Unfortunately, this one just wasn't for me. The writing style was not what I expected and I did not really enjoy.

I received an ARC of this book, thanks Netgalley!

I read this book because I love John McWhorter and his work. I think the things he researches are interesting and he is skilled at explaining them. This book was interesting to me in that I did not even realize there was a debate about where creoles come from. This book is definitely not as accessible to non-linguists as most of Mr. McWhorter's previous books. However, it is well-thought-out and not especially difficult to follow either. He uses plenty of examples and is clear in his writing.
I would recommend this to Linguists, Language Professionals, and Language enthusiasts, as well as anyone interested in dialects and how languages become what they are.

4/5 stars

I received an electronic advanced reader copy of this book from NetGalley and Cambridge University Press. Thank you for the opportunity to preview and review this book.

I am an architect and designer by trade and education, with much of my research concentrating on Haiti and other countries in post-disaster contexts. And although I am not a linguist, I am deeply fascinated by language and have been attempting to learn Haitian creole on my own. So it is with this background in mind that I jumped at the chance to learn more about the formation of creoles, with the hopes of gleaning some better understanding about the people behind the languages.

Despite being a non-expert with little familiarity with specific linguistic terms, I found the initial chapters fascinating. The author, a professor at Columbia University, meticulously lays out the foundation of his argument, that creoles are "their own unique entity and are among the world's only genuinely new languages," that their development represents a definitive linguistic break. He backs up his claim with data and many field examples from various creoles around the world, giving a global foundation to his work.

McWhorter also lays out the details of the opposing view that creoles are a natural progression in language development and are not remarkable in their own right, a view championed by linguists such as Michel DeGraff. Being at MIT, it was quite interesting personally to read about DeGraff and Noam Chomsky, who are heavyweights of the linguistics department here.

I found myself taking notes and making lists of terms I didn't understand, with the hopes of asking a linguist friend for help. But despite my zealous interest in the book's subject matter, I soon became bogged down by the unfamiliar concepts and detailed knowledge that went over my head.

This is a scholarly work that deserves attention and will be a great resource for those in the field. While it may not be as accessible for a layperson like me, it makes the essential point that creoles are not to be ignored but to be celebrated as the languages they are. I will be recommending this book for our university library.

As a Native of Louisiana and one who has made their home in Southern Louisiana this has always been a hidden bone of contention in our society. I have always been a fan of John McWhorter and found this book to not only be an engrossing read but well thought out. He moved beyond the features of fairer skin and "good" hair, beyond the belief that all Creoles reside or come from New Orleans and thoroughly researched the culture of Creoles. A great read..

Loaded with info! What can I say, if you enjoy linguistics, this is your book! I have always thought of dialects as their own languages and was surprised to find most pros didn't think they were. Huh... Well, they are paying more attention now and studying those dialects, like they should have been doing all along! I know in many countries of Europe there are people rushing to record the various dialects from aging populations before they die out. I can speak from some experience about German dialects as many older adults in my family in Germany spoke dialects and many of them have now passed on. Some were considered National Treasures as they spent a considerable amount to time recording their languages and helping researchers write them. Creole is a language that needs to be recorded before it is lost.

Being a linguist and an avid reader, I do not understand how some reviewers gave this book less stars simply because they did not understand the content of a book they asked to read.

Creole exceptionalism, i.e. the linguistic ideology that creoles are on the same level as other languages In that their genesis is filled with language change and contact. In this treatise, McWhorter discusses the ongoing debate among linguists in how to classify creole languages. McWhorter stance is evident, creoles are obviously languages even if their naissance happened quicker and under distress. He goes on further to give the reader the Creole life cycle, starting from their pidgin origins to analsyzing their more concrete constructions. This would be the perfect ompanion to a sociolinguistic class, or classes on language change, or any lingustic related class for that matter. McWhorter uses examples to further his point about the existence of creoles as languages by comparing them to regional dialects of other languages in regards to their case distinctions and negations. After this brief introduction to creoles, McWhorter then starts his discussion by giving readers a background into what pidginization is, then he delves into the start of the creole prototype which looks at the inflection, tone and lexicalization of the languages in question. The next few chapters weigh the existence of creoles in our socio-cultural world. In the end, the reader is faced with analyzing the evidence presented by McWhorter, if one can truly and wholeheartedly classify creoles as language. I for one, am a proponent. After all, what we call English or even what we call American English, is an amalgamation of other languages. But why do we not even bat an eye when it came to classifying English as a language? McWhorter does give readers to think about and hopefully this book will encourage others to start thinking of creoles as the languages they are.

