The null/overt copula alternation in creoles: the case of Guinea-Bissau Creole. Kriyol, or Guinea-Bissau Creole is a Portuguese-based Creole of the Upper Guinea group. As it often happens with creoles, its copula system is quite different from its lexifier: Kriyol does not have a copula, at least not a verbal one, in present tensed predicative sentences, whereas past and future tenses usually require an overt copula. In the present tense, an item with copular function shows up: it is a pronominal element, i.e. the 3sg subject (clitic) pronoun i. Since Kriyol does not have morphological gender distinction, i is syncretic for masculine and feminine; in predicative clauses, it is used with both singular and plural syntactic subjects. Roughly speaking, we find i with noun predicates, with or without modifier, in present tensed sentences. As regards adjectival predicates, according to Kihm (1994), in Kriyol we have both real adjectives (e.g. adjectives for colors, or adjectives more recently borrowed from Portuguese, such as demokratiku) and items referring to “basic qualities like big, small, happy, sad” (1994:34), which syntactically behave like verbs. In nonpredicative contexts, such verbal items seem to behave like real adjectives: they may even be inflected for number. As regards nonpresent tenses, past and future normally require a copula, although it is not always obligatory in the past (Kihm 1994): in past predicative sentences, the copula (y)era shows up, optionally followed by the past marker ba. This past copula directly derives from the Portuguese past copula era from ser, ‘be’. On the other hand, the future copula is sedu, which compositionally looks like ser + -du (past participle suffix, used in Kriyol for passivization). Sedu may be preceded by the Kriyol future marker(s) na (+bin). Summarizing, we find the null copula with the verbal items described above (1-2); with noun predicates (3) and real adjectives (4), i shows up in the present, whereas in nonpresent tenses we have the appropriate copula. The variation between Ø and i does not depend on the syntactic subject (whether NP or pronoun), but rather on the kind of predicative item used. 1) É mininu Ø kumpridu. DEM child Ø tall 2) Kasa ku kai bedju ba di mas. house REL fall old PAST very 3)
Kil omis la I piskadur(is). DEM man-pl COP fisher(-pl)
4) Kil ropa i burmedju. DEM dress COP red
Another interesting variation internal to Kriyol is the (occasional) use of the copulas é and foi, present and past (perfective) Portuguese copulas respectively. Kriyol did not take them as copulas, at least not during the stage of creolization. I would not say that a new copula system is emerging; rather, it seems that it is a parallel system available to the speaker, but still felt as mas portuguis (‘more Portuguese’) by the speakers. References Kihm, A., 1994, Kriyol Syntax: the Portuguese-based Creole Language of Guinea-Bissau, Creole Language Library 14, Amsterdam, John Benjamins. 481