grammatical constraints and motivations for - University of the ...
grammatical constraints and motivations for - University of the ... grammatical constraints and motivations for - University of the ...
In turn 858, ‘ge-bless’ is used in pace of ‘gesëen’. This could be because ‘sëen’ carries a religious connotation in that it refers to spiritual blessings. In addition, it is not a word which would be commonly found in everyday conversation. Therefore, by constructing the verb, ‘ge-bless’, the speaker is able to avoid using a formal term and is also able to illustrate that he is not referring to a religious blessing, but rather to a previous turn (852) in the show in which he asks a caller for her blessing. The last example in which the free morpheme constraint is violated is in turn 911. Here, the host switches to Arabic to account for a concept which does not exist in the Afrikaans vocabulary. ‘Jummuah’ is the Arabic prayer which takes place on a Friday and is a term which is familiar to members of the Cape Flats speech community. Since Afrikaans does not have a verb to describe this concept, the host constructs his own and is thus able to fill both a lexical as well as a pragmatic gap. In conclusion, the data suggests that English/Afrikaans codeswitching has a unique set of grammatical constraints. The constraints proposed by other researchers do apply to English/Afrikaans codeswitching in some instances, but many of them are also violated. In terms of conjunctions, the data provides many counter-examples to the constraint proposed by Cook-Gumperz (1976), which states that the conjunction should be the same language as that of the phrase. The English conjunctions, ‘but’ and ‘because’, are always used in Afrikaans constructions as replacements for the Afrikaans conjunctions, ‘maar’ and ‘omdat/want’, suggesting that these have become incorporated into the speaker’s Afrikaans lexicon. In terms of word order equivalence, switching may only occur where the two languages share a similar syntactic structure. This means that English/Afrikaans codeswitching may only occur in present tense constructions. However, this does not apply to English/Afrikaans codeswitching as the data provides evidence for 82
the violation of this constraint, particularly in negative and past tense constructions where the two languages differ syntactically. Joshi’s (1985) constraint appears to be applicable, with only one counter-example emerging from the data, which can be accounted for in terms of a social motivation for switching. Nouns appear to be the most frequently borrowed words but a number of verbs are also switched. With regard to nonce loans, the data suggests that these are used mainly as a means of filling both lexical and pragmatic gaps. The free morpheme constraint (Poplack, 1980) is continuously violated, but can consistently be explained within a motivational framework. Thus, the data suggests that while many constraints are both relevant and applicable, speakers engaging in English/Afrikaans codeswitching may violate these constraints while still producing what would be regarded as a valid switch. Therefore, constraints are not always applicable, particularly due to the fact that violations thereof are socially motivated and still result in acceptable switches. The next section of this chapter will discuss the social motivations for codeswitching that emerge from the data. Each data set is discussed individually. The first part provides a discussion on a number of reasons the host appears to engage in codeswitching, but will focus mainly on the use of Afrikaans as the dominant language for story-telling purposes, and the reasons for engaging in codeswitching within this context. The second part will provide a discussion on the second data set, analyzing the motivational trends that emerge from the discourse, but focusing particularly on the ways in which codeswitching relates to speaker-addressee relationships. 83
- Page 31 and 32: 2.0 Introduction Chapter 2 Social M
- Page 33 and 34: “…codeswitching is a form of bo
- Page 35 and 36: In this section, I attempt to provi
- Page 37 and 38: eferred to as RO) sets between part
- Page 39 and 40: example, Afrikaans speakers may swi
- Page 41 and 42: Further, Franceschini (1998: 62) st
- Page 43 and 44: context in which the speaker finds
- Page 45 and 46: 3.0 Introduction Chapter 3 Grammati
- Page 47 and 48: codeswitching as they do reflect th
- Page 49 and 50: Constituent insertion differs from
- Page 51 and 52: In these examples, the main verbs a
- Page 53 and 54: 4.0 Introduction Chapter 4 Research
- Page 55 and 56: Thus, qualitative research is an in
- Page 57 and 58: However, contrary to Auer’s 1984
- Page 59 and 60: The transcripts were then analyzed
- Page 61 and 62: 5.0 Introduction Chapter 5 Discussi
- Page 63 and 64: Turn Phrase Table 1: Switched conju
- Page 65 and 66: In turns 22, 53, 59 and 63, English
- Page 67 and 68: Unlike in English, when the past te
- Page 69 and 70: similarity to that of Afrikaans due
- Page 71 and 72: Table 7: Afrikaans determiners with
- Page 73 and 74: possessive. However, it appears as
- Page 75 and 76: indefinite articles, ‘a’ or ‘
- Page 77 and 78: The following are examples from the
- Page 79 and 80: Turn Mixed verb Afrikaans equivalen
- Page 81: In turns 421 and 532, the host subs
- Page 85 and 86: nouns) are used. I have selected a
- Page 87 and 88: What follows are a few switches to
- Page 89 and 90: The next switch is the insertion of
- Page 91 and 92: has chosen to split the phrase into
- Page 93 and 94: The discourse suggests that the hos
- Page 95 and 96: speaker’s close association with
- Page 97 and 98: The next, and final, switch is to A
- Page 99 and 100: of proceedings throughout the show.
