NOTION OF “CODE SWITCHING” IN LINGUISTICS

NOTION OF “CODE SWITCHING” IN LINGUISTICS

Burieva Mukhayyo Shavkatovna

Termiz University of Economics and Service

Contact number: +998 97 350 53 35

Annotation: This paper provides a critical review of the state of the art in codeswitching research being conducted in linguistics. This study presents data on the discourse characteristics of code switching, and the functions that English has according to context. In addition, the data are described in relation to a language competence and preference. The study found that code switching occurred both within and across turns.

Key words and phrases: code-switching; bilingualism; linguistics; text linking.

ПОНЯТИЕ «КОДОВОЕ ПЕРЕКЛЮЧЕНИЕ» В ЛИНГВИСТИКЕ

Аннотация: В данной статье представлен критический обзор современного состояния исследований переключения кодов, проводимых в лингвистике. В этом исследовании представлены данные о дискурсивных характеристиках переключения кода и функциях, которые имеет английский язык в зависимости от контекста. Кроме того, данные описываются с учетом языковой компетенции и предпочтений. Исследование показало, что переключение кода происходит как внутри поворота, так и между поворотами.

Ключевые слова и фразы: переключение кода; двуязычие; лингвистика; текстовая связь.

In linguistics, code-switching or language alternation occurs when a speaker alternates between two or more languages, or language varieties, in the context of a single conversation or situation. Code switching is the practice of moving back and forth between two languages or between two dialects or registers of the same language at one time. Code switching occurs far more often in conversation than in writing. It is also called code-mixing and style-shifting. It is studied by linguists to examine when people do it, such as under what circumstances do bilingual speakers switch from one to another, and it is studied by sociologists to determine why people do it, such as how it relates to their belonging to a group or the surrounding context of the conversation (casual, professional, etc.)

For a long time, code switching was scarcely noticed by linguists writing about language contact. Milroy and Muysken1, who describe it as “perhaps the central issue in bilingualism research”, point out that research on , code switching was slow to start compared with, say, research on borrowing or what used to be termed interference. In the seminal Languages in Contact2, Weinreich referred to the “transfer of words” from one language to another by bilinguals, but dismissed this as a “mere oversight”. Haugen, writing at around the same time, also apparently overlooked the significance of code switching, and wrote that: “The introduction of elements from one language into the other means merely an alteration of the second language, not a mixture of the two”3.

Over the last forty-odd years, there has been an explosion of interest in code switching had remained more or less “invisible” in research on bilingualism until the work of Gumperz and his associates in the 1960s and early 1970s (Gumperz and Wilson4, Blom and Gumperz5). Thereafter the subject took off and there has been no sign as people realized that code switching was not an isolated. But research in this field is complicated by the multilayered significance of code switching. Each new case which is documented can be looked at from multiple perspectives, so from the outset, a certain depth of engagement with the data is necessary.

Furthermore, by definition, studying code switching implies dealing with several languages. Grasping the significance of a transcription where the reader or researcher is not familiar with one or both of the languages involved can be off-putting. This problem should be somewhat reduced in the future by various technical developments 1 Lesley Milroy & Pieter Muysken (eds.), One speaker, two languages: Crossdisciplinary perspectives on code-switching, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995.- 365 2 Kim, R., 2011. Uriel Weinreich and the birth of modern contact linguistics. In: Languages in Contact 2010. Eds. Chruszczewski, P., Wąsik, Z. Wrocław: Philological School of Higher Education in Wrocław Publishing, pp. 99–110. Masenko, L., 2005. 3 Weinreich, U., 1967. Languages in Contact. Findings and Problems. London–The Hague–Paris: Mouton & Co. 4 Gumperz, J.J. and R. Wilson. 1971. Convergence and creolization: A case from the Indo Aryan/Dravidian border. In D. Hymes (ed.), Pidgnization and creolization of languages, 151–168. Cambridge: CUP. 5 Blom, J. P., & Gumperz J. (1972). Social meaing in linguistic structure: Code-switching in Norway. In J. Gumperz, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. of use to the linguistic researcher, such as standardized transcription and coding systems, sound text linking, and the possibility of collaborating on and sharing data over the Intemet. Because of the huge interest in coding systems on the one hand, and the difficulties of studying it on the other, a lot of work has crystallized around a few main approaches:

What does code-switching cover?

Milroy and Muysken wrote in the introduction to One Speaker. Two Languages, that, “The field of code switching research is replete with a confusing range of terms descriptive of various aspects of the phenomenon. Sometimes the referential scope of a set of these terms overlaps and sometimes particular terms are used in different ways by different writers”. He pinpointed the crucial distinction between those who consider code switching to be “fuzzy-edged”, i.e. on a continuum with respect to borrowing, syntactic merging, etc., and those who consider it as the one form of language contact which does not involve convergence of the two systems. More recently, Clyne has suggested that we should reserve code-switching for transference of individual lexical items through to whole stretches of speech, but that we should adopt a different term he suggests “trans version”- for cases where the speaker “crosses over” completely into the other language, In his survey of grammatical studies of code switching, Muysken6 reserves the term code switching for one of the three types of language mixture which he describes: alternation. He uses code-mixing for the other types: insertion and congruent lexicalization.

To sum up, code switching is:

- thought to be an easy or lazy option;

- generally disapproved of, even by those who practise it;

- below the full consciousness of those who use it.

Such insights from speakers can be useful for formulating research hypotheses. For example, let us look briefly at the first point, whether code switching is really the easiest option. Sociolinguistic studies do show that people code-switch more and more within the clause, when they are at ease, in informal situations. Dewacle also found that second language learners code-switch more in informal than in formal interviews. But does this mean it is actually easier to switch than not to switch? The answer depends on a variety of factors. Code switching may be used deliberately as a compromise strategy, when addressing others of varying competences and preferences. It might not then be the easiest solution, but merely the most expedient. At a psycholinguistic level, the position is also less than clear. Inhibiting one of the languages i.e. preventing it from coming to the surface - does apparently require some kind of effort, but the joint activation of two varieties does so as well. The mental effort required for the simultaneous, or rapid successive activation of two competing systems translates into extra split seconds of time which are required. 6 Pieter Muysken, Bilingual speech: a typology of code-mixing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Pp.306.

List of references:

1. Lesley Milroy & Pieter Muysken (eds.), One speaker, two languages: Crossdisciplinary perspectives on code-switching, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995.- 365

2. Kim, R., 2011. Uriel Weinreich and the birth of modern contact linguistics. In: Languages in Contact 2010. Eds. Chruszczewski, P., Wąsik, Z. Wrocław: Philological School of Higher Education in Wrocław Publishing, pp. 99–110. Masenko, L., 2005.

3. Weinreich, U., 1967. Languages in Contact. Findings and Problems. London–The Hague–Paris: Mouton & Co.

4. Gumperz, J.J. and R. Wilson. 1971. Convergence and creolization: A case from the Indo Aryan/Dravidian border. In D. Hymes (ed.), Pidgnization and creolization of languages, 151–168. Cambridge: CUP.

5. Blom, J. P., & Gumperz J. (1972). Social meaing in linguistic structure: Code-switching in Norway. In J. Gumperz, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

6. Pieter Muysken, Bilingual speech: a typology of code-mixing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Pp.306.