Code-switching

thumb|[[Sarah Geronimo and an interviewer code-switch between English and Filipino. Such code-switching is widespread in the Philippines.]]

start=43|end=52|thumb|[[Maya Diab code-switches between English and Lebanese Arabic mid-sentence.]]

In linguistics, code-switching or language alternation is the process of shifting from one linguistic code (a language or dialect) to another, depending on the social context or conversational setting. These alternations are generally intended to influence the relationship between the speakers, for example, suggesting that they may share identities based on similar linguistic histories.

Code-switching is different from plurilingualism in that plurilingualism refers to the ability of an individual to use multiple languages, while code-switching is the act of using multiple languages together. Multilinguals (speakers of more than one language) sometimes use elements of multiple languages when conversing with each other. Thus, code-switching is the use of more than one linguistic variety in a manner consistent with the syntax and phonology of each variety.

Code-switching may happen between sentences, sentence fragments, words, or individual morphemes (in synthetic languages). However, some linguists consider the borrowing of words or morphemes from another language to be different from other types of code-switching.

Code-switching can occur when there is a change in the environment in which one is speaking, or in the context of speaking a different language or switching the verbiage to match that of the audience. There are many ways in which code-switching is employed, such as when speakers are unable to express themselves adequately in a single language or to signal an attitude towards something. Several theories have been developed to explain the reasoning behind code-switching from sociological and linguistic perspectives.

Use

The earliest known use of the term "code-switching" in print was published in 1953, in a chapter by Roman Jakobson in Results Conf. Anthropologists & Linguists, written with C. F. Voegelin, T. A. Sebeok, and C. Lévi-Strauss. He attributes the idea to linguist William Freeman Twaddell, inspired by "communication engineers". In the 1950s, many scholars considered code-switching to be a substandard use of language. Since the 1980s, however, most scholars have come to regard it as a normal, natural product of bilingual and multilingual language use.

In popular usage and in sociolinguistic study, the term code-switching is frequently used to refer to switching among dialects, styles or registers. This form of switching is practiced, for example, by speakers of African American Vernacular English as they move from less formal to more formal settings. Such shifts, when performed by public figures such as politicians, are sometimes criticized as signaling inauthenticity or insincerity.

The term "code-switching" is also used outside the field of linguistics. Informally, code-switching is sometimes used to refer to relatively stable informal mixtures of two languages, such as Spanglish, Taglish, or Hinglish.

As switching between languages is exceedingly common and takes many forms, code-switching can also be recognized as sentence alternation. A sentence may begin in one language, and finish in another. Or phrases from both languages may succeed each other in apparently random order. Such behavior can be explained only by postulating a range of linguistic or social factors such as the following:

Speakers cannot express themselves adequately in one language, so they switch to another to work around the deficiency. This may trigger a speaker to continue in the other language for a while.
Switching to a minority language is very common as a means of expressing solidarity with a social group. The language change signals to the listener that the speaker is from a certain background; if the listener responds with a similar switch, a degree of rapport is established.
The switch between languages can signal the speaker's attitude towards the listener - friendly, irritated, distant, ironic, jocular and so on. Monolinguals can communicate these effects to some extent by varying the level of formality of their speech; bilinguals can do it by language switching.

Code-switching involves the capacity of bilingual individuals to switch between different languages within a single conversation. John Guiteriz notes that code-switching is most commonly observed among bilingual individuals who are highly skilled in both languages and is actually prevalent in numerous bilingual communities, contrary to common beliefs. The patterns of language switching exhibited by the speaker can be influenced by the listener's level of proficiency in the languages or their personal language preferences. Speakers form and establish a pidgin language when two or more speakers who do not speak a common language form an intermediate, third language. Translanguaging refers to multilingual speakers' abilities to draw from multiple languages in a fluid way, rather than the distinction of multiple languages in codeswitching. Speakers also practice code-switching when they are each fluent in both languages. The process of code-switching focuses on the grammatical system within the analyzing and interpretation of languages. Individuals have a blended grammatical system that allows them to apply one, combined set of language rules. Code-mixing is a thematically related term, but the usage of the terms code-switching and code-mixing varies. Some scholars use either term to denote the same practice, while others apply code-mixing to denote the formal linguistic properties of language-contact phenomena and code-switching to denote the actual, spoken usages by multilingual persons.

Code-switching and language transfer

There is much debate in the field of linguistics regarding the distinction between code-switching and language transfer. According to Jeanine Treffers-Daller, "considering CS [code-switching] and [language] transfer as similar phenomena is helpful if one wants to create a theory that is as parsimonious as possible, and therefore it is worth attempting to aim for such a unified approach, unless there is compelling evidence that this is not possible." In such views, these two kinds of language transfer, along with code-switching, comprise what is known as cross-linguistic influence. code-meshing may indicate the achievement of a relative linguistic equality. The resulting product of code-meshing turns out to be more of an integration or system of language, Therefore, it even avoids some issues regarding racism and promotes rhetoric effectiveness compared to code-switching.

