Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-tmfhh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-05T16:18:43.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Constraints on Code-Switching: Evidence from Swedish and English1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Beata Schmid
Beata Schmid
Affiliation:
Linguistics Department, Brown University, Providence, R.I. 02912, U.S.A.
Get access

Abstract

In this paper, I have shown that Joshi's (1982) framework of codeswitching constraints can largely be applied to Swedish-English code-switches. I feel qualified to conclude that Joshi's claims concerning the non-switchability of closed class items and matrix language and embedded languages are held up by the Swedish- English data. The need for corresponding categories proved to be less clear-cut than originally proposed by Woolford (1983) and others. It seems that optimal switching conditions are given if the categories, rules and metarules correspond in the two languages. Apparently, however, it is also possible to switch if the node admissibility conditions for the matrix language only are met, as was shown by code-switched sentences containing RPs. This requires that the speaker has a clear sense of which language is the host and which is embedded. Rules from the embedded language only are not acceptable. This calls for some sort of determination strategy by the parser. I found no evidence for determining Lm at any specific point in the sentence, except at the topmost S. Rather, the judgments by code-switchers that a sentence “comes from” one language seems to coincide with the fact that the resulting sentence is based on the rules from that language. Other than that, the matrix language is determined by the communicative context as a whole.

The data involving RPs also seemed to indicate that RPs are not separate ategories, but are NPs, introduced by a “de-slashing” rule (Sells 1984). If they were separate categories, this would be evidence for there being no need for category equivalence. In this case, we would have to explicitly state all other cases which require category equivalence (the majority of cases), which is undesirable.

Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , June 1986 , pp. 55 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allwood, J.S. 1982. The Complex NP Constraint in Swedish. In Engdahl, E. & Ejerhed, E. (eds.), pp. 15–32.Google Scholar
Anward, J. 1982. Basic Swedish. In Engdahl, E. and Ejerhed, E. (eds.), pp. 47–75.Google Scholar
Baker, C.L. 1978. Introduction to Generative-Transformational Syntax. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1977. On WH-Movement. In Culicover, P., Wasow, T. and Akmajian, A. (eds.), Formal Syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Doron, E. 1981. On Formal Models of Code-Switching. Ms. Linguistics Department. University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Engdahl, E. 1982. Restrictions on Unbounded Dependencies in Swedish. In Engdahl, E. and Ejerhed, E. (eds.), pp. 151–174.Google Scholar
Engdahl, E. 1980. WH-Constructions in Swedish and the Relevance of Subjacency. NELS X, Cahiers Linguistiques d'Ottawa 9:98–108.Google Scholar
Engdahl, E. 1980a. The Syntax and Semantics of Questions in Swedish. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Massachusetts. Reproduced by GLSA.Google Scholar
Engdahl, E. & Ejerhed, E. (eds.) 1982. Readings on Unbounded Dependencies. Umeå Studies in the Humanities 43. Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
Flickinger, D. 1983. Lexical Heads and Phrasal Gaps. In Barlow, M., Flickinger, D. & Wescoat, M. (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 2, Stanford, pp. 89–101.Google Scholar
Gazdar, G. 1982. Phrase Structure Grammar. In Jacobson, P. and Pullum, G.K. (eds.), pp. 131–186.Google Scholar
Gazdar, G. 1981. Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure. In Linguistic Inquiry 12:155–185.Google Scholar
Hasselmo, N. 1972. Code-switching as Ordered Selection. In Firchow, E. et al. (eds.), Studies for Einar Haugen. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hasselmo, N. 1970. Code-Switching and Modes of Speaking. In Gilbert, G. (ed.), Texas Studies in Bilingualism. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter and Co.Google Scholar
Jacobson, P. & Pullum, G.K. 1982. The Nature of Syntactic Representation. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joshi, A.K. 1982. Processing of Sentences with Intra-Sentential Code-Switching. Ms. Department of Computer and Information Science. University of Pennsylvania. Published in: Dowty, D., Karttunen, L. and Zwicky, A. (eds.). 1984. Natural Language Parsing: Psychological, Computational and Theoretical Perspectives. (Studies in Natural Language Processing). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Platzack, C. 1984. Review of Jacobson, P. and Pullum, G.K. (eds.), 1982, in Studies in Language 8, 117–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radford, A. 1981. Transformational Syntax. A Student's Guide to Chomsky's Extended Standard Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ross, J.R. 1967. Constraints on Variables in Syntax. Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT. Published by Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Sankoff, D. and Poplack, S., 1980. A Formal Grammar for Code-Switching Working Papers in the Center for Puerto Rican Studies 8, CUNY, New York.Google Scholar
Sells, P. 1984. Syntax and Semantics of Resumptive Pronouns. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Reproduced by GSLA.Google Scholar
Woolford, E. 1983. Bilingual Code-Switching and Syntactic Theory. Linguistic Inquiry 14, 520–35.Google Scholar