- Page 101 and 102: host is being somewhat sarcastic, b
- Page 103 and 104: also of the ways in which language
- Page 105 and 106: 6.0 Introduction Chapter 6 Conclusi
- Page 107 and 108: • While conjunctions do agree wit
- Page 109 and 110: References Appel, R & Muysken, P. (
- Page 111 and 112: Hamers, J. & Blanc, M. (2000). Bili
- Page 113 and 114: Ponelis, F. (1993). The Development
- Page 115 and 116: Young, D. (1988). Bilingualism and
- Page 117 and 118: APPENDIX
- Page 119 and 120: First Transcript: Update Kaapse Vla
- Page 121 and 122: 52. Clarence: Wilfred? 53. Suster:
- Page 123 and 124: [laughter] 62. Clarence: Die’s (d
- Page 125 and 126: terrace and so I couldn’t go up t
- Page 127 and 128: {So he got an sms back} to say, “
- Page 129 and 130: then you go from Notre-Dame up the
- Page 131 and 132: 201. Suster: Yes Clarence, it’s,
In turn 858, ‘ge-bless’ is used in pace <strong>of</strong> ‘gesëen’. This could be because ‘sëen’<br />
carries a religious connotation in that it refers to spiritual blessings. In addition, it<br />
is not a word which would be commonly found in everyday conversation.<br />
There<strong>for</strong>e, by constructing <strong>the</strong> verb, ‘ge-bless’, <strong>the</strong> speaker is able to avoid using a<br />
<strong>for</strong>mal term <strong>and</strong> is also able to illustrate that he is not referring to a religious<br />
blessing, but ra<strong>the</strong>r to a previous turn (852) in <strong>the</strong> show in which he asks a caller<br />
<strong>for</strong> her blessing.<br />
The last example in which <strong>the</strong> free morpheme constraint is violated is in turn 911.<br />
Here, <strong>the</strong> host switches to Arabic to account <strong>for</strong> a concept which does not exist in<br />
<strong>the</strong> Afrikaans vocabulary. ‘Jummuah’ is <strong>the</strong> Arabic prayer which takes place on a<br />
Friday <strong>and</strong> is a term which is familiar to members <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Cape Flats speech<br />
community. Since Afrikaans does not have a verb to describe this concept, <strong>the</strong><br />
host constructs his own <strong>and</strong> is thus able to fill both a lexical as well as a pragmatic<br />
gap.<br />
In conclusion, <strong>the</strong> data suggests that English/Afrikaans codeswitching has a<br />
unique set <strong>of</strong> <strong>grammatical</strong> <strong>constraints</strong>. The <strong>constraints</strong> proposed by o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
researchers do apply to English/Afrikaans codeswitching in some instances, but<br />
many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m are also violated.<br />
In terms <strong>of</strong> conjunctions, <strong>the</strong> data provides many counter-examples to <strong>the</strong><br />
constraint proposed by Cook-Gumperz (1976), which states that <strong>the</strong> conjunction<br />
should be <strong>the</strong> same language as that <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> phrase. The English conjunctions,<br />
‘but’ <strong>and</strong> ‘because’, are always used in Afrikaans constructions as replacements<br />
<strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> Afrikaans conjunctions, ‘maar’ <strong>and</strong> ‘omdat/want’, suggesting that <strong>the</strong>se<br />
have become incorporated into <strong>the</strong> speaker’s Afrikaans lexicon.<br />
In terms <strong>of</strong> word order equivalence, switching may only occur where <strong>the</strong> two<br />
languages share a similar syntactic structure. This means that English/Afrikaans<br />
codeswitching may only occur in present tense constructions. However, this does<br />
not apply to English/Afrikaans codeswitching as <strong>the</strong> data provides evidence <strong>for</strong><br />
82
Change language