grammar, a system which can be used quite effectively for communicative purposes. Itpresupposes that <strong>the</strong> language learner at all points <strong>of</strong> his learning career “has a language" (seeappendixes i and ii). He acknowledges that <strong>the</strong> notion<strong>of</strong> interlanguage is difficult for teachers whose attitude toward it is as a deviant, distorted, ordebased form <strong>of</strong> some standard or target language. Grosjean (1985) also points to <strong>the</strong>incomprehension and misconceptions by many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> interlanguage behavior <strong>of</strong> developingbilinguals or <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> language behavior specific to bilinguality. He says that when <strong>the</strong>se speakershave used intermediary speech modes that were seen as errors, <strong>the</strong> speakers <strong>the</strong>mselves wereperceived as confused, unbalanced, semilingual, alingual, anomalous, and so on. While <strong>the</strong>complexity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> interlanguage is not <strong>the</strong> purpose <strong>of</strong> this paper to detail, it is introduced as anatural and normal functional process. For <strong>the</strong> language learner it may only be non-normative,when o<strong>the</strong>rs who do not understand its normative place, call it such.The Code-switching NotionAno<strong>the</strong>r non-normative or "quaint" linguistic behavior <strong>of</strong> bilinguals or developing bilinguals iscode-switching and its related concepts such as language transferring and language borrowing.As with <strong>the</strong> interlanguage construct it is not <strong>the</strong> purpose <strong>of</strong> this paper to outline in any refinedway <strong>the</strong> complexity <strong>of</strong> code switching and its related notions. Nor is it <strong>the</strong> purpose <strong>of</strong> this paperto outline <strong>the</strong> relationship which exits between <strong>the</strong> interlanguage notion and <strong>the</strong> code-switchingnotions, although my hope is that someone is doing or will do this for us soon. It is <strong>the</strong> intent <strong>of</strong>this paper to try to see <strong>the</strong>m both as interlinguistic phenomena specific to bilinguals. Thesebilingual phenomena are in much need <strong>of</strong> explanation and understanding for those who must dealwith <strong>the</strong>m in <strong>the</strong> instructional context or o<strong>the</strong>r contexts where this is an important matter. Whileboth interlanguage and code-switching are probably strongly related and may appear more orless concurrently in <strong>the</strong> language life <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developing bilingual I will use <strong>the</strong> term codeswitchingfor that point in <strong>the</strong> developmental time <strong>of</strong> bilingual learners when <strong>the</strong>y are conscious<strong>of</strong> such behavior and <strong>the</strong>n choose more or less purposefully to use or not to use it. For ourpurposes only, if <strong>the</strong>re is a beginning, middle, and culminating phase in becoming bilingual Iwould associate <strong>the</strong> interlanguage notion with <strong>the</strong> earlier stages <strong>of</strong> developing bilinguals, andcode switching (including mixing, transferring, and borrowing) with <strong>the</strong> middle and later phases<strong>of</strong> bilingual acquisition. However, while interlanguage is <strong>the</strong> language constructed beforearriving at more ideal forms <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> target language, code switching may occur during and after<strong>the</strong> interlanguage phase. It may be that with children who are simultaneously developing two ()languages from infancy that interlanguage and code-switching may be less distinguishable or lessdiscernible one from <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r. <strong>In</strong> any case, both seem to be a natural cross linguistic outgrowth<strong>of</strong> becoming or having become bilingual.Code-switching is <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> two languages simultaneously or interchangeably (Valdes-Fallis,1977). It implies some degree <strong>of</strong> competence in <strong>the</strong> two languages even if bilingual fluency isnot yet stable. Code-switching may be used to achieve two things: (a) fill a linguistic/conceptualgap, or (b) for o<strong>the</strong>r multiple communicative purposes (Gysels, 1992). While in some places andcases code switching is <strong>the</strong> exception, in many multilingual and bilingual communities it is andshould be seen as <strong>the</strong> norm (Swigart, 1992; Goyvaerts & Zembele, 1992). It appears that wherecode-switching is <strong>the</strong> norm it is perceived as fluid, unmarked, and uneventful, and where it is <strong>the</strong>exception it will be perceived as marked, purposeful, emphasis-oriented, and strange. How iscode-switching explained by those who study it? Gumperz (1982) describes code-switching asdiscourse exchanges which form a single unitary interactional whole:© 2008 Dr. Ca<strong>the</strong>rine CollierAll Rights Reserved132
