English department/ Hassiba Benbouali.

Chlef

Module: Sociolinguistics

Grade: L3

Teacher in charge: Dr. A. BABOU

Code Switching

Crystal (1987) suggests that code switching occurs when an individual who is bilingual
alternates between two languages during his/her speech with other bilingual persons.

There are many kinds of code switching concerning the linguistic structures that are involved
in this linguistic phenomenon. When the code-switch is done at sentence boundaries, this type
should be labeled "inter-sentential code switching"; this type is defined as including
variation in the language of its clauses. [lbærəħ εṭawhum l Ali il va afficher ce soir] That
is, one clause is being in a language, and the other being in another language. By way of
contrast to inter-sentential code switching, the term "intra-sentential" is used to mean a
switch within a sentence; within the clause boundary. [nəsεa bəzzaf əswalaħ ] (we have got
many things Some linguists prefer calling this switching as code mixing and it is assumed to
require the greatest amount of fluency / proficiency in both languages.

Additionally, tag switching or extra-sentential code switching involves the insertion of a

tag or an exclamation in one language into a sentence which is otherwise in the other
language (Romaine, 1995). [aya ħəmaliw ] je suis venue en retard (What's a pity, I came
late).

A host of linguists perceive CS as a random process. Other researchers claim, however, that
code switching occurs according to a number of constraints:

1-The free-morpheme constraint: It suggests that Cs is not impossible between a bound

morpheme and a lexical form unless the latter has been phonologically integrated into the
language of the bound morpheme ( Sankoff & Poplack, 1980). Cook (1991) states that the
‘runeando’ is impossible because ‘run’ is a distinctively English sound. The word ‘flipeando’
is possible since ‘flip’ could be a Spanish word.

2- The equivalence constraint: Cook states that the switches ‘ a car Americaine’ or ‘une
American voiture’ are both unlikely to occur as they are wrong in both languages. A switch
such as ‘ j’ai acheté an American car’ is possible since both English and French share the
same construction in which the verb is followed by an object.

Gumperz tends to distinguish between two types of code switching:

1-Situational Code Switching:

Blom & Gumperz (1972) in their examination of the situation of Hemmesberget in Norway,
find that alternating the codes by local people was to be considered as patterned and
predictable. Drawing on an ethnographic and linguistic approach, they classified two different
types of CS: situational switching and metaphorical switching. As for situational CS, they
reckon the fact of the teacher who gives lectures at the university in Bokmal which
symbolizes his status and the formality of the locus where the interaction takes place, but the
teacher employs Ranamal so as to or talk informally with his students to encourage and give
them a boost.

2-Metaphorical Code-Switching:

In addition to situational code switching, bilingual speakers can also switch codes
actively and without the intention of altering the conversational situation, but of enriching it
and their messages. In this case, the speakers are not guided by a situational change; the
switch depends on the speaker's own code choice which is, in fact, not expected to take part
in the conversation. Said differently, metaphorical CS is triggered by changes of topic rather
than the social situation.

*The Markedness Model: Meyers-Scotton (1993:3) claims that CS "serves the same
general socio-psychological functions everywhere" and she developed what has become
known "the markedness model" that seeks to elaborate social motivations for CS across
different languages and contexts.

Following the MM. all code choices can be interpreted in terms of speakers'
motivations.

1-The Unmarked Maxim Choice: By unmarked choices, she intends to denote the
switch which is normally expected by the audience; they are those that are more or less
expected, given the ingredients of the interaction such as participants, topic, setting, etc. a
speaker must calculate the costs and rewards of one choice over another (Myers – Scotton,
1993). "Costs" refers to the quantity of words s/he decides to use, and "rewards" refer to the
intentional and referential denotation they convey to their listeners. By making an
unmarked choice, the speaker aims at minimizing costs and maximizing rewards.

2-The Marked Maxim Choice: In contrast to the unmarked choice, making a marked
choice signals an intention to disrupt a status quo and try to negotiate a different weight of
rights and obligations. It is the case where bilingual speakers negotiate rights and obligations
in an endeavour to leave room for them in order to select a code which may either maximize
or minimize the distance between them and other interlocutors.

3-Exploratory Maxim Choice: speakers may use CS when they are in a situation
where they find themselves not certain of the expected or optimal communicative intent, or at
least not sure about which code will be felicitous to attain their social goals. Said in another
way, this kind of choice is the case where the unmarked choice is opaque; hard to be
understood. This may cause a state of maze in the expected norms and role relationships.