Lingo as a Pidgin
Standard English Version of Text
Computers speak binary. Their native
language is formed from sequences of zeros and ones or 'on' and 'off' states.
Early programmers had to refine their programs into binary before a computer
could run them.
In the 1950s, second-generation languages came into use, using letters to represent
functions, which were translated by an assembler for the computer to read.
As this language evolved, it became clear that the closer a programming language
was to a programmer's mother tongue, the more natural programming would seem
to him/her. If a programming language came naturally to the programmer, errors
would occur less frequently [COL, 2003A]. This realisation brought about the
introduction of high-level languages (1). One of these new languages was Algol,
'the first language with a formal grammar' and 'recursive calling of functions'
(2) [FUR, 2000].
Object Oriented Programming, such as Lingo, emerged in the late 1970s and early
1980s [COL, 2003B].
Long before the first programming
language, other languages evolved to allow an alternative form of communication,
largely among the slave trade or populations of the plantations [PAT, 2003].
Black slaves had no means of communicating with the sailors who transported
them to the West Indies of America, nor with the English speaking landowners
who they were to work for [GRE, 1998]. A Pidgin began to emerge, borrowing language
from the slaves' native languages and the English of their captors.
Formed out of necessity, when communication is impossible, or convenience when
communication is difficult and frequently misinterpreted, a Pidgin emerges when
two foreign speaking groups need a mutual language. As the primary function
of Pidgins is to enable basic communication, not to replace existing languages,
they tend not to require the same level of complexity. Coming into being as
crude, basic methods of communication, they 'typically have a limited vocabulary,
a reduced grammatical structure, and a narrow range of functions' [CRY, 1995].
Over time Pidgins can expand, adopting more complex grammar and expressive functions
which were not necessary at the language's earlier stages of development [PAT,
2003]. Eventually a Pidgin can become the mother tongue of a group of its speakers,
displacing their native language. At this point it becomes a Creole.
When they become Creoles, they retain some of the distinctive features of the
Pidgin. These features include the use of the base form of verbs in past tense,
and a reduced vocabulary [HAY, 2001].
A Pidgin is a hybrid of two languages, but is not the mother tongue of any of
its speakers. Its speakers learn it having already established a native language
[UNI, 2001]. This is the first characteristic that it has in common with computer
code, specifically Lingo. Lingo is a hybrid of computer language and human language
(usually English), and as with Pidgin it is the native language of no one.
Languages which evolve within a single
community borrow occasional words and phrases from foreign languages when their
own is deficient, but their development is not purposely engineered to allow
communication with speakers of a foreign language. The evolution of a native
language happens almost accidentally [PAT, 2003]. Speakers of native languages,
such as English, inadvertently allow them to evolve as they adopt new technology
or are exposed to other influencing factors (3).
Unlike these native languages, Lingo has been intentionally developed to allow
communication between two entities. Its structure was designed for a specific
purpose, with its lexis thoughtfully considered. Every component of the language
has a purpose, and exists as a necessary part of the human/computer dialogue.
According to Peter J. Scott, one key feature of Pidgin is that it is formed
deliberately when communication is difficult [SCO, 1996]. It evolves over a
much shorter period of time than a native language. This does not allow time
for neologisms to creep subtly into the language as they do in, for example,
English.
In incidents of 'dramatic social inequality' [PAT, 2003], Pidgin lexis is derived
'predominantly from the language of the dominant population (4)' [RUL, 2004].
In the case of Lingo, the dominant population are the programmers who build
and essentially control the computers that provide the secondary language. Like
traders and slaves, humans and computers play dramatically different roles in
society. The role of a computer is to assist humans and generally make life
easier for us. This role is not dissimilar to the part slaves played, working
in order to make life easier for their masters.
English has varying levels of formality. It can be strictly defined, as with
Standard English, or more casual, but whether the strict structure of Standard
English is adhered to or not, the meaning of a sentence can be understood on
most occasions. Lingo also has multiple levels of formality. A programmer can
choose to use dot syntax or verbose syntax, both of which can be interpreted
by the computer as having the same meaning. However, as with English, a level
of informality that leads to mistakes can alter the intended meaning of a piece
of code, sometimes to the extent that it makes no sense at all, and is not executable.
Lingo is a language of parataxis, containing few or no conjunctions. With the
exception of 'if' statements, it consists mostly of main clauses. These clauses
are always commands (such as 'go to frame 1' or 'set the member'). With roots
in the slave trade, Pidgins are also languages of commands, and their vocabularies
contain a great deal of imperatives.
Lingo is formed from components. As a major sentence structure tends to follow
a subject - verb - object pattern, a Lingo function must include an event (e.g.
'on mouseup') an action to carry out (e.g. 'go to'), and an object (e.g. a sprite
or marker). One cannot expect a small section removed from a piece of digital
code to be executable on its own [KRA, 2001] in the same way that individual
words extracted from a sentence will not tell the full, intended story.
