 |
VOLUME
PRESENTATION
Peter
Auer
During recent years, we have experienced an unexpected surge of
scientific interest in phenomena of bilingual speech, and in particular, code-switching.
While code-switching had previously been investigated as a matter of peripheral importance
within the more narrow tradition of research on bilingualism, it has now moved into a more
general focus of interest for sociolinguists, psycholinguists and also general linguists
(in particular, syntacticians). The new development has resulted in the publication of
numerous monographs, articles, and in the foundation of an ESF network on code-switching
and language contact.
From both earlier and more recent research we know: (a) that
code-switching can be related to and indicative of group membership in particular types of
bilingual speech communities, such that the regularities of the alternating use of two or
more languages within one conversation may vary to a considerable degree between speech
communities, and (b) that intrasentential code-switching, where it occurs, may be
constrained by syntactic and morphosyntactic factors which may or may not be universal in
nature. Accordingly, the dominant perspectives on code-switching represented in previous
research are macro-sociolinguistic (in the narrow sense of the term, i.e. as referring to
relationships between social and linguistic structure), or grammatical (referring to
constraints on intrasentential code-switching). In the first tradition, we find both
quantitative, correlational work (such as Poplack 1988)
and qualitative approaches (such as Myers Scotton 1993a, Gardner-Chloros 1991,
Heller 1995); the central question of this
type of research is how language choice is negotiated as a consequence of power and
inequality, or as an index of the rights and obligations attributed to
incumbants of certain social categories. The second tradition is exemplified by the work
of Shana Poplack (1980) as well as by more
recent publications, e.g. by Joshi (1985),
Bentahila & Davies (1983), Myers Scotton (1993b), Muysken (1995) and many others. It usually addresses the question of
syntactic constrains from within the framework of a particular grammatical theory, and is
sometimes complemented by a psycholinguistic interest in the switchability of
languages (cf. Grosjean 1995).
However, these two traditions leave a gap which is well known to
every linguist working on natural data from bilingual settings. The gap is due to the fact
that, on the one hand, macro-sociolinguistic aspects of the speech situation never
completely determine language choice and type of code alternation (or the absence of it),
but rather leave a considerable amount of conversational structure (involving
code-switching and similar phenomena) unspecified and thus open to local processes of
language negotiation and code selection. On the other hand, the gap is also due to the
fact that code-switching is never restricted to intrasentential loci which may be amenable
to a strictly syntactic analysis; on the contrary, whenever intrasentential code-switching
occurs, intersentential switching is a matter of course, but not all code-switching
situations/communities which allow intersentential switching also allow intrasentential
switching. This means that neither the sociolinguistic approach (sensu stricto) nor the
grammatical approach explore the whole range of observed regularities in bilingual speech.
The lacuna is precisely in those patterns of code-switching which go beyond the sentence,
i.e. code-switching between conversational moves or intonation
units, each representing full constructional units in terms of their
syntactic make-up.
This volume puts forward the claim that conversational
structure should be considered a third level of structure in bilingual language use -
a level which is sufficiently independent both from the macro conditions of switching and
its syntactic constraints on in order to be explored in its own right. Of course, these
conversational patterns of code alternation are as closely linked to their larger social
context as are the syntactic regularities of intra-sentential switching (a point which is
easily verified by a look at the conversational data in this volume, which come from a
variety of social contexts/multilingual communities). However, reference to the
larger-scale situation in which bilinguals converse does not account for the
structural regularities in the local uses of the two or more languages involved, nor does
it reveal their governing principles.
The case for independent treatment of conversational structure in
bilingual interaction is made by the papers in PART 1 of the
present volume. Li Wei (The why and how questions in
the analysis of conversational code-switching) contrasts a CA type approach to
code-switching with the so-called markedness model advocated by C. Myers-Scotton and
argues that the latter model is only applicable in macro-linguistic contexts of diglossia.
Giovanna Alfonzetti (The conversational dimension of code-switching between
Italian and dialect in Sicily) demonstrates that, even in a situation of
dialect/standard alternation (such as in Sicily), the codes involved may be used
by participants in such a way as to delimit them clearly from each other. Alfonzetti finds
a high number of recurrent conversational patterns in which the two codes, although
structurally relatively close, are functionally juxtaposed in conversation. Melissa
Moyer (Bilingual conversational strategies in Gibraltar) describes
conversational code-switching in Gibraltar using a triple classificatory schema relating
to the base language, the patterns of language choice across turns, and a
typology of switching forms.
However, the volume additionally inquires into the theoretical and
methodological foundations of the analysis of conversational structure in code-switching.
Thus, PART 2 centres around problems in the
conceptualizations of the codes in code-switching: When is a code
a code? When is variability code-switching? Is what linguists perceive as two distinct
codes still an instance of code-switching when seen from the bilingual members
perspective?