Translingual or translanguaging may have come in the form of a combination of language usage with nonlinguistic elements. For example, people can use multiple different languages plus drawing symbol or small images to express one message or idea by putting them together on a surface. Specifically, they consider translingualism to be highly the usage of multiple language in writing and divide it into translingual work, translingual negotiation and translingual rhetoric for discussion and research study purpose.

: People will switch codes while quoting another person.
: When expressing gratitude or solidarity, code-switching can occur inadvertently or with the intention of fostering a rapport.
: A speaker may engage in code-switching when listeners have difficulty comprehending specific words or concepts initially by simplifying their vocabulary or syntax and increasing volume to strengthen comprehension.
: People may alter their language to express group identification. This can happen, for example, when introducing members of a particular group to others.
: While asking someone to do something, code-switching works to mark emphasis or provide inspiration.
: Code-switching occurs when people use technical or idiomatic speech from a foreign or non-primary language in order to translate ideas in their native language. Alternating between their native language and English allows individuals to assist with gaps in their understanding or to aid in the comprehension of others.
: People may engage in code-switching without thinking about it. This can occur when one is frightened by a specific event or circumstances such as going on a thrilling ride at an amusement park.
: Code-switching is a useful tool for people to talk and act more like those around them. It is sometimes called . In Assyrian-English switching one could say, "Ani wideili. What happened?" ("Those, I did them. What happened?").
occurs within a sentence or a clause.
occurs within a word itself, such as at a morpheme boundary.

A is a particular type of intrasentential code-switching. It is a hybrid involving structures from two different languages in one sentence It is more of a "syntactic blend" than the kind of lexical blend one sees in portmanteau words such as smog.

Almedia Jacqueleline Toribio's study aims to answer a fundamental question: How do second language learners acquire the necessary knowledge to maintain structural coherence and make well-formedness judgments when using code-switched forms? The study reveals that there are two main beneficial aspects of code-switching. Both developmental patterns contribute to assessing methodological linguistic constructs. Toribio offers an illustration of intrasentential code-switching, showcasing consistent grammatical patterns. Proficient bilingual individuals, equipped with advanced proficiency in both languages, engage in intra-sentential code alternations.

Applications in language learning process

The application of code-switching under such a condition can be divided into two main different situations: one is the interaction between learners and the educator, and the other is the communication between students and classmates.

According to Grace Cornell Gonzales and Emily Machado, many teachers adapt their teaching styles to code-switching because they believe that it allows students to feel as if they are maintaining their full identity. Some educators allow students to code-switch when talking or writing. This strategy has been seen to be effective because it allows students to communicate their experiences just how they felt them happen. Although code-switching can become difficult to control, it has been said that speaking and writing go hand in hand: if a person can write, then they can speak and control their switch in the same or similar way. It is important to note that code-switching occurs more often with those whose dominant language is not standard English.

Nevertheless, code switching has typically not been regarded as a favorable attribute by educational institutions, teachers, or the dominant culture. Jean Aitchison's notes that discouragement stems from concerns regarding the potential negative impact on the languages involved, which could potentially lead to language erosion or decline. According to Aitchison, one possible explanation for the widespread disapproval of language variations is rooted in social-class prejudice. There exists a general belief that someone should arbitrate between the different forms of English. Aitchison concludes that the puristic stance toward language, which maintains the idea of an absolute standard of correctness, has its roots in a natural inclination towards nostalgia, further amplified by social pressures.

Aguirre asserts that a bilingual teacher's intuitive knowledge of bilingual behavior can be instrumental in his or her construction of a sociolinguistic profile for the student in the bilingual classroom. Moreover, in language programs where the native language is quite different from the target language, the use of code-switching can lead to confusion about grammar and other sentence structures.

Code-switching for educators

In contrast with learners, educators usually have a higher level of proficiency in the target language which means they can use the target language for normal communication without barriers. Educators can converse fluently in both languages, so they have a choice as to whether and how often code-switching is used in the language teaching process. But on the other hand, the use of code-switching by teachers can also lead to students not being able to adapt to new language situations.

Code-switching in the classroom

Code-switching in classrooms is the practice of alternating between two or more languages or dialects in an educational setting. While sometimes confused with lexical borrowing, code-switching involves a more fluid transition between languages. Its role in the classroom is heavily debated among educators, more specifically, whether or not to incorporate it into school teachings. Code-switching has mainly been argued to shape student identity, learning outcomes, and classroom power dynamics.

Impact on student identity

Adapting to different languages and cultural norms can be a difficult process. Students tend to assimilate into the new culture to fit in with their peers, a behavior that lines up with the communication accommodation theory. Critics argue that formal or informal expectations to code-switch can intensify this pressure by encouraging students to conform to a dominant language norm. This dynamic has been described as contributing to feelings of cultural disconnect and isolation, as well as the perception that a student's native language is less valued. Instead of strictly separating languages, this approach encourages students to incorporate their primary language into their school work. This allows students to utilize their cultural background, bringing diverse perspectives into a classroom. As language practices are an of a student's bicultural life. From this perspective, code-switching is seen as a way to acknowledge students' linguistic and cultural identities rather than treating them as obstacles. Others argue that ethnic identity is connected to linguistic identity which creates pride and self acceptance for bilingual students.

