th century Dutch slave trade seem to have overlooked the fact that from the 1620s to the late 1670s the Dutch WIC was extremely active on the Upper Guinea Coast with Gorée as its base.53 To illustrate the potential of Gorée as a roadstead, it is noted that, “couverte par la pointe avancée du Cap-Vert et à distance d’une petite lieue de la terre, elle ofre … un mouillage excellent pour les gros navires … à partir duquel ses occupants nouèrent de solides liens commerciaux avec les sociétés du voisinage” (“covered by the tip of the Cape Verde Peninsula and at a short distance from the mainland, it ofers an excellent point of anchorage for big ships from where her inhabitants maintain strong commercial ties with neighboring societies”) (Guèye 1998: 23, 24). Given the irst WIC’s ambitions, it should be no surprise that “Gorée Island’s strategic importance soon attracted the Dutch, who … bought the island from the indigenous population and built two forts to defend their interests in the slave trade”.54 De Moraes (1998a: 250) highlights the Dutch trade in and around Gorée and the direct connection with the ABC-Islands, when she cites from a 14-page manuscript of anonymous authorship preserved in the Rotterdam Archives, according to which the irst WIC’s Chamber of Amsterdam: 53. Gorée is the name given to the island by the Dutch (< Goede Reede “Good Harbor”). In various documents dealing with the pre-Dutch period, the island is variously referred to as Palma, Palmera Island and/or Be(r)zeguiche. here is no agreement as to the year in which Gorée fell into Dutch hands. Some sources mention 1621, others 1627 or even 1629. 54. http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=8780&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_ SECTION=201.html 354 Bart Jacobs a sous sa direction Cabo Verde et les places circonvoisines plus éloignées dont le comptoir principal est situé sur une petite île située au Cabo Verde, nommée Goereede, et les comptoirs moins importants de la terre ferme du Cap, Pourto Dalié [Portudal], Reisco [Ruisque], Sjouale [Joal] … Pour le reste, la Chambre d’Amsterdam a eu autrefois sous sa direction Nieuw Nederlandt et Cajana [Guyana], mais elle n’a plus maintenant que les îles Curaçao, Aruba et Buonaire … (“has under its control Cape Verde and surrounding places with the principal stronghold situated on a small island of the Cape Verde Peninsula, called Goereede, and the less important strongholds on the mainland of the Cape, Portudal, Ruisque, Joal (…). Apart from that, the Chamber of Amsterdam has had under its control New Netherland and Guyana, but she now only possesses the islands of Curaçao, Aruba and Bonaire”). Emphasizing the dominant position of the Dutch in the Cape Verde / Gorée region, De Moraes (1998c: 58) quotes the Portuguese governor Carvalho, who in 1635 warned that “De Cabo Verde à Berzeguiche55 il doit y avoir quatre ou cinq lieux d’où le Hollandais a une forteresse”.56 Furthermore, the Dutch WIC had important trading posts in Arguin (on the coast of Mauritania), Joal, Portudal, Ruisque (as mentioned in the anonymous manuscript) and Cacheu (De Moraes 1995: 259, 264, 1998c: 55, Den Heijer 2003: 141, Boulègue 1989: 27), all — and Cacheu in particular — settlements of great importance to the Upper Guinea coastal trade of the 17th century. Moreover, if Guèye’s (1998: 27, emphasis added) observation that “De 1621 à 1677, les Hollandais, maîtres de Gorée, laissaient les autres nations traiquer à côté d’eux à Ruisque, Portudal, Joal” (“From 1621 to 1677, the Dutch, masters of Gorée, allowed the other nations to trade alongside them in Ruisque, Portudal and Joal”) is correct, then this suggests that during some ive decades the Dutch were basically in charge of the Upper Guinea trade. Map 1 shows the Upper Guinea settlements with pronounced Dutch presence in the 17th century. he Portuguese settlement of Cacheu is thought to have been the irst settlement on the mainland where UGC was widely used (Bartens 1996: 53, 60). he spread of UGC from the Cape Verde Islands to Cacheu was facilitated by the fact that “many of the freed blacks in Cacheu had formerly been slaves from Santiago” (Green 2007: 243). By 1628 already the Dutch had built a fortress in Cacheu (De Moraes 1998c: 55), thus enabling trade between Cacheu and Gorée (De Moraes 55. With respect to the toponym Be(r)zeguiche, De Moraes (1995: 259) addresses “L’inexactitude … concernant l’endroit”. Indeed, there is some confusion about where to locate Be(r)zeguiche. In Boulègue (1987, 1989), it stands for the entire Cape Verde peninsula, which, however, would render Carvalho’s quote somewhat awkward. According to others (e.g., Rodney 1965), Be(r)zeguiche was the name of the island of Gorée prior to the Dutch period. 56. From Cape Verde to Berzeguiche there must be some four or ive places where the Dutch have a fortress. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 355 Map 1. Settlements crucial to the language transfer from Upper Guinea to Curaçao. In gray: strongholds controlled by the irst Dutch WIC in the second half of the 17th century. 1998a: 185, 250). If in 17th century Cacheu UGC was indeed the lingua franca, the potential importance of the Dutch presence there and of the trade with Gorée is evident for the hypothesized language transfer from Upper Guinea to Curaçao. In the irst half of the 17th century, the Cape Verde Islands (Santiago in particular), till then Portugal’s most important Upper Guinea stronghold, ceased to be an obligatory stop for ships sailing from Africa to the New World and saw their dominant role in the West African and Atlantic (slave) trade vanish switly (cf. Pereira 1986: 25–31, Boxer 1963: 14, Carreira 1983: 43). hese circumstances went hand in hand with the decline of Portuguese control over the Upper Guinea Coast, which, in turn, was closely related — and inversely proportional — to the increasing Dutch dominance in Upper Guinea. Mark (2002: 13) foregrounds the importance of Gorée in this shit of power: “By the early 1600s …, the joint Spanish-Portuguese monarchy’s inancial diiculties, combined with the rise of Dutch commerce, had begun to undermine Portuguese supremacy. his process was abetted by the Dutch conquest of northeastern Brazil beginning in 1630 and by the establishment of a Dutch trading post on Gorée Island of the Senegalese coast in 1621”. Or, as Green (2007: 241) puts it, “Growing Dutch competition with Portugal meant that, with the deinitive loss of Gorée to the Dutch in 1629, [Portuguese] inluence over the Senegambian region from Cabo Verde efectively ceased”. All this suggests that, while Santiago’s trading activities “shited to other centers during the seventeenth century” (Boxer 1963: 14), Dutch-controlled Gorée was the number one candidate to take over and continue the existing (slave) trading 356 Bart Jacobs patterns, assuming Santiago’s former role of ideal roadstead where vessels coming from and going to the New World would stop to refresh or (re)load. Illustrative of the new balance of power in Upper Guinea are Portuguese attempts to expel the Dutch between 1628 and 1630. Apart from destroying Dutch possessions on Gorée in 1629, these attempts apparently failed, witness the report of a Cape Verdean Father in 1629: “les Hollandais recommencent de nouveau à faire une forteresse à Berzeguiche [Gorée] et il est à craindre avec bonne raison qu’ils se rendent maître de toute la Guinée et de cette île (S. Tiago)” (“the Dutch have restarted the building of a fortress on Berzeguiche [Gorée] and there are good reasons to fear that they will conquer the whole of Guinea including this island (S.Tiago)”) (Father Sebastião Gomes, cited in De Moraes 1998c: 58). In any case, from 1630 onwards, “Un certain modus vivendi entre Portugais et Néerlandais semble … avoir été trouvé, car dès cette année (1630) les Portugais commerçaient de nouveau sur la Petite Côte” (“a certain modus vivendi between the Portuguese and the Dutch seems to have been found, since from that year (1630) onwards the Portuguese started trading again along the Petite Côte”) (De Moraes 1998c: 59). he Dutch Upper Guinea trade received a major impulse ater 1640, when, as a result of peninsular struggles between Portugal and Spain, the Portuguese trade with the Spanish Americas practically ceased. As a consequence, many of the Upper Guinea settlements’ export economies would come to rely on the Dutch trade. his is emphasized by Green (2007: 287, 274), when he remarks that, because of the ended Portuguese export from Cacheu, the loss of the Dutch settlements in Angola and São Tomé in 1648 to the Portuguese was in fact a blessing to Cacheu’s economy, since this “meant that Cacheu remained of transitory importance as the external trade of the West African coast was repositioned”. In sum, proiting from the demise of Portuguese control, the Dutch would for approximately ive decades become the leading trade nation in the Cape Verde region with Gorée as a thriving center from where slavery and other trading activities along the Upper Guinea Coast were developed, connecting this region to the Spanish Americas in general and to Curaçao in particular. 