Étude de l’interaction verbale chez des montréalais d’origine italienne

Government and code-mixing

“…di Sciullo et al 1975 When the governor is a P, the theory still holds. In (33), the D E T is the Lq carrier and has the same language index as the governing P. If constraint (3) predicts that no mixing occurs when government is involved, it does not predict that mixing must not occur when government is absent.…”

“…The phrases are taken from the corpus of the research programme on multilingual (Italian-French-English) interaction (cf. di Sciullo et al 1975), collected with the aid of the Social Sciences andHumanities Research Council of Canada between 1973 and1974 in Montreal, by the second author of this paper. The following interviews were used for this study: AMR 1.1.1, AMR 3.1.2, AMR 3.6.2, AMR 6.3.1, AMS 1.1.1, AMS 3.6.1, AMS 4.7.1, AMS 4.7.2, AMS 7.8.2.…”

A formal grammar for code‐switching1

“…Note that these restrictions stem only from the differences between two languages involved in the code-switching mode. Published data on French-Italian, for example, which both make use of equivalent rules of clitic pronoun placement, include a switch between clitic and verb: si sent 'S/he feels' (di Sciullo et al 1976). …”

“…Much progress has been made in situating code-switching within a micro-sociological framework or that of the ethnography of speaking, consistent with the goals of understanding the interactive purpose, communicative function and social implications of this behavior (e.g. Gumperz 1964Gumperz , 1971Gumperz , 1976 Sciullo et al 1976;Valdes-Fallis 1976. A relatively small number of studies have focused directly on the grammatical aspects of code-switching (e.g.…”

Quechua's loss, Spanish's gain

“…These observations represent general tendencies only. On the one hand, code-switching is frequent in the course of conversations, and on the other hand, the selection of codes, even though rule-governed and highly predictable (Sankoff 1971;Di Sciullo, Van Ameringen, Cedergren & Pupier 1976), remains the decision of individual speakers in specific situations. (For a fuller discussion of forces favoring each language, see Lefebvre 1976.…”