Abstract
This paper provides a critical review of the state of the art in code-switching research being conducted in linguistics. Three issues of theoretical and practical importance are explored: (a) code-switching vs. borrowing; (b) grammaticality; and (c) variability vs. uniformity, and I take a position on all three issues. Regarding switching vs. borrowing, I argue that not all lone other-language items are borrowings once more subtle measures of integration are used. I defend the use of empirical data to compare competing theoretical frameworks of grammaticality, and I exemplify quantitative research on variability in code-switching, showing that it also reveals uniformity and the possible influence of community norms. I conclude that more research is needed on a range of bilingual communities in order to determine the relative contribution of individual factors, processing and community norms to the variability and uniformity of code-switching.
Highlights
In this paper I will attempt to present, for an interdisciplinary audience, my view of code-switching from linguistics
The Matrix Language Frame (MLF) predicts that word order will follow that of the matrix language of the clause, whereas one Minimalist approach pursued by Cantone and MacSwan (2009) in relation to Italian-German code-switching suggested that the language of the adjective should determine the relative word order of adjective and noun
Variation in code-switching patterns has been approached using a range of quantitative approaches, some focusing on its description per se and others attempting to account for the variability either in terms of structural or psycholinguistic factors, or to link specific aspects of variation to extra- or intra-linguistic factors
Summary
In this paper I will attempt to present, for an interdisciplinary audience, my view of code-switching from linguistics. English generic nouns that were not established borrowings were likely to be inserted without any determiner, following the pattern characteristic of that in English but not Spanish, where generic nouns appear with determiners This is an excellent example of using a ‘peripheral’ kind of morphosyntactic integration in order to study the borrowing vs. LOLNS with English-like morphology (based on determiner presence vs absence) and/or phonology were considered to be morphosyntactically and/or phonologically integrated into Spanish, the recipient language His results showed a correlation between the two types of integration, leading him to suggest that phonological integration may be relevant in distinguishing borrowings from switches. This research represents an innovative lifting of the ban on considering the phonological integration of LOLIs and should be pursued further in relation to more data in a range of different corpora
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