4.1.2 1677: Loss of Gorée and subsequent abandonment of Upper Guinea Before presenting concrete data on the slave trade from Upper Guinea to Curaçao until 1677, let us briely focus on the areal shit of the WIC trade from Upper Guinea to Lower Guinea and Bantu-speaking areas, which caused the number of Senegambian slaves exported to Curaçao in the post-1677 period to be virtually negligible. Crucial is the Upper Guinea war between the Dutch and the French from 1672 to 1678. he expenses of this war lead to the bankruptcy of the irst Dutch WIC in 1674. Although the second Dutch WIC was founded in that same year, they he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 357 soon sufered a new blow with the loss of Gorée to the French in 1677 (Brooks 2003: 165). hese events brought the Dutch dominance in Upper Guinea to an end and meant a signiicant post-1677 abandonment of Upper Guinea by the Dutch, who, from that point onwards, would come to rely almost exclusively on Lower Guinea, Congo and Angola for the development of their (slave) trading activities. Den Heijer (2003: 149) sums up: “Until 1679 the WIC regularly sent ships to the isles of Arguin and Cabo Verde. Ater the conquest of its forts and factories in the Senegambia region by the French in 1678 and 1679, trade and shipping to this territory was limited”.57 Similarly, Curtin (1975: 103) sustains: “In 1677, the French leet made a … sweep against the Dutch, taking in Gorée and some of the English forts. his ended strong Dutch participation in Senegambian trade” (cf. Barry 1988: 86). Signiicantly, the coastal trade in the entire Cape Verde region sufered from the Dutch withdrawal (Boulègue 1989: 97) : Après la prise de Gorée par les Français, en 1677, la politique monopolistique de la Compagnie du Sénégal provoqua un afaiblissement considérable du commerce de la Petite Côte. Ruisque, Portudal et Joal déclinèrent ; les autres points de traite perdirent toute activité. 4.1.3 Slave trade from Gorée and Cape Verde to Curaçao up to 1677 How crucial the period prior to 1677 must have been to the formation of PA is made clear by Buddingh (1994: 35): “De belangrijkste jaren voor de slavenhandel waren de jaren 1667 tot en met 1674 toen er gemiddeld 3.000 slaven per jaar op Curaçao aankwamen” (“he years most important to the slave trade were the years from 1667 to 1674 when an average of 3,000 slaves per year arrived at Curaçao”). Allen (2007: 65) roughly conirms these data: “From 1667 until 1675 … around 24,000 African enslaved people were shipped to Curaçao”. She calls this period the ‘peak period’ in Curaçao’s 17th century slave import.58 An immediate cause 57. Although the port of Arguin on the Mauritanian coast served the gum trade rather than the slave trade, it should be noted that the Dutch managed to retain this entrepôt up until the early 18th century (Barry 1988: 86). Note, furthermore, that Den Heijer’s quote can be interpreted as if WIC ships were being sent to “the isles of … Cabo Verde”. However, in the documents at hand, I have not come across concrete references to WIC trading activities directly with, or on the Cape Verde Islands. It is therefore likely that Den Heijer refers to the Cape Verdean peninsula rather than to the Cape Verde Islands. 58. Mikael Parkvall (p.c.) rightly notes that, if possible, one should distinguish between net and gross imports into Curaçao, “since many or most slaves did not stay on the island, but were re-exported”. Inherently, the question of which slaves integrated in the island’s households and plantations and which were preferred for resale to the Spanish Americas should be addressed (to this, see §4.3). 358 Bart Jacobs for this peak was that in 1662 the WIC was allotted the asiento59 for supplying the Spanish colonies with slaves (Postma 1990: 111). As noted above, De Moraes (1993, 1995, 1998a, 1998b, 1998c) has recovered manuscripts and documents in various Dutch municipal archives dealing with the activities of the irst Dutch WIC along the Upper Guinea Coast between 1621 and 1677. he data on the slave trade cover the last two decades of this period in particular, which coincide with Curaçao’s ‘peak period’. For reasons of space, I discuss only a portion of her indings: – – – De Moraes (1998b: 42) found a reference to the Dutch ship Gidéon, which in 1659 “déchargea à Curaçao 28 esclaves du Cap-Vert” (“unloaded at Curaçao 28 slaves from Cape Verde”). In 1671 the same ship was charged with the transport of slaves “de Cabo Verde à Curaçao” (“from Cape Verde to Curaçao”) (De Moraes 1998a: 326). his ship may have, between these two documented voyages, made several other, undocumented, return trips from Cape Verde60 to Curaçao. Crucially, De Moraes (1998b: 42) speaks of Matthias Beck, director of Curaçao between 1657 and 1668, who, “dans une lettre adressée aux directeurs de la Compagnie [WIC], espérait que l’occasion se présenterait d’amener du CapVert ‘un beau lot de Nègres’ ” (“in a letter addressed to the directors of the WIC, hoped that the occasion would present itself to bring from Cape Verde ‘a good lot of Negros’ ”). De Moraes (1998b: 51), furthermore, describes the activities of the WIC vessel Casteel van Curaçao (what’s in a name?), which in 1674 transporta du Cap-Vert à Curaçao 200 pièces de Nègres. Il emmena ensuite une partie de ces esclaves à Cayenne, puis repartit pour Gorée charger de nouveaux esclaves et retourna une seconde fois à Curaçao. Il efectua un troisième, puis un quatrième aller-retour Gorée-Curaçao, pour inalement rentrer en métropole [Amsterdam] en juin 1676, deux ans après son départ (“transported from Cape Verde to Curaçao 200 Negros. hen, it unloaded some of these slaves in Cayenne, set sail to Gorée again to recharge slaves and returned to Curaçao a second time. It made a third and a fourth return trip Gorée-Curaçao before inally returning in the metropolis in June 1676, two years ater its departure”). 59. he so-called asientos were contracts or trading agreements that would give their owner the exclusive right to trade with Spain in a speciic region. 60. In some cases, when reference is made to Cape Verde, it is unclear whether reference is made to the Cape Verde Islands, to the roadstead on the Cape Verde peninsula now known as Dakar, or to both. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 359 – Many more Dutch WIC vessels — such as the Gerechtigheyt in 1672–1673, the Morgenstar in 1673–1674 and the Elisabeth in 1674 — set sail from Gorée and/ or Cape Verde to Curaçao transporting ‘mixed cargoes’ (i.e., slaves + other merchandise) (De Moraes 1998a: 328–330). he few archival documents recovered by De Moraes are probably minor compared to the amount of documents lost or destroyed following the irst WIC’s bankruptcy. Moreover, if one considers that undocumented contraband slave trade was the rule rather than the exception, the data presented above might only represent the proverbial tip of the iceberg. Roitman (2006: 8) lends support to this idea, citing a former Governor of Cape Verde (“It is customary that the vessels in the port of Cacheu go to the Indies ater having registered a cargo of 100, 120, or 150 pieces [slaves] … when, in fact, they are taking 800 to 1,000 pieces in each ship”), suggesting that the number of slaves drawn from Upper Guinea with destination Curaçao is very likely to have been much higher than is traceable. 4.1.4 Conirmation from second WIC records In contrast to its precursor, the second WIC did manage to preserve its records, which start in 1674 and end in 1740. he records are available in the Nederlands Historisch Data Archief in Leiden. he scenario sketched above, with the Dutch Upper Guinea slave trade at its peak prior to, and rapidly declining ater the loss of Gorée in 1677, is crucially supported by the shipping and transport patterns that emerge from a basic analysis of these records: – – – Between 1674 and 1677, a total of twelve WIC ships are marked ‘CV’, meaning that they departed from the Cape Verde region. Four of these carried slaves, the remaining eight let with unspeciied cargo. Of the four registered slavers, three had Curaçao as their destination. From 1678 to 1681, the number of WIC ships leaving the Cape Verde region is almost halved (seven). One, charged with slaves, headed for Curaçao. hen, from 1682 onwards, not more than one WIC ship — with unspeciied cargo and destination — is registered as departing from the Cape Verde region. 4.1.5 Post-1640: Curaçao ‘replaces’ Cartagena Let us shit focus from Upper Guinea to the Caribbean. here, the rapid development of Curaçao as a slave depot from the 1640s onwards was encouraged by the synchronous fall of Cartagena,61 which until then had been the center of slave 61. Two important works on the rise and fall of Cartagena are Böttcher (1995) and Del Castillo Mathieu (1982). 360 Bart Jacobs distribution throughout the Spanish American colonies. Cartagena’s decline resulted from the already-mentioned fact that ater 1640 Spanish trade with the Portuguese came to a halt. To illustrate this, Green (2007: 244fn) cites from an anonymous document from the early 1640s: [F]rom the kingdoms of Guiné and other parts large numbers of blacks used to come to the city of Cartagena, but with the uprising of the kingdom of Portugal [in 1640] this trade has ceased with the result that the said city and its province are in great want of the said blacks. his passage also makes clear that, although Cartagena and Santiago lost their grip on the slave trade, the supply of and demand for Senegambian slaves did not diminish. As noted, in 1662 the Dutch WIC received the much-desired asiento for providing the Spanish Americas with slaves, an event that further encouraged Curaçao’s development at the expense of Cartagena. By then, Dutch trade along the Upper Guinea coast had reached its full growth, with, as mentioned, settlements stretching from Arguin to Cacheu (see Map 1) and export from Gorée just getting into its stride. In addition, recall that the WIC had lost their settlements in Angola and São Tomé to the Portuguese in 1648, so that we can assume that, to supply Curaçao and the Spanish colonies with slaves, the Dutch would have drawn signiicantly from Upper Guinea.62 As a result, a WIC-regulated trade route lasting for several decades could be established with Gorée and other WIC-dominated Upper Guinea settlements (Cacheu in particular) substituting for Santiago as an export harbour and Curaçao replacing Cartagena as the inal destination for an unknown number of Senegambian slaves. While many of these slaves would subsequently be redistributed over the Spanish American colonies, the linguistic data show that a signiicant number with native UGC skills would also stay on Curaçao, presumably for housekeeping and/or land cultivation purposes. 