Speakers communicate fluently, maintaining an even flow <strong>of</strong> talk. No hesitation pauses, changesin sentence rhythm, pitch level or intonation contour mark <strong>the</strong> shift in code. There is nothing in<strong>the</strong> exchange as a whole to indicate that speakers don't understand each o<strong>the</strong>r. Apart from <strong>the</strong>alternation itself, <strong>the</strong> passages have all <strong>the</strong> earmarks <strong>of</strong> ordinary conversation in a singlelanguage. (p. 60)This bilingual state <strong>of</strong> affairs is described in terms <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> heavily interactive nature <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> twolanguages. Traditionally code-switching was seen and still is seen by many as a random processhat could be explained by interference. Today it is considered as rule-governed behavior and as acommunication strategy (Corder, 1981).Grosjean and Soares (1986) studied language processing in <strong>the</strong> mixed language mode inFrench/English and Portuguese/English. They state that a bilingual has <strong>the</strong> choice <strong>of</strong> activatingboth, thus code-mixing, or <strong>of</strong> deactivating one and activating <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r in a monolingual context;however, <strong>the</strong>re is never total deactivation <strong>of</strong> one language when <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r is more prominent in<strong>the</strong> situation. They propose a base or matrix language and <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> bringing in <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rlanguage by ei<strong>the</strong>r code-switching through <strong>the</strong> word, phrase, clause, or sentence level or throughborrowings. The interaction procedure is still unclear in terms <strong>of</strong> linguistic processing <strong>the</strong>ory.They propose with Obler and Albert (1978) a general language monitoring device that is flexible,rapid, and automatic, and <strong>the</strong>y agree with Paradis (1980) that <strong>the</strong> bilingual has two languagelexicons, each <strong>of</strong> which is connected to one conceptual store (Paradis does not posit a bilingualmonitoring device). If <strong>the</strong>re is such a device it uses all <strong>the</strong> information it can to indicate asquickly as possible which language is being spoken: prosodic information (fundamentalfrequency, duration, rate, amplitude, stress pattern, etc.);segmental information (phoneme andsyllable characteristic); syntactic and semantic rules; knowledge <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> speaker and <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> topic;pragmatic factors, as well as <strong>the</strong> constraints imposed on code-switching and borrowing by <strong>the</strong>two languages in question. This means, <strong>of</strong> course, that <strong>the</strong> device is constantly receivingfeedback from <strong>the</strong> higher level processors. The device is always active, but especially so when<strong>the</strong> speaker is in a bilingual speech mode and <strong>the</strong> probability <strong>of</strong> language mixing is high.Grosjean and Soares (1984) explain that <strong>the</strong> challenge for psycholinguists interested in studyingmixed language processing will be to explain how communication in mixed language takes placeso rapidly and so efficiently despite what <strong>the</strong>y have seen as some ra<strong>the</strong>r intricate operations andstrategies.Sank<strong>of</strong>f and Poplack (1980) refer to an "equivalence constraint" or rule which st<strong>ates</strong> thatbilinguals in uttering sentences may use constituents <strong>of</strong> one language at one point and those <strong>of</strong>ano<strong>the</strong>r at ano<strong>the</strong>r point as long as <strong>the</strong> order <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se constituents is shared by <strong>the</strong> two languages(at least in <strong>the</strong> study <strong>of</strong> Spanish/English mix modes).Woolford (1983) views code-switched sentences as resulting from a mixture <strong>of</strong> phrase structurerules extracted from <strong>the</strong> two languages. She argues that phrase structure rules <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> twolanguages can be freely mixed in <strong>the</strong> construction <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> tree structures <strong>of</strong> code-switchedsentences.Sridhar and Sridhar (1980) assume that <strong>the</strong>re is a basic language bilingual discourse and propose<strong>the</strong> terminology <strong>of</strong> guest and host languages to describe code-switched utterances. They arguethat intrasentential code-switching is a case where guest elements, which have <strong>the</strong>ir own internalstructure, occur in <strong>the</strong> sentences <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> host language, obeying <strong>the</strong> placement rules <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> hostlanguage or <strong>the</strong> matrix language (at least as <strong>the</strong>y saw it in <strong>the</strong> study <strong>of</strong> Kannada/English mix).Poplack (1980) discusses two grammatical constraints on code-switching: (a) a free-morphemeconstraint which st<strong>ates</strong> that a switch cannot occur between a lexical form and a bound morpheme© 2008 Dr. Ca<strong>the</strong>rine CollierAll Rights Reserved133
