Calculating speakers: Codeswitching in a rational choice model

Abstract

Although the methodologies for describing many types of linguistic variation have been well developed, satisfactory theoretical links between data and explanation – especially links that include causal mechanisms – remain lacking. This article argues, somewhat paradoxically, that even though most choices reflect some societal pattern, speakers make linguistic choices as individuals. That is, choices ultimately lie with the individual and are rationally based. Rational Choice Models (e.g. Elster 1979, 1989, 1997) provide explanatory mechanisms for the ways actors in society select from alternative structures and available options. The Rational Choice approach taken here is enhanced by diverse theories of human action (e.g. Damasio 1996, Klein 1998, Lessig 1995). Analysis of codeswitching examples within a recasting of the Markedness Model (Myers-Scotton, e.g. 1993, 1998) suggests how a rationally based model offers better explanations for linguistic variation than do other approaches.

The sociolinguistic functions of codeswitching between Standard Arabic and Dialectal Arabic

“…Researchers generally agree that codeswitching (CS)-or the alternation between two language varieties in a speech episode-is a creative communicative act employed for various pragmatic and sociolinguistic purposes (Blom & Gumperz 1972;Valdés 1981;Gumperz 1982;Bentahila 1983;Kachru 1983;Appel & Muysken 1987;Heller 1988;Myers-Scotton 1993;Clyne 2003;Bhatt & Bolonyai 2011). For example, codeswitching is used as a mechanism for identity negotiation, situational marking, social-group membership, upward mobility, social solidarity, listener accommodation, face management, discursive salience, and linguistic economy (Bentahila 1983;Auer 1988;Myer-Scotton 1993;Giles & Powesland 1997;Gal 1988;Bhatt & Bolonyai 2011).…”

“…CS has been analyzed through ethnographic methods (Gumperz 1958(Gumperz , 1961(Gumperz , 1964(Gumperz , 1982, conversation-analysis techniques (Auer 1984(Auer , 1988(Auer , 1998, interpretive and interactional frameworks (Heller 1992), sociopragmatic principles (Myers-Scotton 1993), accommodation theories (Giles & Powesland 1997), rational choice processes (Myers-Scotton & Bolonyai 2001), and optimality theory (Bhatt & Bolonyai 2011), among others.…”

Adolescents’ metalinguistic reflections on the academic register in speech and writing

“…If employing academic language serves to instantiate an academic and social identity, then non-use of academic registers may result from a choice to enact an alternative, non-academic identity (Brown, 2011;Morek, this issue;Myers-Scotton & Bolonyai, 2001). While theories of positioning and indexing suggests that linguistic identities are multiple and shifting (Brown, 2006), these decisions may hinge on whether students ascribe to the assumptions about language collectively held by members of the schooling community (Wassink & Curzan, 2004).…”

Building intimacy through linguistic choices, text structure and voices in political discourse

“…Political actors also display "marked register usages" (Koven, 2007;Myers-Scotton, 2001) that index nuances of a different register into the here-and-now moment of discourse, and parenthetical remarks (Koven, 2002) when politicians step out of the storytelling frame making explicit "here and now" comments (Koven, 2002: 181). All these choices bring other social actors into the here-and-now moment of discourse by making reference directly to their persona, to a register they are familiar with or to their identities by explicitly referring to cultural practices.…”