4.1.6 From Upper Guinea to Curaçao: he normal route It should not be surprising that many of the slaves in the irst decades of Curaçao’s settlement had Senegambian roots. Ater all, sea currents strongly favored a sailing route from Cape Verde to the Caribbean rather than from Lower Guinea or Angola. Dutch settlements in Brazil, on the other hand, were mostly supplied with slaves from Lower Guinea and Angola for the same reasons: a favorable sea current (Roitman 2006: 4, 5). Walker (2005: 60) stresses that “From the Cape Verde Islands, 62. For reasons of space, the important Dutch entrepôt in El Mina (Ghana) is not discussed in this paper. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 361 mariners could either sail south … along the African coast, or they could ride the North Equatorial Current westward toward the Caribbean”. In other words, sailing from Upper Guinea to Curaçao was the normal route. 4.1.7 Accounting for the native UGC skills amongst slaves brought to Curaçao To my knowledge, no records of slave trade conducted by the Dutch exist directly from, or on, the Cape Verde Islands. he linguistic ingerprints let by UGC on PA therefore justify the search for historical patterns of migration from the Cape Verde Islands to regions with a pronounced Dutch presence in the 17th century. In this respect, recall that many freed blacks in Cacheu were native Cape Verdeans (4.1.1). Green gives at least two plausible reasons for this, noting, irst, that “the building of the fort of Cacheu in 1589 … was instigated by Manuel Lopes Cardoso, a resident of Santiago” (2007: 141). Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, there is “evidence of people from Santiago moving to Cacheu during the famines of Santiago in the early 17th century” (2007: 277fn). he Cape Verde Islands did indeed sufer a heavy famine, which preluded a more general economic and humanitarian crisis on the archipelago throughout the 17th century (cf. Semedo 1993: 9, Barbe 2002: 47). As can be deduced from Green’s assertion, the famine and the crisis that followed are likely to have stimulated the emigration of native Cape Verdeans as well as the cheap selling and/or refuge of slaves from the islands (Santiago in particular) to neighboring regions where, at that time, the Dutch lourished, dominated trade and were looking for slaves to supply Curaçao with. 4.2 Sephardic trading networks linking Cape Verde to Amsterdam and Curaçao his section treats another lacuna in the literature on PA’s and Curaçao’s history, the pronounced presence of Sephardic Jews63 in Upper Guinea — particularly in those strongholds where the irst Dutch WIC dominated trade — including their ties with the Amsterdam and Curaçaoan Sephardim. It is known that the Sephardim were heavily involved in the early settlement of Curaçao,64 that they were the irst to demand slaves, and were granted the right to import them to the island from 1659 onwards (Böhm 1992: 171–173). Towards 63. In this paper, the term Sephardic Jews or Sephardim is reserved for those Jews whose roots go back to the Iberian Peninsula, from where they were dislodged towards the end of the 15th century. he term Sephardim derives from the name these Jews gave to the Iberian Peninsula: Sepharad (Bossong 2008: 13). 64. See, for example, Klooster (1998, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2009), Schorsch (2004), De Granda (1974) or Karner (1969). 362 Bart Jacobs the end of the 17th century Curaçao harbored the largest Sephardic community in the Caribbean realm (Drescher 2001: 450). Many of the irst Sephardic Jews on Curaçao are thought to have come either directly from Brazil and Amsterdam, or indirectly from Brazil via Amsterdam. However, it has rarely been recognized by those concerned with the early history of the Curaçaoan Jews that their networks extended to the Upper Guinea Coast and the Cape Verde Islands, as references to Upper Guinea are absent in key publications such as Emmanuel (1957), Emmanuel & Emmanuel (1970), Böhm (1992), Fouse (2002) or Karner (1969).65 he presence of a signiicant Sephardic Jewish community in the Upper Guinea region has remained underexposed not only in literature on the history of Curaçao. As Green (2005: 166, 167) points out, “here is almost a complete absence of reference to the Jewish presence in West Africa among historians of the Sephardim …. Historians of Senegambia have tended to pass over Portuguese records and the references to the Jewish presence which they contain”.66 Indeed, in elaborate works on the Sephardic Jews and their transatlantic social and trading networks (e.g., Bernardini & Fiering 2001, Schorsch 2004) references to Cape Verde or Cacheu are absent.67 However, according to Green (2005: 168), the importance of the Sephardim in Upper Guinea in the early 17th century is “impossible to gainsay”, a claim irmly underpinned by research done, amongst others, in the municipal archives of Amsterdam, which has revealed (Green 2005: 168) 65. An important exception is Martinus (1996: 120), who has speculated about Sephardim presence in Upper Guinea: “hat the presence of Jews on the West African coast was quite general, is supported by the fact that in Guiné-Bissau creole jidiw means ‘griot’, traveling musician, minstrel”. He has also pointed out the Sephardim involvement in the transatlantic slave trade and hypothesized about ties between the West African Sephardim and the Curaçaoan Sephardim (Martinus 1996: 119–145). 66. Green (2005: 166) thinks this absence of references to the Sephardim in West Africa “is not entirely unrelated to fears as to what might be uncovered, since it is notorious that one of the major activities of Europeans in Africa at this time was slaving. he implication of a signiicant number of Sephardim being involved in this activity would not sit comfortably with the traditional interpretation of many historians of the Sephardim that their subjects were, essentially, victims of persecution, and that, where they were slave owners, they treated their charges much better than did Christians”. 67. Lobban (1996), however, deserves special mention. Not only did he point to the presence of Sephardic and converted Jews in practically all important Upper Guinea ports including Gorée, he also linked this Diaspora to the West Indies. “[I]n the Caribbean, in Curaçao, Surinam, and Jamaica, there were Jewish populations similar to, and linked with, those in West Africa” (http:// www.saudades.org/jewscapev.html). I thank an anonymous reviewer for the reference to Lobban (1996). he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 363 a signiicant corpus of documentary material that substantially … develops our understanding both of the nature of the Sephardic community on the Petite Côte in this period, and of the nature of the relationship between the Sephardim and the Wolof people among whom they lived. Furthermore, Green (2005: 175fn) uncovered and analyzed “networks of Sephardic slavers, which were centered … on the Cape Verde islands and the Guinea coast” as well as “previously unknown connections between Cabo Verde and the Jews of Amsterdam” (Green 2007: 266). 4.2.1 Ties between the Upper Guinea Jews and Amsterdam his paragraph draws attention to the close contacts the Jewish Upper Guinea settlers had with Amsterdam, a circumstance that is likely to have had a considerably stimulating efect on trade between Upper Guinea and Curaçao. Indicative of these contacts is Brooks’ (2003: 61) observation that in Upper Guinea the persecution of New Christians (forcibly converted Jews) and Jews by the Portuguese “intensiied with the arrival of Dutch competitors …” because of “allegations of commercial ties between New Christians and Jews residing in Holland”. Mark (2007: 207) shows that these allegations were not based on false arguments: hese Jewish merchants traded for ivory, which they obtained from (New) Christian traders — presumably lançados [free-lance traders oten with an opaque Sephardim background] — living in Senegambia. he lançados had established contact with the Dutch Jews as soon as the latter settled in Senegal, a fact that strongly suggests pre-existing contact. In line with Mark, Guèye (1998: 26, 27) signals that those defending Portugal’s commercial interests in Upper Guinea were not particularly pleased by the presence there of Portuguese exiles (Jews, New Christians and lançados), “parce qu’ils préféraient commercer avec les Français, les Anglais et surtout avec leurs coreligionnaires juifs réfugiés aux Pays-Bas” (“because they preferred trading with the French, the English and especially with their Jewish co-religionists who had led to the Netherlands”). he link between the Upper Guinea Sephardim and Amsterdam is extensively highlighted by Mark & Horta (2004: 232): “At the moment that an important Portuguese Jewish community was being established in Amsterdam, two communities of Portuguese Jews, closely ailiated with their counterparts in Holland, were growing in Senegal. …”. Moreover, many “Dutch Jews chose to settle there [in Upper Guinea], for they were among friends, and, in many instances, co-religionists” (Mark & Horta 2004: 234, cf. Mark & Horta 2009). Going into some more detail, Mark (2007: 206, 207) elaborates on New Christian and Sephardic Jewish merchants 364 Bart Jacobs who settled in two villages on Senegal’s Petite Côte, Joal and Porto de Ali [Portudal] by 1608. hese traders were the descendents of forcibly-converted Portuguese Jews, but they had returned to their ancestral Jewish faith in Amsterdam. In Senegal they lived publicly as Jews and maintained close religious and commercial ties to Amsterdam. hey had their own rabbi, sent in 1612 by the Sephardic community in Amsterdam. Mark (2007: 206fn) adds that “Ruisque, located on the same coast, also housed a Jewish community as late as 1647; this community too appears to have been linked to Amsterdam”. Roitman (2006: 11) conirms that “especially the river ports of [Porto d’]Alé, Joala, and Cacheu, were considered to be ‘hotbeds’ of Sephardic activity on the West coast of Africa” (cf. Lobban 1996). Crucially, as emphasized in §4.1 and shown on Map 1, the Dutch WIC had trading posts in Joal, Portudal, Ruisque and Cacheu. Boulègue (1989: 39) recognizes the potential importance the Jewish networks between Amsterdam and Upper Guinea might have had for Dutch (WIC) trade in the Senegambia region: “Les Hollandais … bénéicièrent des liens entre les Luso-africains de religion juive et leur correligionnaires d’Amsterdam” (“he Dutch beneited from the ties between Luso-Africans of Jewish faith and their co-religionists from Amsterdam”). It shouldn’t come as a surprise that lançados and other Luso-Africans with a Jewish background were also reported as actively trading in Gorée (Brooks 2003: 63, Lobban 1996). In contrast to the Jewish Upper Guinea-Amsterdam connection, the ties between the Sephardim of 17th century Curaçao and Amsterdam are widely recognized: many of the irst Sephardim to settle and develop trade in Curaçao either originated directly from Amsterdam or were former citizens of Amsterdam who had settled in Dutch Pernambuco, from where they were banned in 1654 (Klooster 2009: 34). We can, therefore, safely hypothesize a triangular social and (slave) trading network connecting Senegambia, Amsterdam and Curaçao.68 4.2.2 Trade rather than religion To better understand the potential importance of the ties between the Dutch and the Upper Guinea Sephardim as well as of their networks stretching to Curaçao, it should be emphasized that, contrary to popular belief, the Upper Guinea Sephardim’s main objective seems to have been trade rather than religion. Green (2005: 170), for instance, refers to a Sephardic Jew called Peregrino, known in the Portuguese archives as a rabbi active along the Petite Côte at the beginning of 68. he Sephardic Jewish community of Pernambuco (Brazil) should be included in future studies on nature of Sephardic Jewish trading networks and their role in facilitating slave trade to Curaçao. I will not do so here, but see, for instance, Goodman (1987) or Smith (1987, 1999). he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 365 the 17th century (the same rabbi mentioned above by Mark). In the Amsterdam archives Green uncovered a document that refers to Peregrino’s trading connections with Diogo Dias Querido, “a signiicant igure in Amsterdam’s Sephardic community” (Green 2005: 170) as well as with the Belmonte family, a Jewish family of merchants residing in Amsterdam. he data revealed by Green suggest that Peregrino, although referred to as ‘rabbi’ in Portuguese documents, was in fact a merchant visiting the Upper Guinea Coast with mainly commercial objectives. his, concludes Green (2005: 173), can be taken to suggest that in fact many of the New Christians moved to (or stayed in) Upper Guinea for economic rather than religious purposes: In the early seventeenth century there was no need to come to Senegambia to return to Judaism. he Ottoman Empire, North Africa, Italian principalities, and Amsterdam were all welcoming Sephardim. Given the evidence this document adduces for the primarily commercial mission of Peregrino, it does seem plausible that the central motivation for the presence of Jews and cristãos novos in Senegambia was indeed trade. hat this trade involved slavery is noted by Havik (2002: 88): “Nas primeiras décadas do século XVII, as autoridades caboverdianas protestaram contra a presença de ‘muita gente da nação’, isto é, judeus sefaraditas, que negociavam com os holandeses, ingleses e franceses, e tinham os seus próprios exércitos de escravos” (“In the irst decades of the 17th century, the Capeverdean authorities protested against the presence of ‘many people of the nation’, that is, Sephardic Jews, who traded with the Dutch, the English and the French, and had their own armies of slaves”). 4.2.3 Sephardim networks directly linking Upper Guinea to Curaçao Almost immediately ater settling on Curaçao in the 1650s the Jews engaged in transatlantic and intra-Caribbean (slave) trade (Schorsch 2004: 295). Although much trade conducted by Sephardim is likely to have remained undocumented,69 the data presented below make it plausible to assume that the Curaçaoan Sephardic community provided itself with slaves from Upper Guinea predominantly. To come straight to the point, De Moraes (1998a: 323, 324) draws attention to the Sephardic Jewish slave trader Abraham Drago, who was accustomed to buying slaves in and from Cape Verde. It is well known that Abraham Drago was one of the irst Jews to settle on Curaçao in 1651 (Klooster 2006: 139). 69. It is no secret that the big bulk of the Atlantic and intra-Caribbean trade conducted by Sephardim and New Christians was contraband. Israel (2009: 10), for instance, with respect to trade in the New World, notes: “he 1580s … saw the beginning of contraband traic, irst introduced by Portuguese New Christians” (cf. Green’s 2007: 284 quote below). 366 Bart Jacobs Klooster (1998: 66), furthermore, introduces Phelipe Henriquez, born in Amsterdam, who came to Curaçao and was to become “one of Curaçao’s most successful Jews”. Interestingly, “Henriquez was involved in transatlantic slave trade for the Portuguese Company of Cacheu” (Klooster 1998: 66).70 According to Van Dantzig (1968: 81 in Martinus 1996: 145), “he Portuguese licensed company of Cacheu, founded in 1692 mainly for slave trade, had intimate links with the Portuguese Jews of Amsterdam and had its own oice in Curaçao”. Note that under diferent names the same company had already been active in Cacheu from 1664 onwards (Martinus 1996: 144). Although Phelipe Henriquez — whose grandfather’s name was Felipe Henriques (Klooster 1998: 66) — was active in slave trade only towards the end of the 17th century, the Henrique(z/s)-connection becomes increasingly interesting in the light of data presented by Green (2007: 284) on two Sephardic merchants with direct ties to Amsterdam, Adão Dias Solis and Manoel Henriques: “On July 31st 1635 both men arrived in Cartagena on the Nuestra Señora del Rosario from Cacheu which was carrying 650–700 slaves, 510–560 of which were contraband”. Green (2007) has identiied several other Sephardic Jewish merchants active in the Cape Verde region and Cacheu, directly trading slaves to Cartagena throughout the 17th century. It is suicient to note that “Curaçao lies directly on the sailing route between Cabo Verde and Cartagena” (Green 2007: 336, cf. Map 1) to understand the implications of Sephardim-regulated slave trade from Cape Verde and Cacheu to Cartagena for the early history of Curaçao. Moreover, as argued in §4.1.5, from the 1640s onwards, Curaçao would come to replace Cartagena as the primary importer of Upper Guinea merchandise. Green (2007) is, to my knowledge, the irst historian to comment on the consequences the Sephardic Jewish presence in Cape Verde and the relations with Cartagena might have had for the linguistic history of Curaçao: contemplating the Jewish legacy in the Atlantic world, he combines the results of his research with the linguistic indings of Quint (2000b): Another factor which points to a potential Judaic legacy in contemporary Cabo Verde is the extraordinary linguistic parallel between the Creole spoken on Santiago and that spoken in Curaçao in the Caribbean (known as Papiamento). According to one specialist, the two languages have “too many points in common for this to be due to mere chance”; such similarities include phonic, morphological, lexical, semantic and cultural aspects (Quint 2000: 166). It may be no coincidence that Curaçao had one of the largest Jewish populations of the Caribbean, and that it was almost directly on the sailing route between Cabo Verde and Cartagena, quite 70. As discussed in §4.1, the Dutch had a trading post in Cacheu up until the late 1670s and UGC must have been widely used there. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 367 near to the latter’s harbour — a place so important, as we have seen in this thesis, to the Jewish networks. he fact that, unlike other white residents of the islands, the Jewish community of Curaçao spoke Papiamento as a vernacular by the mid-18th century (Quint 2000: 194) lends support to the hypothesis that they may have had some role in trans-shipping Caboverdean Creole to Curaçao. (Green 2007: 336) It is not far-fetched to assume that many of the Sephardim involved in the Upper Guinea trade acquired knowledge of UGC to communicate with the local African traders; an unknown number of second- or third-generation Upper Guinea Jews might also have been native speakers. It goes without saying that, if the Sephardic Jews who settled on Curaçao were also familiar with UGC, this will have facilitated and enhanced the introduction, preservation and spread of a UGC ofshoot brought in by the Senegambian slaves.71 4.3 Discussion of the results his historical account is by no means complete, exhaustive, or even highly accurate; these data should rather be seen as the irst stones of what is to become a solid and more detailed historical framework to be elaborated upon in future studies. 