Like any evolving language, Pidgin
frequently requires the addition of new words. As it is a language of necessity,
and is formed largely from nouns and verbs, these are the words which are introduced
most often. In Lingo, programmers are required to invent custom names for functions
and objects. These neologisms are nouns, as programmers only invent the names
of variables and event handlers. They cannot invent adverbs, adjectives or verbs,
because properties and actions are predefined by Lingo's vocabulary. Although
the programmer may give a title to an action, he/she is naming the action rather
than describing it. Lingo tends to represent verbs and adjectives as nouns.
For example, it refers to 'the keyPressed' or 'the visible'. If one were to
describe a property of visibility in English, one would say 'the object is invisible',
not 'the visible of the object is nothing'.
A common feature of custom names in Lingo is that they are compound words or
blends, for example 'JumpUp' could be the name of a function which tells an
object to move upwards. Compound words litter Lingo, and include common, standard
Lingo terms such as 'mouseup' and 'keyupScript'. Many of the neologisms in Pidgin
are also compounds, for example 'looksee' in Chinese Pidgin [TAY, 1995].
In creating words, Pidgin speakers adjust words from a second language to imitate
the phonetics of their native language [UNI, 2001]. Words adopted from the second
language are also spelt phonetically, often from a reduced alphabet. Hawaiian
Pidgin uses an alphabet consisting of only 12 letters (5) and replaces 'th'
with 'd' so that 'there' and 'then' become 'dere' and 'den' [COL, 2001].
In Lingo words are reduced in length not by spelling them phonetically, but
by other means. Lingo programmers can choose to abbreviate custom event handlers
and variables by whatever means they see fit. Clipping is a common method as
it reflects trends in Lingo's own vocabulary, such as in 'loc' ('location'),
and 'pos' ('position'). Clipping also occurs in some Pidgins, including Cameroon
Pidgin English [ANC, 2003] which, for example, clips 'mamiecocoyam' (meaning
'mother of Cocoyam') to 'mamiecoco' [KOU, 1998].
John Cayley, argues that code cannot
be defined as a Pidgin, because Pidgin is a true hybrid of several languages,
whereas code is formed by the injection of features of one language into another.
He argues that code is a computer language 'contaminated' by English, not a
language in itself [CAY, 2002].
However, Cayley does not acknowledge how words are frequently injected into
Pidgins. These new words may not be copied directly from Standard English, but
tend to be similar and are recognisable as having derived from English (or,
if English is not the language of the dominant population, an alternative superstrate
(6)). Secondlly, Lingo programmers name functions and variables, the names they
create are not always Standard English words. They are often compounds, blends,
mnemonic wordplays or spelt phonetically for contraction, much like Pidgin neologisms.
Furthermore, the words programmers add to Lingo are proper nouns (they are the
names of objects and functions). Cayley implies that code is not a 'full-blown'
language because of the injection of neologisms. However, the invention or evolution
of proper nouns is a common feature of all languages. All societies frequently
invent new projects and discover new objects for which they must find names.
Pidgin morphology rarely includes
inflection [UNI, 2001]. Infinitives are used regardless of tense. For example,
'she get' rather than 'she had' or 'she got' in Hawaiian Pidgin [COL, 2001].
Though tense is rarely expressed at all, in some cases an additional word is
inserted, such as 'bin' ('been') to express past tense (7). In Lingo, the time
at which an instruction is called defines the time the action it details takes
place, therefore each term only has one form, and expresses only present tense.
Objects exist in a permanent state of 'nowness' - Director recognises all instants
as 'now', reading scripts consecutively but never acknowledging past or future.
For example, 'is' is used, but never 'was'.
Objects in Lingo can be grouped in a list, which is referred to as a single
item in later code. Alternatively behaviours are applied to each individual
object. This allows actions to involve only single objects, not plurals, hence
the use of 'is' in all cases and never 'are', and singular forms of all objects.
Pidgin also tends to use a singular despite intending to refer to a plural.
F Pidgin Fijian 'has only one pronominal form', compared to 35 forms (8) for
pronouns in Fijian [PAT, 2003].
Because the language often does not have the vocabulary or tense distinction
to describe a situation as succinctly or accurately as more developed languages,
Pidgin sentences can be long-winded. In Tok Pisin, 'bookcase' is 'ples bilong
putim ol bok'. The way in which Lingo is compiled means a similar lack of economy
is sometimes necessary (9). For example 'make sprite 1 black and invisible'
would have to be written as 'set the visible of sprite 1 to false' then 'set
the color of sprite 1 to rgb("000000")' (10).
All languages are born initially
for basic communication, but then evolve to a level of complexity that allows
greater expression and advanced literary works. However, a Pidgin's central
purpose is basic. Pidgins develop to assist trade or basic communication, not
to further literature. It is generally only when it becomes a Creole that it
becomes more expressive. Lingo, similarly, was designed for programmers as a
tool for controlling a computer, and was not intended as a language that would
be appreciated independently of the program or artwork it is used to create.
Pidgin is a device which allows trade to succeed, as Lingo is a device which
allows an artefact to exist. However, as both Pidgins and Lingo have become
more established, they have begun to be appreciated as tools for art rather
than just a means to an end.
