Study Guides (238,207)
Canada (115,009)
Psychology (554)
PSYC 341 (26)

Reading 22

10 Pages
Unlock Document

McGill University
PSYC 341
Richard Koestner

Social and Psychological Factors in Language Mixing p. 349 Introduction Preliminary remarks: • Anyone who is bilingual has to account for two fundamental aspects of bilingual linguistic competency: • - Language Separation -Language Integration • Mixing of 2 languages has been associated with the misconceptions of these two aspects • This article looks at the social, psychological and perceptual phenomena of the mixing of two languages. Some definitions… Code Switching (CS) refers to various linguistic units such as words, phrases, clauses, and sentences mostly by two grammatical systems. CS is intersentential (2 diff. languages in the same sentence or one complete sentence in English, and the second sentence is French). CS may be subject to discourse principles and involve social or psychological factors. Code Mixing (CM) refers to the mixing of various linguistic units such as morphemes, words, modifiers, phrases, clauses, and sentences primarily from two participating grammatical systems. Intra-sentential and is constrained by grammatical principles as well as social and psychological factors. The distinction between the two: Hatch, a researcher, maintains that there is no sharp distinction between intersential CS and intra-sentential CM. Other researchers reject the distinction based on their functions and treat them both as “situational shifting” Others find it important and useful particularly if the goal is to develop a grammar of language mixing. The term code-mixing can be very unclear and also the least-favored designation. This term can be used to refer to related phenomena such as borrowing, interference, transfer, or switching. The language mixing/switching is used by authors to cover both the terms for code mixing and code switching. The Systematicity of LM/S The depth, strength, and tacitness of the pragmatic conventions that determine language choice are illustrated in an incident regarding a sting operation planned by a US intelligence agency. - A few years ago, an officer in the US intelligence community needed a translator (who was bilingual; English + their ethnic language) to interpret what the suspect was saying. However, because of the implicit practical conventions of LM/S, the officer distrusted the mole and decided to ask advice to the second author of this chapter. The officer asked whether the mole’s interpretation of the suspect’s words were appropriate, and if there were any reasons he should not trust the mole. • This incident is a perfect example of fundamental misconceptions that monolinguals have about bilinguals’ verbal behavior and the tacit pragmatic conventions that guide it. More interestingly, bilinguals do not notice their own tacit pragmatic convention. Conclusion LM/S either is not subject to constraints or equivalently, exhibits only irregular mixture. Labov argues that the mixing of Spanish and English is governed by systematic rules or constraints. Now, there is a unanimous consensus that LM/S is systematic but complex. • Imagine a scenario where four participants speak the following; A: Teochew B: Hokkien C: Cantonese D: Hokkien & Teochew In addition, they each speak in English. Here’s their conversation: (1) English-Hokkien-Teochew D to B: Every day, you know kao taim (Every day, you know at nice o’clock) D to A: li khi a (You go) • Another exchange can happen in which language mismatching occurs in the middle of an interaction and conflict resolution takes place afterwards.  Societies in which language identity ranks highest in the range of identities accessible to bilinguals in a diverse group setting, linguistic accommodation may not take place, thus diminishing the incidence of language switching. Situational Factors - The public language often serves as “they” code and the private langiage as the “we” code. - They : creating distance, asserting authority, and expressing objectivity, to suppressing the tabooness of an interaction. - We : in-group membership, informality, and intimacy, to emotions. Social Variables - Social variables such as class, religion, gender, and age can influence the pattern of LM/S both qualitatively and quantitatively. The social cues on code-mixing in Hindi-Persian-English are demonstrated on p.355. - Table 13.2, p.356, the functions of both PERSIAN-HINDI LM/S and ENGLISH-HINDI LM/S - However, English and Persian do not mix, therefore these two styles are not compatible. o Situational factors such as shifting personality, thoughts, audience and topic can futher promote language alternation. This behaviour can be well exemplified on p. 356 based on the story of of a Tibetan lama. Message-intrinsic factors LM/S is also a function of additional linguistic and pragmatic considerations. Quotations: Direct quotations or Reported speech prompts LM/S amongst bilinguals cross-linguistically. e.g. Spanish-English (1) She doesn’t speak English, so dice que la reganan: “Si se les va olvidar el idioma a las criaturas” (2)She does not speak English. So, she says they would scold her: “the children are surely going to forget their language”. Reiteration: Reiteration or paraphrasing marks another function of mixing. The message expressed in one language is either repeated in the other language literally or with some modification to signify emphasis or clarification. e.g. English-Spanish (1)The three old ones spoke nothing but Spanish. No hablaban ingles…”They didn’t speak English”. (2) The moment my aunt saw the jacket, she knew that Miss Chen was dishonest and had fu zhong lin jia (scale and shell in her belly). Message Qualification Often, mixing takes the form of a qualifying complement or argument as shown by the disjunctive argument and the adverbial phrase in the following sentence: (1) Slovenian-German Uzeymas ti kafe? Oder te? “Will you take coffee? Or tea?” Topic-Comment/relative clauses -Related to message qualification. A Japanese-English study shows that the topic introduced in Japanese (formally marked with wa) and the comment is given in English e.g. (1) Kore wa she is at home this topic “As for this (person – referring to a photograph of her daughter), she is at home. Hedging LM/S is important for hedging (e.g. taboo suppression, de-intensification, or a vague “sort of” expression). The “they” code is often use for HEDGING such as the function of taboo suppression. This aspect of LM/S is often deliberate and is by and large a conscious proces
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 341

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.