4.3.1 A combined Dutch-Sephardic project? he data analyzed suggest signiicant contacts between the Senegambia region and the Dutch Antilles and hint at complex networks between the Dutch, Jewish, Portuguese and Spanish traders. Although the exact nature of these trade contacts as well as the structure of the networks are not always clear, they suggest, together with the more concrete data exposed by De Moraes, that all the conditions were met for language transfer from Upper Guinea to Curaçao to have taken place in the pre-1677 period. An important conclusion, then, is that the language transfer was probably facilitated neither by the WIC’s slave trade, nor by the Sephardic Jewish slave trade alone, but by convergence of both: an unknown but signiicant part of the slave trade conducted from Upper Guinea to Curaçao would have been jointly coordinated with its success depending on close collaboration between the parties involved. Clarifying in this respect is Joubert & Perl’s (2007: 45) assertion that in 71. Some linguistic features typical of the PA dialect of the Sephardim (who nowadays make up no more than 1% of the Curaçao population) suggest the preservation of basilectal characteristics that disappeared from standard PA. An example is the use of two past markers taba and tabata found in Henriquez (1988: 83) reminiscent of the SCV habitual and progressive past marking with ta V-ba and staba ta, and even more so of Barlavento CV taba and tabata. he link with Barlavento CV is especially remarkable since the Barlavento varieties were probably shaped in the course of the 18th century and are therefore unlikely to have played a role in PA’s development. 368 Bart Jacobs 1651 and 1652 the WIC and the Sephardic Jews signed contracts “with the aim of establishing a farming colony on Curaçao”, suggesting, indeed, that the early colonization and settlement of Curaçao was to a certain extent a combined SephardicDutch project. In this light, it can hardly be a coincidence that in the same year that the Curaçaoan Sephardim were granted the right to import slaves (1959), the Dutch WIC started with the export of slaves from Gorée to Curaçao (Böhm 1992: 172, De Moraes 1998b: 42). 4.3.2 Founder Principle? he primary purpose of the historical section was to show that the role of Upper Guinea in supplying Curaçao with slaves in the 17th century was more important than assumed up till now. However, there is little doubt that already in this early period a considerable amount of slaves was also drawn from entrepôts along the coasts of Lower Guinea (El Mina in particular), Congo and Angola (see, for instance, Van Welie 2008: 55, 56). In this respect, the fact that a relatively small number of speakers “can have a disproportionate inluence on Creole formation under favorable circumstances” (Parkvall 2000: 4) might prove to be of crucial importance to understanding how and why the UGC (sub)structures and features on all levels of the grammar could be retained in PA, even if the number of Upper Guinea slaves on Curaçao would turn out to have been relatively limited in comparison to slaves from other areas. Hypothesizing in detail about what these ‘favorable circumstances’ might have been falls outside the scope of this paper. However, we do know that Curaçao started out as a transitory staging post from where most slaves were resold and distributed throughout the Spanish Americas and the Caribbean. In the irst two to three decades, only few would remain on the island. It is possible that — for reasons that need not interest us here — slaves drawn from Upper Guinea were particularly popular among the 17th century colonizers of Curaçao, preferred above slaves from other regions, and thus selected to remain on the island rather than to be (re)sold. Once Willemstad started to grow rapidly, the need for slaves on the island itself increased exponentially (towards the end of the 17th century). One can imagine that, with no (or hardly any) more Senegambian slaves coming into Curaçao ater 1677, native UGC-speakers would soon be outnumbered by slaves from Kwa- and Bantu-speaking areas. If this scenario holds, various aspects of the Founder Principle, as outlined by Mufwene (1996), might have applied to the language contact situation that subsequently emerged on the island.72 72. One relevant observation made by Mufwene (1996: 92) is, for instance, that “it was generally more cost-efective for subsequent generations of immigrants (free, enslaved, and indentured) to learn the emerging local vernaculars than to develop new ones from scratch”. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 369 5. Final remarks Quint (2000b) was the irst to classify PA and UGC as a separate branch within the family of Iberian-based creoles. His claim, however, was not heard by Papiamentu specialists. he present paper is consistent with Quint’s classiication. he historical framework provided tells us that we need not doubt the kinship suggested by the linguistic data and that we do not have to appeal to chance, bioprograms or complex sub- and superstrate theories to explain the correspondences. he combined linguistic and historical data lend themselves to making a solid, relatively straightforward case for relexiication of an Afro-Portuguese creole in the Caribbean realm. he recognition of PA as a relexiied ofshoot of an early UGC variety will have implications for the diachronic and synchronic study of other creoles as well, since it implies that a signiicant number of the slaves exported from Upper Guinea had native UGC skills. Besides Curaçao, as mentioned, Cartagena was a major net-importer of Senegambian slaves. In particular, the 16th century arrivals of Senegambian slaves to Cartagena are well documented: Schwegler (1998: 224) talks of an initial period (1533–1580) “durante el cual predominaron en Cartagena los esclavos yolofos” (“in which Wolof slaves predominated in Cartagena”) and Parkvall (2000: 137) conirms that “imports to Colombia were dominated by Yolofs until about 1580”. In the light of these data, it might not be a coincidence that various Portuguese items found in PL (e.g., bai “to go”, ten “to have”) are also found in UGC and that these creoles share some other salient features, such as the post-verbal past marker –ba, the habitual marker ta, and two verbs “to have” (SCV ten ~ tene, PL ten ~ tené).73 For future study, Quint’s (2000b: 196) proposal for genetic research to pinpoint more exactly the origins of the early Curaçao population should not be disregarded. Gonçalves et al. (2003: 1)74 indicate the results such research might provide, having established a Sephardic Jewish contribution to the Cape Verdean gene pool: [A] high frequency of J* lineages in Cabo Verdeans relates them more closely to populations of the Middle East and probably provides the irst genetic evidence of the legacy of the Jews. In addition, the considerable proportion (20.5%) of E3b(xM81) lineages indicates a possible gene low from the Middle East or northeast Africa, which, at least partly, could be ascribed to the Sephardic Jews. 73. he number of Portuguese items is limited though, and it is by no means my intention to claim that PL would have resulted from relexiication of early UGC. Both the linguistic as well as the historical data, however, do make it possible to hypothesize that speakers of UGC were to some extent involved in the formation of PL. 74. I thank Mikael Parkvall for bringing this publication to my attention. 370 Bart Jacobs Finally, it is important to stress that the hard evidence of a link between PA and UGC is primarily provided by the linguistic data. he value of the historical data cannot be seen apart from the linguistic data. It is also implied that those who are not convinced of the Upper Guinea origins of PA should be concerned primarily with disproving the linguistic rather than the historical evidence. Abbreviations PA SCV GB UGC ST PRI ANG AB GGC PL P S WIC VPDW = Papiamentu = Santiago Cape Verdean Creole = Portuguese Creole spoken in Guinea-Bissau and Casamance = Upper Guinea Creole (a term covering both SCV and GB) = Sãotomense = Principense = Angolar = Annobonense = Gulf of Guinea Creole (a term covering ST, PRI, ANG and AB) = Palenquero = Portuguese = Spanish = (Dutch) West Indian Company = Van Putte & Van Putte-De Windt (2005) References Andrade, Ernesto d’ & Alain Kihm. 2000. “Stress in three creoles”. Crioulos de base portuguesa ed. by Ernesto d’Andrade, Dulce Pereira & Maria Antónia Mota, 97–109. Lisbon: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística. Allen, Rose Mary. 2007. Di ki manera? A Social History of AfroCuraçaoans, 1863–1917. PhD dissertation, University of Utrecht. Arends, Jacques. 1999. “he origin of the Portuguese element in the Surinam Creoles”. Spreading the Word: he issue of difusion among the Atlantic Creoles ed. by Magnus Huber & Mikael Parkvall, 195–208. University of Westminster Press. Baptista, Marlyse. 2002. he Syntax of Cape Verdean Creole: he Sotavento varieties. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Baptista, Marlyse, Heliano Mello & Miki Suzuki. 