Although I have a Ph.D. in linguistics, I haven't had occasion to read many of McWhorter's academic works in the past because they don't often overlap with my subfields. I know I have a lot to learn about creoles, though, so I thought reading this would be a nice way to fill in some gaps in my knowledge. The book does not disappoint, but be forewarned that it's an academic work and so assumes that you already know quite a bit about linguistics.

This book lays out McWhorter's theories on creole formation (in short: creole language genesis is a unique process because a creole is not just a sum of its parents' parts) and in the process familiarizes the reader with opposing theories (one in particular: that creoles are blends of parent or 'donor' languages). The author presents his arguments in detail as you'd expect from an academic work. No shortage of examples from real-life creole languages, either. I'm particularly glad that he included a lot of examples of creoles from all over the world with relationships to many different language families. Often books and articles on creoles tend to focus only on creoles where one of the donor languages is Indo-European (especially English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese), so it's nice to see other creoles represented, too.

My only gripe about this book is how he focuses on uniqueness. Argument: creoles aren't blended languages, they're unique. But he never explains why a blended language wouldn't be unique, too. It's the PROCESS that he's claiming to be unique, but in many places throughout the book his wording makes it sound like the individual creole languages are unique while other languages aren't. In reality, every language is a unique collection of features regardless of how it came into being. For someone well known for his accessible pop linguistics books, it's a bit surprising that he explains this aspect of his theory so poorly.

Final assessment: it's worth the read.

Thanks go to Net Galley and Cambridge University Press for the review copy. I am reviewing this title because accepting the galley created an obligation on my part, but these are deep waters, and I found myself thrashing around in them searching for the shoreline.

Since retirement, I have sought to stretch myself by stepping out of my own comfort zone, veering away from the types of fiction that I have always enjoyed, and from the historical and other nonfiction titles that dovetailed with my work. In doing so, I have often been rewarded. Sometimes I learn things, and a couple of times I have discovered that I enjoy a genre that I had never even explored before. Taking risks can be a good thing.

Then there are situations like this one. This one is just embarrassing. Take my rating with a grain of salt, readers, because for the most part, I have no clue what is in here or whether McWhorter has proven his point. I was able to figure out what the debate is about: some linguists claim that Creole speech is a dialect created from other languages (and if I'm wrong about that--it occurs to me that my review may attract the attention of actual linguists--tell me so, but be gentle here, because I am doing my best.) The thesis presented is that Creole is a legitimate language unto itself, and the writer delves into the history of its evolution in order to prove its independent development.

Is he right? Is he incorrect? Hell if I know.

Generally I appreciate reading specialized texts (in the humanities, where I am usually at ease) that don't dumb things down for the reader and that assume some facts are understood in order to move forward. And one might expect nothing less from a Cambridge publication. But there are enough terms used that are technical and specialized for use by linguists, and there is enough prior knowledge assumed here as well, that I soon realize I am in over my head. A Google search isn't going to cut it here.

What I did pick up by noting the descriptive terms and phrasing is that this is a red-hot debate, one that excites a certain amount of passion and perhaps even creates lifelong grudges among scholars in the field.

So forgive me, linguists, because I know not what I do here. This may be a five star book, at least for linguists that can understand what's being said; or perhaps the case is poorly made and it's less than the four stars given here. Four stars is my default for a book that is good but not stellar, and since I don't understand enough of the argument the author makes here to provide a valid, fair rating and am nevertheless required to rate the book, my default of 4 stars is the port in which I will rest, in my lifeboat, until I can find the courage to wobble onto the shore.

Recommended for those that are confident as linguists, and that are interested in the discussion.

McWhorter makes a fascinating claim here: that creoles are not pidgins or admixtures but rather new languages created using elements of contributing languages but, quite crucially, after a break in transmission rather than a continuous evolution. The first two chapters are of particular interest for non-linguists (most of whom, I imagine, will share my interest in sociolinguistics); I certainly plan to use excerpts with classes.

I received this e-book ARC through Net Galley from Cambridge University Press in exchange for a truthful review.

I was drawn in by this title as my family is made up of French creole speakers. However I am not a linguist and the audience for this scholarly text is most definitely geared towards linguists.

While most of the debate presented was not in my wheelhouse and way over my head, I enjoyed the "French plantation creole" grammar examples and reading about the vast number of languages from all over the world which are classified by linguists as creole languages.