grammatical constraints and motivations for - University of the ...
grammatical constraints and motivations for - University of the ...
grammatical constraints and motivations for - University of the ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
host is being somewhat sarcastic, but is able to convey humour by switching to<br />
Afrikaans, thus preventing <strong>the</strong> caller from taking <strong>of</strong>fence.<br />
It is also interesting to compare <strong>the</strong> host’s attitudes toward Caller 2 <strong>and</strong> Caller 13.<br />
Both callers appear to share a communal identity with <strong>the</strong> host, but <strong>the</strong>ir language<br />
use does not reflect this. Caller 2 speaks ‘suiwer’ Afrikaans, even though it is<br />
apparent that he is a member <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Cape Flats speech community. As a result, <strong>the</strong><br />
host chooses to respond mainly in English. Caller 13, on <strong>the</strong> contrary, speaks<br />
English only even though he too is an Afrikaans mo<strong>the</strong>r-tongue speaker. The host<br />
responds to him in English as well, <strong>the</strong> only difference being that he does not do<br />
so as a means <strong>of</strong> putting up a social barrier as is <strong>the</strong> case with Caller 2. While <strong>the</strong><br />
host clearly switches to English as a means <strong>of</strong> demonstrating social distance from<br />
Caller 2, he switches to English in response to Caller 13, as a result <strong>of</strong> taking <strong>the</strong><br />
speaker’s preferences into account.<br />
It is important to note that <strong>the</strong> host would not have been able to communicate<br />
effectively in <strong>the</strong> same level <strong>of</strong> Afrikaans as that used by Caller 2. Also, had he<br />
chosen to respond to Caller 2 in Kaapse Afrikaans, it may have been regarded as<br />
disrespectful to <strong>the</strong> caller, who appears to be much older than <strong>the</strong> host himself.<br />
Thus, while he is putting up a social barrier due to <strong>the</strong> fact that he <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> speaker<br />
do not share common ground (particularly with regard to language use), he is also<br />
displaying deference by communicating in a way that would not be interpreted as<br />
disrespectful to <strong>the</strong> older man.<br />
With caller 13, on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r h<strong>and</strong>, <strong>the</strong> host does appear to take <strong>the</strong> caller’s<br />
linguistic preference into account by communicating in <strong>the</strong> language <strong>of</strong> his choice.<br />
However, in this instance, he also attempts to show that regardless <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> identity<br />
<strong>the</strong> caller wishes to portray, <strong>the</strong> two still share in-group membership. Thus, while<br />
he does respond mainly in English, he also switches to Afrikaans as a means <strong>of</strong><br />
sarcastically implying that he is fully aware that he <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> caller share in-group<br />
membership, despite <strong>the</strong> caller trying to portray ano<strong>the</strong>r identity. In addition, by<br />
101