2007. “Cape Verdean, or Kabuverdianu, and Guinea-Bissau, or Kriyol (Creole Portuguese)”. Comparative Creole Syntax ed. by John Holm & Peter L. Patrick, 53–82. London: Battlebridge. Barme, Stefan. 2003. “Zum (ibero-)romanischen Ursprung einiger (morpho-) syntaktischer Strukturen des Papiamentu und des español caribeño”. Zeitschrit für romanische Philologie 119:2.232–255. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 371 Barbe, André. 2002. Les îles du Cap-Vert : De la découverte à nos jours, une introduction. Paris : L’Harmattan. Barry, Boubacar. 1988. La Sénégambie du XVe au XIXe siècle. Paris: L’Harmattan. Bartens, Angela. 1996. Die iberoromanisch-basierten Kreolsprachen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Bartens, Angela. 2000. “Notes on Componential Difusion in the Genesis of the Kabuverdianu Cluster”. Language Change and Language Contact in Pidgins and Creoles ed. by John McWhorter, 35–61. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Benoist, Joseph Roger de & Abdoulaye Camara. 2003. Histoire de Gorée. Paris: Maisonneuve & Larose. Bernardini, Paolo & Norman Fiering, eds. 2001. he Jews and the Expansion of Europe to the West, 1450–1800. New York: Berghahn Books. Bickerton, Derek. 1994. “he origins of Saramaccan syntax: A reply to John McWhorter’s ‘Substratal inluence in Saramaccan serial verb constructions’ ”. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 9.65–77. Bickerton, Derek. 1999. “Perspectives on Creole language history”. New West Indian Guide 73.97–102. Bickerton, Derek. 2001. “Okay for content words, but what about functional items?” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24.1104–1105. Bickerton, Derek. 2002. “Sobre los pretendidos portuguesismos de la lengua palenquera”. Palenque, Cartagena y AfroCaribe ed. by Yves Moñino & Armin Schwegler, 35–42. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. Birmingham, John C. 1971. “Still more on Papiamentu”. Hispania 54:2.300–301. Birmingham, John C. 1975. “Papiamentu’s West African cousins”. Colloquium on Hispanic Linguistics ed. by Frances M. Aid, 19–25. Washington: Georgetown University Press. Birmingham, John C. 1976. “Papiamentu: he long-lost Lingua Franca?” he American Hispanist 13.8–11. Böhm, Günter. 1992. Los sefardíes en los domínios holandeses de Amrérica del Sur y del Caribe: 1630–1750. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert. Bossong, Georg. 2008. Die Sepharden: Geschichte und Kultur der spanischen Juden. München: C.H. Beck. Böttcher, Nikolaus. 1995. Aufstieg und Fall eines atlantischen Handelsimperiums. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert. Boulègue, Jean. 1987. Le Grand Jolof (XIIIe–XVIe siècle). Blois: Façades & Karthala. Boulègue, Jean. 1989. Les Luso-Africains de Sénégambie. Lisbon: Instituto de Investigação Cientíica. Boxer, Charles R. 1963. Race Relations in the Portuguese Colonial Empire, 1415–1825. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Brito, António de Paula. 1887 [1967]. Apontamentos para a gramática do crioulo que se fala na ilha de Santiago de Cabo Verde. Republished in Estudos Linguísticos crioulos ed. by Jorge Morais-Barbosa, 329–404. Lisbon: Academia Internacional da Cultura Portuguesa. Brooks, George E. 2003. Eurafricans in Western Africa: Commerce, social status, gender, and religious observance from the sixteenth to the eighteenth century. Oxford: James Currey. Buddingh, Bernard R. 1994. Van Punt en Snoa: Ontstaan en groei van Willemstad, Curaçao vanaf 1634. Den Bosch: Aldus Uitgevers. 372 Bart Jacobs Busche, Christian. 1993. “Die portugiesische Entstehung des Papiamentu in der Kritik”. Portugiesisch basierte Kreolsprachen ed. by Matthias Perl, Axel Schönberger & Petra hiele, 103–113. Frankfurt am Main: TFM. Cardoso, Hugo & Norval Smith. 2004. “A new look at the Portuguese element in Saramaccan”. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics 3.115–147. Carreira, António. 1983. O crioulo de Cabo Verde: Surto e expansão. Lisbon: s.n. Castillo Mathieu, Nicolas del. 1982. Esclavos negros en Cartagena y sus aportes léxicos. Bogotá: Instituto Cao y Cuervo. Clements, Joseph Clancy. 2007. “Korlai (Creole Portuguese), or No Lin”. Comparative Creole Syntax ed. by John Holm & Peter L. Patrick, 153–174. London: Battlebridge. Conradi, Cornelis. 1844. Ewanhelie di San Matheo. Curaçao: Fundashon pa Planiikashon di Idioma. Couto, Hildo Honório do. 1994. O crioulo português da Guiné-Bissau. Hamburg: Helmut Buske. Curtin, Philip D. 1975. Economic Change in Precolonial Africa: Senegambia in the era of the slave trade. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Dantzig, Albert van. 1968. Het Nederlandse aandeel in de slavenhandel. Bussum: Fibula-Van Dishoeck. DeBose, Charles. 1975. Papiamentu: A Spanish-based creole. PhD dissertation, University of Michigan. Dijkhof, Marta B. 1993. Papiamentu Word Formation. PhD dissertation, Universiteit van Amsterdam. Dijkhof, Mario. 2000. Gramatica di Papiamento. Oranjestad, Aruba: s.n. Dissel, Sijbrand van. 1865. Evangeli segoen Marko. New York: American Bible Society. Doneux, Jean Léonce & Jean-Louis Rougé. 1988. En apprenant le creole a Bissau ou Ziguinchor. Paris : L’Harmattan. Drescher, Seymour. 2001. “Jews and New Christians in the Atlantic Slave Trade”. he Jews and the Expansion of Europe to the West, 1450–1800 ed. by Paolo Bernardini & Norman Fiering, 439–470. New York: Berghahn Books. Emmanuel, Isaac S. 1957. Precious Stones of the Jews of Curaçao. Curaçaon Jewry 1656–1957. New York: Bloch Publishing Company. Emmanuel, Isaac S. & Suzanne A. Emmanuel. 1970. History of the Jews of the Netherlands Antilles. Cincinnati: American Jewish Archives. Emmer, Pieter C. 1998. he Dutch in the Atlantic Economy. Aldershot: Variorum Press. Endruschat, Annette. 2004. “Elementos preposicionais nas línguas crioulas de base portuguesa”. Papia 14.47–70. Endruschat, Annette. 2005. “Präpositionen in portugiesisch-basierten Kreolsprachen”. Portugiesische Kreolsprachen: Entstehung, Entwicklung, Ausbau und Verwendung ed. by Annette Endruschat & Axel Schönberger, 121–160. Frankfurt am Main: Domus Editoria Europaea. Ferraz, Luiz Ivens. 1979. he Creole of São Tomé. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press. Ferrol, Orlando. 1982. La cuestión del origen y de la formación del papiamento. he Hague: Smit. Fontes, Carlos. 2007. Estudo do léxico do São-Tomense com diccionario. Unpublished master’s thesis. Faculty of Arts, University of Coimbra. Fontes, Carlos & John Holm. 2008. “Pan-Creolisms in Santomé”. Paper presented at the meeting of the ACBLPE at the Universidade Nova de Lisboa, July 3–5, 2008. Unpublished ms. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 373 Fouse, Gary C. 2002. he Story of Papiamentu: A study in slavery and language. Lanham: University Press of America. Fouse, Gary C. 2007. “Slavery and the Development of Papiamentu”. Journal of Caribbean Literatures 5:1.61–72. Friedemann, Nina de & Carlos Patiño Rosselli. 1983. Lengua y Sociedad en el Palenque de San Basilio. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo. Goilo, Enrique R. 1951. Papiaments leerboek. Curaçao: s.n. Gonçalves, Rita, Ana Freitas, Ana Fernandes, Toomas Kivisild, Richard Villems & António Brehm. 2003. “Y-chromosome lineages in Cabo Verde Islands witness the diverse geographic origin of its irst male settlers”. Human Genetics 113.467–472. Goodman, Morris. 1987. “he Portuguese Element in the American Creoles”. Pidgin and Creole Languages: Essays in Memory of John E. Reinecke ed. by Glenn G. Gilbert, 361–405. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Granda, Germán de. 1974. “El repertorio lingüístico de los sefarditas de Curaçao durante los siglos XVII y XVIII y el problema del origen del papiamento”. Romance Philology 28:1.1–16. Green, Tobias. 2005. “Further considerations on the Sephardim of the Petite Côte”. History in Africa 32.165–183. Green, Tobias. 2007. Masters of Diference: Creolization and the Jewish presence in Cabo Verde, 1497–1672. PhD dissertation, Centre of West African Studies, University of Birmingham. Guèye, Moustapha. 1998. “Gorée et la traite négrière”. Gorée et l’esclavage ed. by Djibril Samb, 21–40. Dakar : Université Cheikh Anta Diop — IFAN. Hagemeijer, Tjerk. 2007. Clause Structure in Santome. PhD dissertation, Universidade de Lisboa. Haseth, Carel de. 1990. “Een bijdrage in de discussie over het ontstaan van het Papiaments”. De Gids 53.548–557. Havik, Philip J. 2002. “A dinâmica das relações de gênero e parentesco num contexto comercial: Um balanço comparativo da produção histórica sobre a região da Guiné-Bissau — séculos XVII e XIX”. Afro-Ásia 27.79–120. Hawthorne, William. 2003. Planting Rice and Harvesting Slaves: Transformations along the Guinea-Bissau coast, 1400–1900. Portsmouth NH: Heinemann. Heijer, Henk den. 2003. “he Dutch West India Company, 1621–1791”. Riches From Atlantic Commerce ed. by Johannes Postma & Victor Enthoven, 77–114. Leiden: Brill. Henriquez, May. 1988. Ta asina? O ta asana? Abla, uzu i kustumber sefardí. Willemstad: Henriquez. Holm, John. 2000. An Introduction to Pidgins and Creoles. Cambridge University Press. Holm, John & Peter L. Patrick, eds. 2007. Comparative Creole Syntax. London: Battlebridge. Intumbo, Incanha. 2006. “Papiamentu, Guiné-Bissau Creole Portuguese, and its substrate, Balanta: A comparison of the noun phrase”. Revista internacional de lingüística iberoamericana 4:1.107–115. Intumbo, Incanha. 2007. Estudo comparativo da morfossintaxe do crioulo guineense, do balanta e do português. Master’s thesis, Faculdade da Letras da Universidade de Coimbra (Portugal). Published 2008 as monograph. Munich: Lincom Europa. Intumbo, Incanha. 