At least two points in this equation of linguists and lay
participants conceptions of codes are questionable. One is the
distinction between code-switching and borrowing, which leaves an area of ambiguity in
which non-sedimented, unstable take-overs from the other code nonetheless do not seem to
be used functionally. The notion of nonce borrowings suggested by Poplack
& Sankoff (1984) to account for these
intermediate cases is highly disputed. The second weak point in the above equation is the
emergence of mixed codes in which what monolingual linguistics might see as a
more or less structured amalgamation of elements from two codes assumes the status of a
new variety of its own (cf. Nortier 1989).
The contributions in this part cast some doubt on such a simple
equation of members and linguists codes, arguing from within an interpretive
sociolinguistic framework. In order to overcome the tedious discussion of what, e.g., is
code-switching and what is borrowing, the problem of the definition of codes
is addressed from the perspective of the bilingual speakers themselves. The new approach
focuses on the evidence we find in the ways in which participants employ their repertoire
in order to show that they orient to the other-language-ness of the element in
question. As a consequence, a number of structures that might be seen as involving the
juxtaposition of two codes from the linguists perspective are dismissed
as not constituting a case of code-switching from the participants perspective (cf.
Auer 1983/84, 1990). This means that code-switching is closely tied to its
functions or meaning in conversation: there are no codes without
functions.
Celso Alvarez-Cáccamo (From switching
code to codeswitching: Toward a reconceptualization of communicative
codes) introduces the discussion in theoretical terms, tracing back the origin
and development of the notion of code-switching to its earliest formulations as connected
to information theory. He proposes to distinguish between variety-switching (where a
variety is held together by co-occurrence restrictions between linguistic forms) and
code-switching (where a code is characterized by situational co-occurrence expectations).
A very similar point is made by Rita Franceschini (Code-switching and the
notion of code in linguistics) who also argues for a strictly functional approach to
code-switching. Both authors develop a notion of code-switching which leaves
non-functional cases outside of a conversation-analytic or otherwise
interpretive approach.
The problem of the delimitation and definition of
codes is perhaps most obvious in those social contexts in which the varieties
involved are structurally very close (as in Alvarez-Cáccamos Galizan/Castilian d
ata and in some of Franceschinis Italian/French/Italian dialect materials). On the
other hand, Michael Meeuwis & Jan Blommaert (A monolectal view of
code-switching: Layered code-switching among Zaireans in Belgium) show that s
tructurally distant codes such as Lingala/French or Swahili/French may
nevertheless be amalgamated into a mixed code; that this code assumes the
characteristics of a monolectal code is proven precisely by the fact that the
mixed codes themselves can be used in functional code-switching.
A testing field for the codes of code-switching is
that of discourse markers, which have often been shown to be easily integrated into a
newly emerging mixed code. A careful conversational analysis is required in order to
distinguish discourse markers as part of such a mixed code from those markers on which the
use of the other language is employed functionally. Cecilia Ösch-Serra
(Discourse connectives in bilingual conversation: The case of an emerging
Italian-French mixed code) argues that in the linguistic behaviour of Italian
migrants in French-speaking Switzerland, the phonetically and pragmatically similar
markers (Ital.) ma and (Fr.) mais are re-organized into a new mixed system
in which each of them takes on new discourse-related duties different from those of the
respective monolingual codes (Italian and French). An even more complex situation is
depicted in Yael Maschlers contribution (On the transition from
code-switching to a mixed code). Working on data from Hebrew-English bilinguals in
Israel, she traces the course of grammaticalization from code-switching into a mixed code
on the basis of a careful analysis of language use in discourse markers which in some
cases are said to constitute code-switching, in others they are part of an emerging
Hebrew-English code.
PART 3 of the volume is dedicated to
the interface between conversation-analytic and ethnographic approaches to
code-switching, widening the scope to notions of identity and power negotiation in
bilingual conversation.
Mark Sebba & Tony Wootton (We, they and identity:
Sequential vs. identity-related explanation in code-switching) present a
conversational account of switching practices between London Jamaican and London English
and then ask the question of how social identities are symbolized through language
choices. In answering this question, John Gumperz distinction between we
and they codes is revitalized in new terms after it had long fallen in
disrespect. The authors come to the conclusion that we code and they
code may be subsumed within more local and more changeable social identities which
are made salient from time to time in conversation; since there are only two
codes involved, but a multitude of social identities need to be expressed, the
relationship between language use and identity is by necessity created and negotiated in
the conversation itself.
