Our purpose in this paper is to answer the question, "Why do speakers codeswitch?" We define code-switching as the use of two or more linguistic varieties in the same conversation or interaction. The switch may be for only one word or for several minutes of speech. The varieties may be anything from genetically unrelated languages to two styles of the same language. The use of solitary, established loan words or phrases is not considered codeswitching. It is recognized, however, that to provide criteria to differentiate established loans from nonestablished ones is a difficult task and is beyond the scope of this paper.Our general hypothesis is this: code-switching occurs because at least one speaker wishes to redefine the interaction by moving it to a different social arena. There is, therefore, a relationship between (a) the linguistic code used and (b) the social meaning of the interaction.Earlier attempts to treat code-switching systematically have provided a classification of switches into two types (Blom and Gumperz 1972). The sociolinguistic mechanics of language choice which make code-switching possible and even probable are the basis for this classification. The two types are situational, including shift for topic,and metaphorical, including shift for emphasis. Situational switching depends on the societal consensus that a particular linguistic variety is allocated to a particular cluster of topics, places, persons or purposes. A code-switch symbolizies a switch in cluster. Metaphorical switching also depends on societal agreement as to the allocation of codes. However, metaphorical switching depends for its effect on a departure from the societal consensus on code allocation. As such, it is used to draw attention or to emphasize. 1 The situational and metaphorical classifications are useful because they describe how and when code-switching occurs. But to know that a codeswitch signals change in topic or lends emphasis to a topic still does not tell why a speaker code-switches. To explain the 'why 4 of code-switching means to explain the switch as an extension of the speaker. It means to explain the relationships between the subject of discourse and the participants of an interaction and the societal norms which give a language choice its meaning.Brought to you by | University of Queensland -UQ Library Authenticated Download Date | 6/21/15 6:17 AM
Crises a b o u n d in and around our lives. One spouse discovers the other's infidelity and threatens a divorce unless the illicit liaison is b r o k e n off immediately. A union is on the verge of declaring a strike. Congress, about to adjourn, has failed to agree on a budget, preventing the g o v e r n m e n t from paying its bills. A Third World country, unable to meet its debt payments to foreign banks, is about to be declared in default. The Soviet Union sends nuclear missiles to Cuba and the president of the United States goes on television to d e m a n d their immediate withdrawal and to announce a naval blockade of the island.In each of these cases, a negotiation may take place to try to avert an impending major loss. Times of crisis call for a special kind of negotiation. There is no time for drawn-out discussion or the usual diplomatic dance, and typically the negotiators are under considerable stress. Nowhere is the critical role of negotiation so clear as in crisis, for here it can make the difference b e t w e e n peace and war, metaphorically and sometimes literally.Richard Lebow points out that if the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 had d e v e l o p e d into a cataclysmic war, historians would have had little trouble explaining w h y this war was inevitable, arising as it did from the deepseated geopolitical and ideological conflict b e t w e e n the superpowers, the spiraling arms race, and the heightened tension of the Cold War.1 Yet this crisis did not turn into a war. Decision-makers on each side s o m e h o w succeeded jointly in preserving the peace.This paper seeks to understand the dynamics of the decision-making process in crises. What makes a crisis a crisis? What are key variables which, if manipulated in one direction, intensify the crisis, or if manipulated the other way, tend to defuse it? Where can the decision-making process fail? We do not offer here a s u m m a r y of the valuable and extensive literature which analyzes crises, but rather attempt to distill a simple conceptual f r a m e w o r k for understanding a crisis that a practitioner could use. Our immediate concern is not the question of h o w to control a crisis, but h o w one might usefully think about a crisis as a first step toward controlling it.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.