2008. “Balanta, Guiné-Bissau Creole Portuguese and Portuguese: A comparison of the noun phrase”. Roots of Creole Structures ed. by Susanne Michaelis, 263–278. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Israel, Jonathan. 2009. “Jews and Crypto-Jews in the Atlantic World Systems, 1500–1800”. Atlantic Diasporas Jews, Conversos, and Crypto-Jews in the Age of Mercantilism, 1500–1800 ed. 374 Bart Jacobs by Richard L. Kagan & Philip D. Morgan, 3–17. Baltimore: he Johns Hopkins University Press. Jacobs, Bart. Forthcoming a. “Papiamentu’s origins: Where does the Old Portuguese come from?” Proceedings of the 11th Islands Cultures Conference ed. by Nicholas Faraclas, Ronnie Severing and Christa Weijer. Willemstad, Curaçao: Instituto pa Planiikashon di Idioma. Jacobs, Bart. Forthcoming b. “Upper Guinea Creole: evidence in favor of a Santiago birth”. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 26.3, 2010. Joubert, Sidney & Matthias Perl. 2007. “he Portuguese Language on Curaçao and its role in the formation of Papiamentu”. Journal of Caribbean Literatures 5:1.43–60. Karner, Frances P. 1969. he Sephardics of Curaçao: A study of socio-cultural patterns in lux. Assen: Van Gorcum & Comp. Kihm, Alain. 1989. “Lexical conlation as a basis for relexiication”. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 34:3.351–376. Kihm, Alain. 1994. Kriyol Syntax: he Portuguese-Based Creole Language of Guinea-Bissau. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Klooster, Willem. 1998. Illicit Riches: Dutch trade in the Caribbean, 1648–1795. Leiden: KITLV Press. Klooster, Willem. 2001. “he Jews in Suriname and Curaçao”. he Jews and the Expansion of Europe to the West, 1450–1800 ed. by Paolo Bernardini & Norman Fiering, 350–369. New York: Berghahn Books. Klooster, Willem. 2003. “Curaçao and the Caribbean Transit Trade”. Riches From Atlantic Commerce ed. by Johannes Postma & Victor Enthoven, 365–384. Leiden & Boston: Brill. Klooster, Willem. 2005. “he Rise and Transformation of the Atlantic World”. he Atlantic World ed. by Willem Klooster & Alfred Padula, 1–42. Upper Saddle River: Pearson. Klooster, Willem. 2006. “Communities of port Jews and their contacts in the Dutch Atlantic World”. Jewish History 20.129–145. Klooster, Willem. 2009. “Networks of Colonial Entrepreneurs: he founders of the Jewish settlements in Dutch America, 1650s and 1660s”. Atlantic Diasporas: Jews, Conversos, and Crypto-Jews in the Age of Mercantilism, 1500–1800 ed. by Richard L. Kagan & Philip D. Morgan, 33–49. Baltimore: he Johns Hopkins University Press. Kouwenberg, Silvia & Eric Murray. 1994. Papiamentu. Munich: Lincom. Kouwenberg, Silvia & Abigail Ramos-Michel. 2007. “Papiamentu (Creole Spanish/Portuguese)”. Comparative Creole Syntax ed. by John Holm & Peter L. Patrick, 307–332. London: Battlebridge. Kramer, Johannes. 2004. Die iberoromanische Kreolsprache Papiamento. Hamburg: Helmut Buske. Ladhams, John. 1999a. “he Pernambuco connection? An examination of the nature and origin of the Portuguese elements in the Surinam Creoles”. Spreading the word: he issue of difusion among the Atlantic Creoles ed. by Magnus Huber & Mikael Parkvall, 209–240. London: University of Westminster Press. Ladhams, John. 1999b. “Response to Norval Smith”. Spreading the word: he issue of difusion among the Atlantic Creoles ed. by Magnus Huber & Mikael Parkvall, 299–304. London: University of Westminster Press. Lang, Jürgen. 2001. “La Problématique de l’origine du créole de Santiago (Cap-Vert)”. Les îles atlantiques : Réalités et imaginaire ed. by Françoise Massa, 181–187. Université de Haute Bretagne Rennes 2, Équipe ERILAR. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 375 Lang, Jürgen, ed. 2002. Dicionário do crioulo da ilha de Santiago (Cabo Verde): Wörterbuch des Kreols der Insel Santiago (Kapverde). Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Lang, Jürgen. 2006. “L’inluence des Wolof et du wolof sur la formation du créole santiagais”. Cabo Verde : Origens da sua sociedade e do seu crioulo ed. by John Holm, Jürgen Lang, JeanLouis Rougé & Maria João Soares, 53–62. Tübingen : Gunter Narr. Lenz, Rodolfo. 1928. El papiamento: La lengua criolla de Curazao. Santiago de Chile: Balcells & Cia. Lipski, John M. 1989. he Speech of the Negros Congos of Panama. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Lipski, John M. 1991. “On the emergence of (a)mí as subject in Afro-Iberian pidgins and creoles”. Linguistic Studies in Medieval Spanish ed. by Ray Harris-Northall & homas Cravens, 39–61. Madison: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies. Lipski, John M. 2005. A History of AfroHispanic Language: Five centuries, ive continents. New York: Cambridge University Press. Lipski, John M. 2008. “Spanish-Based Creoles in the Caribbean”. he Handbook of Pidgin and Creole Studies ed. by Silvia Kouwenberg & John Victor Singler, 543–564. Oxford: WileyBlackwell. Lipski, John M. & Maurizio Santoro. 2007. “Zamboangueño Creole Spanish”. Comparative Creole Syntax ed. by John Holm & Peter L. Patrick, 373–398. London: Battlebridge. Lobban, Richard. 1996. Jews in Cape Verde and on the Guinea Coast. Paper presented at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, 11 February 1996. Digital source: http://www. saudades.org/jewscapev.html Lorenzino, Gerardo A. 2007. “Angolar (Creole Portuguese), or Lunga Ngola”. Comparative Creole Syntax ed. by John Holm & Peter L. Patrick, 1–24. London: Battlebridge. Maduro, Antoine J. 1965. Papiamentu, origen i formación. Curaçao: s.n. Maduro, Antoine J. 1966. Procedencia di Palabranan Papiamentu i otro anotacionnan. Curaçao: s.n. Maduro, Antoine J. 1969. “Algun observashon tocante e articulo ‘origenes y evolucion del Papiamentu’ publicá den e numeronan 2, 3 i 4 di Watapana”. Watapana 2:5.13–15. Maduro, Antoine J. 1971. Bon papiamentu (i un appendix interesante). Curaçao: s.n. Maduro, Antoine J. 1987a. Palenkero i Papiamentu. Curaçao: Maduro & Curiel’s Bank. Maduro, Antoine J. 1987b. Kaboberdiano i Papiamentu. Curaçao: Maduro & Curiel’s Bank. Maduro, Antoine J. 1991. Papiamentu: Indagando i Ilustrando. Curaçao: Scherpenheuvel. Mark, Peter. 2002. ‘Portuguese’ Style and Luso-African Identity: Precolonial Senegambia, sixteenth-nineteenth centuries. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press. Mark, Peter. 2007. “Towards a reassessment of the dating of the trading and the geographical origins of the Luso-African Ivories, 15th–17th centuries”. History in Africa 34.189–211. Mark, Peter & José da Silva Horta. 2004. “Two Early Sephardic Communities on Senegal’s Petite Côte”. History in Africa 31.231–256. Mark, Peter & José da Silva Horta. 2009. “Catholics, Jews, and Muslims in Early SeventeenthCentury Guiné”. Atlantic Diasporas: Jews, Conversos, and Crypto-Jews in the Age of Mercantilism, 1500–1800 ed. by Richard L. Kagan & Philip D. Morgan, 170–194. Baltimore: he Johns Hopkins University Press. Martinus, Efraim Frank. 1996. he Kiss of a Slave: Papiamentu’s West-African connections. PhD dissertation, Universiteit van Amsterdam. Maurer, Philippe. 1986. “Le papiamento de Curaçao : Un cas de creolisation atypique ?” Etudes creoles 9 :1.97–113. 376 Bart Jacobs Maurer, Philippe. 1988. Les modiications temporelles et modales du verbe dans le papiamento de Curaçao (Antilles Néerlandaises). Hamburg : Helmut Buske. Maurer, Philippe. 1991. “Der Einluss afrikanischer Sprachen auf die Wortsemantik des Papiamentu”. Beiträge zum 6. Essener Kolloquium über “Kreolsprachen und Sprachkontakte” ed. by Norbert Boretzky, Werner Enninger & homas Stolz, 123–137. Bochum: Brockmeyer. Maurer, Philippe. 1995. L’angolar : Un créole afroportugais parlé à São Tomé. Hamburg : Helmut Buske. Maurer, Philippe. 1998. “El papiamentu de Curazao”. América Negra: Panorámica actual de los estudios lingüísticos sobre variedades hispanas, portuguesas y criollas ed. by Matthias Perl & Armin Schwegler, 139–217. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert. Maurer, Philippe. 2002. “La pluralización nominal en los criollos atlánticos con base léxica ibérica”. Palenque, Cartagena y AfroCaribe ed. by Yves Moñino & Armin Schwegler, 129–136. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. Maurer, Philippe. 2005. “La préposition for di du papiamento et le verbe fô des créoles du golfe de Guinée”. La Linguistique 41:1.57–66. Mendes, Mafalda, Nicolas Quint, Fátima Ragageles & Aires Semedo. 2002. Dicionário Práctico Português-Caboverdiano. Lisbon: Verbalis. Moraes, Nize Izabel de. 1993, 1995, 1998a. À la Découverte de la Petite Côte au XVIIe Siècle (Sénégal et Gambie). Vols. 1, 2, 3 and 4. Dakar : Université Cheikh Anta Diop — IFAN. Moraes, Nize Izabel de. 1998b. “La traite des esclaves efectuée par les Hollandais à Gorée (1637– 1677)”. Gorée et l’esclavage ed. by Djibril Samb, 41–52. Dakar : Université Cheikh Anta Diop — IFAN. Moraes, Nize Izabel de. 1998c. “Les puissances européennes, Gorée et la Petite Côte aux XVIe et XVIIe siècle”. Gorée et l’esclavage ed. by Djibril Samb, 53–62. Dakar : Université Cheikh Anta Diop — IFAN. Morais-Barbosa, Jorge. 1975. “Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau and Sao Tomé e Príncipe: he linguistic situation”. Miscelânia luso-africana: Colectânea de estudos ed. by Marius F. Valkhof, 133–151. Lisbon: Junta de Investigações Cientíicas do Ultramar. Mufwene, Salikoko, S. 1996. “he Founder Principle in Creole Genesis”. Diachronica 13:1.83– 134. Muller, Enrique Antonio Francisco. 1989. Inleiding tot de syntaxis van het Papiamentu. PhD dissertation, Universiteit van Amsterdam. Munteanu, Dan. 1991. El Papiamento, Origen, Evolucion y Estructura. Bochum: Brockmeyer. Munteanu, Dan. 1996. El papiamento, lengua criolla hispánica. Madrid: Gredos. Munteanu, Dan. 2007. “Lenguas criollas de base románica”. Manual de lingüística románica ed. by José Enrique Gargallo Gil & Maria Reina Bastardas, 427–451. Barcelona: Ariel. Muysken, Pieter & Norval Smith. 