This analysis of we and they codes is
echoed in the following paper by Ben Rampton (Language crossing and the
redefinition of reality). In a Bakhtin-inspired approach, Rampton considers the
relevance of crossing (i.e. the sporadic use of a minority language or
vernacular by majority speakers) for code-switching research which he criticises for not
having paid enough attention to incongruity and contradiction in usage patterns, and for
treating it exclusively as a background contextualization cue but not as part
of the main action, which it may become in the case of crossing. The model
Rampton proposes on the basis of his analysis distinguishes between situational and
figurative code-switching (double-voicing), which, in turn may appear in a
metaphorical (unidirectional) or an ironic (vari-directional) form.
While both Sebba/Wootton and Rampton deconstruct the
identity-aspect of code-switching (in the simple way as used, for instance, in
Myers-Scottons work), Normann Jørgensen (Bilingual childrens
acquisiti on of code-switching for power-wielding) transforms the macro-sociological
notion of power into a micro-ethnographic one in order to analyze how Danish
school-children use Turkish at two stages of their linguistic and social development.
Although these childrens use of code-switching to wield power over others is
sometimes in indirect and complicated ways related to macro-societal aspects of the
Turkish minority in Denmark, there is no way to explain what is going on in the
interaction unless its conversational development is taken into account.
In the continuum of combined usages of ethnographic and
conversation analytic methods of analysis, Christopher Stroud (Perspectives
on cultural variability of discourse and some implications for code-switching) repr
esents the most ethnographically inclined position. He places his analysis of
code-switching between Tok Pisin and Taiap in Papua New Guinea from the very start in a
cultural-semantic environment in which the local ideologies of personhood and
self-conception play a central role. He uses an antagonistic speech genre (the kros)
in order to demonstrate how women are renegotiating or transforming traditional
gender roles by the skillful use and juxtaposition of Taiap and Tok Pisin. Here,
code-switching is viewed as a valuable motor in the discursive production of
multivocality, i.e. it is characteristically indexical and open topolyphonic
readings; this, in turn, needs to be understood against the background of the linguistic
ideology shared by the Gapuners.
This volume covers a wide range of language pairs
(English/Spanish, English/Chinese, London English/London Jamaican English, British
English/Hindi-Urdu, Castilian/Galizan-Portuguese, Italian/French, Italian/Sicilian,
Turkish/Danish, Swahili/French, Lingala/French, Tok Pisin/Taiap, Hebrew/English) and of
sociolinguistic situations (Gibraltar, Chinese in the UK, West Indians in the UK,
Indians/Pakistanis in the UK, Galiza, Italians in Switzerland, Sicily, Turkish children in
Denmark, Zairean emigrants in Belgium, American immigrants into Israel, Papua New Guinea),
yet, all papers also address theoretical and/or methodological questions in substantial
ways. |
 |
REFERENCES
Auer, Peter, 1983/84, Zweisprachige
Konversationen. Konstanz, Papiere des SFB 99 No 54; Engl. as: Bilingual Conversation,
Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Auer, Peter, 1990, A discussion paper on
code-alternation. In: ESF Network on Code-switching, Papers for the Workshop on
concepts, Methodology and Data, Basel, pp. 69-89.
Bentahila, A. & Davies, E., 1983, The
syntax of Arabic-French code-switching. Lingua 59, 301-330.
Gardner-Chloros, P. , 1991, Language
selection and switching in Strasbourg. Oxford: Clarendon.
Grosjean, F., 1995, A
psycholinguistic approach to code-switching: The recognition of guest words by bilinguals.
In: Milroy/Muysken (eds), 259-275.
Joshi, A.K., 1985, Procesing of sentences
with intrasentential codeswitching. In: D.R. Dowty et al. (eds.), Natural Language
Parsing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 190-205.
Heller, Monica, 1995, Codeswitching and the
politics of language. In: Milroy/Muysken (eds), 158-174.
Milroy, L., & P. Muysken (eds), 1995, One
speaker - two languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Muysken, P., 1995, Code-switching and
grammatical theory. In: Milroy/Muysken (eds), 177-198.
Myers Scotton, Carol, 1993a, Social
Motivations of Codeswitching. Oxford: Clarendon.
Myers Scotton, Carol, 1993b, Duelling
Languages. Oxford: Clarendon.
Nortier, J.M., 1989, Dutch and Moroccan
Arabic in contact: code-switching among Moroccans in the Netherlands. Academic
Proefschrift, Universteit van Amsterdam.
Poplack, Shana, 1980, Sometimes Ill
start a sentence in Spanish Y TERMINO EN ESPAÑOL: Toward a typology of Codeswitching. Linguistics
18, 581-618.
Poplack, Shana, 1988, Contrasting patterns
of Codeswitching in two communities. In: M. Heller (ed.), Codeswitching. Berlin:
Mouton, 215-244.
Poplack, Shana & Sankoff, David, 1984,
Borrowing: the synchrony of integration. Linguistics 22, 99-136. |
|