Both computer code and Pidgin English have become established well enough to
move beyond their original purposes of necessity into Art. Poems have been written
in Pidgin and Creole, such as John Agard's 'No Oxford Don' (11), as well as
in Lingo (12) and other programming languages such as HTML. Other works of art
and literature have mixed features of multiple coding languages, creating a
new hybrid. Talan Memmott's Lexia to Perplexia [MEM, 2000] uses HTML tags, concatenation
and lexis that resembles the custom handler names used by Lingo programmers.
This cacophony suggests a secondary, machinic conscience merged with Memmott's
own, human thoughts. N. Katherine Hayles goes so far as to describe Memmott's
piece as a 'creole discourse' (13) [HAY, 2001].
In the case of code poetry, most works are not executable. Both Lingo and Pidgin's
primary functions (to allow basic communication) are lost. One could even argue
that code poetics not code at all. Instead they are only an imitation of its
syntax. The process writing poetry in code or Pidgin removes it from its original
function.
Despite the similarities, there are
still major distinctions between Lingo and Pidgins, one of which was described
by Florian Kramer. Kramer points out that computers were created by humans,
and therefore that code and computer programs are not the languages of machines
but 'writings by human' [KRA, 2001]. In the physical world, the dominant group
of humans can claim no responsibility for forming the language of the secondary
or foreign speaking group. Their influence is only felt at the time the Pidgin
begins to emerge.
If the English definition of a Pidgin as 'any combination and distortion of
two languages as a means of communication [DAV, 1994]' suits Lingo and other
computer code (14) so well (15), should studies on Pidgin begin to incorporate
investigations into coding trends? Or is it that modern English is deficient?
New technology and uses for various different forms of English (including code
and the deviant spelling which is associated with text messages and online chatrooms)
have been developed in such a brief time that Standard English has not yet had
time to catch up them.
For now, similarities between Pidgin and code are rarely acknowledged. Perhaps
because a computer is not considered comparable to a living being, and therefore
its language its not comparable to human language. Perhaps, in time, we will
develop terms which distinguish more clearly between a human/human hybrid language
and a human/computer hybrid language. Or alternatively, will human thought progress
to the stage where computers and humans are considered to be of equal worth,
making the definition and connotations of 'Pidgin' suit computer code even more
appropriately?
Endnotes:
(1) The first of these was FROTRAN. FROTRAN introduced 'IF', 'DO' and 'GOTO' statements [FUR 2000], which later developed into variables.
(2) The calling of functions involves detailing actions elsewhere in the code, and 'calling' them with their given name. This jumping back and forth is similar to using footnotes in Standard English texts, where information which relates to part of the text is 'called' from the end of the text.
(3) For example, the popularity of email and instant messaging has effected written English, and the ubiquity of American television has increased Americanisms in English worldwide.
(4) For example, in Melanesian - English 'Tok Pisin' Pidgin, 85% of the root words are derived from English [RUL, 2004].
(5) a, e, i, o, u, h, k, l, m, n, p, and w.
(6) 'Superstrate: a language spoken by people who held a dominant position' in the environment in which a Pidgin emerged [PAT, 2003].
(7) 'I bin gone' is used rather than 'I went' in Jamaican Pidgin.
(8) Fijian pronouns have so many forms because the Fijian language distinguishes dual and paucal (a few) from plural, and 'there are also different forms for items that are edible vs. drinkable vs. other' [PAT, 2003].
(9) However, in some cases Lingo terms can also improve linguistic economy, as many are abbreviations, such as 'mouseDown' rather than 'mouse button held down'.
(10) Or:
sprite (1).visible = 0
sprite (1).color = rgb("00000")
(11) An extract from 'Listen Mr. Oxford Don' [AGA, 1985]:
I ent have no gun
I ent have no knife
but mugging de Queen's English
is the story of my life
(12) Codeworks by John Cayley [CAY, 2002]
(13) Bill Seaman suggests that Lexia to Perplexia is a Creole because it incorporates not just different programming languages, but also a language of images [SEA, 2004]. If sets of images can also be defined as languages, then perhaps illustrated texts such as comic strips can also be defined as Creole.
(14) Other code which could also fit this description includes JavaScript and HTML, which uses a number of English words but very different syntax.
(15) Since Pidgin shares so many features with Lingo, would programmers benefit from learning a Pidgin? An article in the Columbia University Press has suggested that the closer a programming language is to the programmer's native language, the fewer mistakes will be made [COL, 2003A]. Perhaps this suggests that speakers of Pidgin would find it easier to learn Lingo than other programmers, and as Pidgins share so many features with Creoles, perhaps a programmer whose mother tongue is a Creole would make fewer mistakes (16).
(16) Although Lingo could not be defined as a Creole itself because a key feature of a Creole is that it is the native language of its speakers, in Writing Machines, Katherine N. Hayles suggests that code shares much in common with Creole [HAY, 2002].
All text copyright Barbara Brownie, 2004