1990. “Question words in pidgin and creole languages”. Linguistics 28.883–903. Muysken, Pieter. 2008. Functional Categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Navarro Tomás, Tomás. 1953. “Observaciones sobre el papiamento”. Nueva Revista de Filología Hispánica 71.183–189. Niewindt, Martinus Joannes. 1833 [2002]. Prefecto Apostolico di Curaçao na Cristian di su Mision. Bloemendaal: Libri Antilliani. Niewindt, Martinus Joannes. 1837 [2001]. Catecismo Corticu pa uso di catolicanan di Curaçao. Curaçao: Fundashon pa Planiikashon di Idioma. Parkvall, Mikael. 2000. Out of Africa. London: Battlebridge. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 377 Parkvall, Mikael. 2001. “Reassessing the role of demographics in language restructuring”. Degrees of Restructuring in Creole Languages ed. by Ingrid Neumann-Holzschuh & Edgar W. Schneider, 185–213. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Pereira, Daniel A. 1986. Estudos da História de Cabo Verde. Praia: Instituto Caboverdiano do Livro. Pereira, Dulce. 2000. “Um crioulo de outro planeta”. Crioulos de base portuguesa ed. by Ernesto d’Andrade, Dulce Pereira & Maria Antónia Mota, 27–46. Lisbon: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística. Postma, Johannes M. 1990. he Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade 1660–1815. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Putman, Jacobus Josephus. 1849. Proeve eener Hollandsche spraakkunst, ten gebruike der algemeene armenschool. Curaçao: s.n. Putman, Jacobus Josephus. 1850. Kamiena di Kroes: Koe historia, meditasjon I orasjon kortiekoe. Curaçao: Fundashon pa Planiikashon di Idioma. Putte, Florimon van & Igma van Putte-de Windt. 2005. Dikshonario Papiamentu-Hulandes, Hulandes-Papiamentu. Zutphen: Walburg Pers. Quint, Nicolas. 2000a. Grammaire de la Langue Cap-Verdienne. Paris: L’Harmattan. Quint, Nicolas. 2000b. Le Cap Verdien : Origines et Devenir d’une Langue Métisse. Paris : L’Harmattan. Quint, Nicolas. 2003. Parlons capverdien: Langue et culture. Paris: L’Harmattan. Quint, Nicolas. 2008. “Les apontamentos de António de Paula Brito (1887) ou la naissance d’une tradition grammaticale capverdienne autochtone”. Histoire Épistémologie Language 30:1.127–153. Quint, Nicolas. Forthcoming. “Coordination et parataxe en capverdien moderne (dialecte santiagais ou badias)”. Dépendance et parataxe dans les langues africaines ed. by Bernard Caron, 29–48. Louvain: Peeters. Rodney, Walter. 1965. “Portuguese attempts at monopoly on the Upper Guinea Coast, 1580– 1650”. Journal of African History 6:3.307–322. Roitman, Jessica Vance. 2006. “he Portuguese, the Dutch and the Sephardim: Networks and cross-cultural mediation in the Atlantic slave trade, 1580–1654”. Paper of a Conference on African Slave Trades and African Slavery in a Global Comparative Perspective, Held in Leiden at the African Studies Centre, 18 May 2006. Ms. Rona, José Pedro. 1976. “Rehispanisation de langues créoles aux Antilles : Étude sur la divergence et la convergence”. Actes du XIIIe Congrès International de Linguistique et Philologie Romanes, Vol. II ed. by Marcel Boudreault & Frankwalt Möhren, 1015–1025. Québec: Les Presses de l’Université Laval. Rougé, Jean-Louis. 1994. “A propos de la formation des créoles du Cap Vert et de Guinée”. Papia 3:2.137–149. Rougé, Jean-Louis. 2004. Dictionnaire étymologique des créoles portugais d’Afrique. Paris: Karthala. Rougé, Jean-Louis. 2008. “A inexistencia do crioulo no Brasil”. Africa no Brasil ed. by José Luiz Fiorin & Margarida Petter, 63–73. São Paulo: Contexto. Sanchez, Tara S. 2005. Constraints on Structural Borrowing in a Multilingual Contact Situation. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Scantamburlo, Luigi. 1999. Dicionário do Guineense. Volume I: Introdução e notas gramaticais. Bubaque, Guinea-Bissau: Edições Colibri, FASPEBI. 378 Bart Jacobs Scantamburlo, Luigi. 2002. Dicionário do Guineense. Volume II: Dicionário Guineense-Português. Bubaque, Guinea-Bissau: FASPEBI. Schorsch, Jonathan. 2004. Jews and Blacks in the Early Modern World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schwegler, Armin. 1996. Chi ma nkongo: Lengua y rito ancestrales en El Palenque de San Basilio (Colombia). 2 volumes. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert. Schwegler, Armin. 1998. “Palenquero”. América Negra: Panorámica actual de los estudios lingüísticos sobre variedades hispanas, portuguesas y criollas ed. by Matthias Perl & Armin Schwegler, 220–291. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert. Schwegler, Armin. 1999. “On the (African) origin of Palenquero subject pronouns”. Ms. [09-221999 Version]. Schwegler, Armin. 2002. “On the (African) origins of Palenquero subject pronouns”. Diachronica 19:2.273–332. Schwegler, Armin & Kate Green. 2007. “Palenquero (Creole Spanish)”. Comparative Creole Syntax ed. by John Holm & Peter L. Patrick, 273–306. London: Battlebridge. Semedo, José Maria. 1993. “Un archipel volcanique dispersé”. Collection Notre librairie : Littérature du Cap-Vert, de Guinée-Bissau, de São Tome et Príncipe 112.6–11. Silva Rêgo, Antonio da. 1998. Dialecto Português de Malaca. Lisbon: CNCDP. Sintiago, Alfredo. 1898. Gramatica Corticoe di Idioma Papiamentoe. Curaçao: Universiteit van de Nederlandse Antillen. Smith, Norval. 1987. he Genesis of the Creole Languages of Surinam. PhD dissertation, Universiteit van Amsterdam. Smith, Norval. 1999. “Pernambuco to Surinam 1654–1665? he Jewish slave controversy”. Spreading the Word: he issue of difusion among the Atlantic Creoles ed. by Magnus Huber & Mikael Parkvall, 251–298. London: University of Westminster Press. Valkhof, Marius. 1966. Studies in Portuguese and Creoles. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press. Veen Zeppenfeldt, Antonio van de. 1928. Praktische Handleiding der Papiamentsche Spraakkunst. Curaçao: s.n. Veenstra, Tonjes. 1996. “he pronominal system of Saramaccan”. Matériaux pour l’étude des classes grammaticales dans les langues créoles ed. by Daniel Véronique, 259–272. Aix-enProvence: Publications de l’Université de Provence. Veiga, Manuel. 2000. Le créole du Cap-Vert : Étude grammaticale descriptive et contrastive. Paris: Karthala. Voorhoeve, Jan. 1973. “Historical and linguistic evidence in favour of the relexiication theory in the Formation of Creoles”. Language in Society 1.133–145. Walker, Timothy. 2005. “Lisbon as a Strategic Haven in the Atlantic World”. he Atlantic World ed. by Willem Klooster & Alfred Padula, 60–75. Upper Saddle River: Pearson. Welie, Rik van. 2008. “Slave trading and slavery in the Dutch Colonial Empire: A global comparison”. New West Indian Guide 82.47–96. Wilson, William André Auquier. 1962. he Crioulo of Guiné. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press. Wijk, Henri Louis Anne van. 1958. “Orígenes y evolución del Papiamentu”. Neophilologus 42.169–182. Wijk, Henri Louis Anne van. 1968. “Orígenes y evolución del Papiamentu”. Watapana 1:2.13–16. Wijk, Henri Louis Anne van. 1969. “Orígenes y evolución del Papiamentu”. Watapana 1:3.13–18. Wood, Richard E. 1970. Papiamentu: Dutch contributions. PhD dissertation, Indiana University. he Upper Guinea origins of Papiamentu 379 Wood, Richard E. 1972. “New light on the origins of Papiamentu: An eighteenth-century letter”. Neophilologus 56.18–30. Journal: La Union. 1889. (Weekly newspaper.) 19 April 1889. Curaçao: Catholic Church. Digital source: http://www.unesco.org/culture/dialogue/slave Résumé Cet article traite des relations linguistique et historique entre le papiamento et le créole de la Haute Guinée, ce dernier étant parlé sur l’île de Santiago du Cap-Vert, ainsi qu’en Guinée-Bissau et en Casamance. Dans la section linguistique, l’hypothèse que le papiamento est la forme relexiiée d’une ancienne variété du créole de la Haute Guinée, sera soutenue par l’analyse de correspondances structurelles des mots outils appartenant à cinq catégories grammaticales (pronoms personnels, pronoms interrogatifs, prépositions, conjonctions ainsi que des formes réciproques et réléchies). A cela s’ajoutent des exemples correspondants tirés d’anciens textes en papiamento (datant du 18e et 19e siècle). La section concernant l’histoire ofre une interprétation des événements historiques, qui expliquent le transfert langagier de la Haute Guinée à Curaçao dans la seconde moitié du 17e siècle. Zusammenfassung Der Artikel handelt von den sprachlichen und geschichtlichen Beziehungen zwischen Papiamentu und der Kreolsprache Oberguineas, die auf Santiago, einer der Inseln der Kapverden, und in Guinea-Bissau und Casamance gesprochen wird. Im Abschnitt zu den sprachlichen Befunden wird die Hypothese, dass Papiamentu ein relexiizierter Ableger einer frühen Varietät der Kreolsprache Oberguineas ist, durch die Analyse struktureller Entsprechungen der Funktionswörter in fünf grammatischen Kategorien (Pronomen, Fragewörter, Präpositionen, Konjunktionen sowie reziproke und relexive Formen) gestärkt. Zusätzlich werden entsprechende Aufälligkeiten aus frühen Texten in Papiamentu (18. und 19. Jahrhundert) präsentiert. Der Abschnitt zur Geschichte bietet eine Aufstellung der historischen Ereignisse, die für den Sprachtransfer von Oberguinea nach Curaçao in der zweiten Hälte des 17. Jahrhunderts verantwortlich zeichnen. Author’s address Bart Jacobs Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München Linguistisches Internationales Promotionsprogramm (LIPP) Türkenstraße 103 80799 Munich, Germany bart.jacobs@campus.lmu.de