Thorough analysis of the text from the URL link reveals discloses that language becomes a Pidgin/Creole when its combination entails two unrelated lingos. The text is no exception as some English words are in combination with the native language. This has evidently qualified this text to be a pidgin/Creole. "Sapos, yu, and strong" are derivatives of English language while "kaikai and bai" are words from a native langujkkage in New Guinea. The Pidgin/Creole sentence structures are highly reduced compared to the mother languages. In this context, the English translation of the pidgin words is long in compliance with grammar rules while the pidgin words are set with a junk structure. Furthermore, they never give a clear meaning if one is not used to the language (Siegel, 2008). The writing style for English words is also direct.
From the text, it is notable that Pidgin/Creole posses inadequate vocabulary with a simplified grammar. The language considers no gender and elicits total absence of plural marking. It is evident that pidgin does not consider the plural of peanut to be peanuts as indicated in the English translation but remains "pinat". Some words are extremely shortened as illustrated by the word "where" substituted by "we" in pidgin. This is a dominant characteristic of pidgin/Creole language. It is remarkable that the language posses aspect somewhat than having a tense. It only cares about passing on the message but hardly considers time.
Under scrutiny, the text holds less redundancy while trying to be precise thus eliminating the elements of misunderstanding. The words are highly corrupted and substandard when compared with their precursor forms. This is apparent in the text when the statement elucidating the true friendship phenomenon meets analysis. Pidgin/Creole has a characteristic of relexification where some older get substituted by novel ones. The pidgin employs the word "Sapos" instead of "if" utilized in the English version. Concurrently, this language is complicated and requires learning just like others. Other noticeable features include limited inflectional arrangement, and fewer discernible grammatical groupings.