- Page 2 and 3:
"Those who arrive by age 12 or 13 m
- Page 5:
Article I.2 Are Signed Languages "R
- Page 8 and 9:
Biological analyses of the status o
- Page 10 and 11:
and beyond, speaking and signing ch
- Page 12 and 13:
Conclusion: Are Signed Languages Re
- Page 14 and 15:
Article I.3 The Interpreter: Has a
- Page 16 and 17:
A few weeks earlier, I had called F
- Page 18 and 19:
“We struggled even getting to the
- Page 20 and 21:
herself by strapping a cassette rec
- Page 22 and 23:
In 1998, after nine years as the ch
- Page 24 and 25:
momentary burst of excitement that
- Page 26 and 27:
can shape core grammar. Because the
- Page 28 and 29:
The authors compared animal and hum
- Page 30 and 31:
monkey moved. He followed it with h
- Page 32 and 33:
delight, fear, laughter, and surpri
- Page 34 and 35:
Piipaío in a hut: Pirahã huts typ
- Page 36 and 37:
LEP students, and equitable organiz
- Page 38 and 39:
4. Second language development crea
- Page 41 and 42:
curriculum or "teaching to the test
- Page 43 and 44:
portfolio work was scanned and stor
- Page 45 and 46:
experiences of many groups of stude
- Page 47 and 48:
While not disagreeing that interpre
- Page 49 and 50:
sound educational practice, however
- Page 51 and 52:
arises from the efforts to abstract
- Page 53 and 54:
Article II.2 Cross-Cultural Communi
- Page 55 and 56:
males who can serve as positive rol
- Page 57 and 58:
Understanding another culture is a
- Page 59 and 60:
Pets and AnimalsWhich animals are v
- Page 61 and 62:
to teach standard English is reflec
- Page 63 and 64:
Asking personal questions of a pers
- Page 65 and 66:
Using Cross Cultural Communication
- Page 67 and 68:
Why Do Nonstandard English-Speaking
- Page 69 and 70:
Before beginning to teach standard
- Page 71 and 72:
• Negative attitudes toward low p
- Page 73 and 74:
New standardized tests and assessme
- Page 75 and 76:
Each of the behaviors listed above
- Page 77 and 78:
Article II.3 Hard Work Hypothesis:
- Page 79 and 80:
each point higher in SES, students
- Page 81 and 82: This case does not provide strong s
- Page 83 and 84: Article II.4 Language Acquisition a
- Page 85 and 86: 1992, p. XI). These researchers, wh
- Page 87 and 88: comprehend a word within a specific
- Page 89 and 90: more to the truthfulness of the chi
- Page 91 and 92: This idea of “semilingualism” c
- Page 93 and 94: Article III.1 A Brief Description o
- Page 95 and 96: take different lengths of time to c
- Page 97 and 98: example, should involve the same co
- Page 99 and 100: As with all stages of BICS acquisit
- Page 101 and 102: Assessment techniques at stage 3 ca
- Page 103 and 104: different. Therefore, the social di
- Page 105: integrative motivation. Basically,
- Page 109 and 110: (Ellis, 1985; Hakuta, 1986). Howeve
- Page 111 and 112: that sociocultural processes have o
- Page 113 and 114: Article III.3 How Children Acquire
- Page 115 and 116: phonetic units (unique to signed la
- Page 117 and 118: Article III.4 Toward a Sociocultura
- Page 119 and 120: emember is that the fundamental goa
- Page 121 and 122: The best practices models can be th
- Page 123 and 124: By focusing on the dialectic betwee
- Page 125 and 126: intergenerational wisdom shared by
- Page 127 and 128: Daily Realities RecappedThe above v
- Page 129 and 130: traditions. At a time in our histor
- Page 131: We will now look at two examples of
- Page 135 and 136: question the effects of such attitu
- Page 137 and 138: Article IV.3 Culture Change: Effect
- Page 139 and 140: and psychological characteristics o
- Page 141 and 142: Contraryto what wewere expecting, t
- Page 143 and 144: Article V.1 Assessment in ESL & Bil
- Page 145 and 146: vocabulary does the student lack?Is
- Page 147 and 148: whether they are LEP and to provide
- Page 149 and 150: Fourth, ESL and bilingual program s
- Page 151 and 152: competent reader/writer. All versio
- Page 153 and 154: Table 1Comparison of Recent Accultu
- Page 155 and 156: unilinear model, which measures the
- Page 157 and 158: an English-only instructional progr
- Page 159 and 160: Article V.3 Assessment of English L
- Page 161 and 162: 8. Change answers only for a very g
- Page 163 and 164: Riles, 1979; Jose P. v Ambac, 1983)
- Page 165 and 166: proficiency is often underestimated
- Page 167 and 168: Finally, when second language reade
- Page 169 and 170: for their decisions, noting issues
- Page 171 and 172: As mentioned above, when the transi
- Page 173 and 174: ather than generic adjectives and t
- Page 175 and 176: their imagined points of view. Ther
- Page 177 and 178: English texts and demonstrate progr
- Page 179: using inter-district teams). In the