Learning outcomes

Adapting to a new language and its norms can change how students process information and engage with course material. Some linguists point out that schools and universities often overestimate how proficient students are in the main language of instruction. When the classroom's primary language is a student's secondary language, they may work through content more slowly. This can unfortunately lead teachers to label them as "inadequate" or "behind" even when the issue is primarily linguistic, not cognitive.

However, in foreign language classrooms, student-led code-switching can actually help learners understand. Some teachers consider code-switching as a useful because it allows students to guess what words in another language mean using the context of their native language. To ensure students understand content in different languages, some teachers use translanguaging practices. This allows teachers to shift between language, giving students better academic content while proving their linguistic skills. A major challenge with this approach is that teachers have to ensure students truly understand the content across different languages, which creates distinct challenges in multilingual classrooms. Students often use "interliteracy," where they temporarily apply the grammar, spelling, or punctuation rules of one language to their writing in another as a way to support their development.

Students who are able to use code-switching in their writing demonstrate statistically significant improvements in specific higher order skills, notably "idea development" and "explicitness." Students, especially children, use their full repertoire of languages, opposing earlier theory about code-switching. It was thought that when an individual is code-switching, it is a transition between two separate monolingual identities. This idea is also known as translanguaging in writing.

Classroom power dynamics

The expectations around language use in schools often highlight underlying power dynamics. While code-switching usually refers to the blending of languages, "code-switching pedagogy" often refers to the expectation that students must switch out their native dialects and use Standard English for academic work. Some critics argue that mandatory code-switching is a harmful, or even racist, pedagogy that upholds standard English as the most "powerful". This is because it prevents students from thinking or speaking in ways that come easiest to them and frames other dialects as inappropriate for school. Students use these languages practices in creative, skillful, and intelligent ways to express themselves in social interaction. As a response, some educators encourage students to question these linguistic hierarchies rather than just submitting to them. In practice, teachers might actively mix languages during lecture to clarify concepts and validate students' home languages, or allow students to draft assignments in their native dialect before translating them. Remote settings have taken the likes of social media, emails, and any other setting where communication has been made via online platforms. A study done by Cambridge University looked into how code-switching is present on remote, online platforms. Looking at tweets from Twitter regarding Hurricane Irma, researchers looked to see how posting went hand in hand with the impacted English and Spanish speaking countries. They found that many utilized English due to the platform's systemic influences. However, translations were prevalent in tweets to make them accessible to both English and Spanish speakers. To understand the relationship between how often people code-switched, the researchers calculated the proportion of code-switches of prior and current Tweets. The results of the study found that language switching produces Tweets that are better at conveying messages the individual wished to put across. Likewise, they found that multilingual individuals differed their code switches based on the language used in their previous Tweets. Due to the difficulty to use multiple languages in the same sentence in writing, more messages were English than in Spanish. Finally, when comparing non-code switching Tweets by the same writer, those with code-switching present had more complex language. This study is only one of potentially many studies to be done. Writing studies has much more to dissect about remote code-switching. Potential research could look into Zoom etiquette, Discord forums, etc.

Theories

===Social theories===

Code-switching relates to, and sometimes indexes social-group membership in bilingual and multilingual communities. Some sociolinguists describe the relationships between code-switching behaviours and class, ethnicity, and other social positions.

In addition, scholars in interactional linguistics and conversation analysis have studied code-switching as a means of structuring speech in interaction. Some discourse analysts, including conversation analyst Peter Auer, suggest that code-switching does not simply reflect social situations, but that it is a means to create social situations.

Markedness model

The Markedness model, developed by Carol Myers-Scotton, is one of the more complete theories of code-switching motivations. It posits that language users are rational and choose to speak a language that clearly marks their rights and obligations, relative to other speakers, in the conversation and its setting. When there is no clear, unmarked language choice, speakers practice code-switching to explore possible language choices. Many sociolinguists, however, object to the Markedness Model's postulation that language-choice is entirely rational.

Sequential analysis

Scholars of conversation analysis such as Peter Auer and Li Wei argue that the social motivation behind code-switching lies in the way code-switching is structured and managed in conversational interaction; in other words, the question of why code-switching occurs cannot be answered without first addressing the question of how it occurs. Using conversation analysis (CA), these scholars focus their attention on the sequential implications of code-switching. That is, whatever language a speaker chooses to use for a conversational turn, or part of a turn, impacts the subsequent choices of language by the speaker as well as the hearer. Rather than focusing on the social values inherent in the languages the speaker chooses ("brought-along meaning"), the analysis concentrates on the meaning that the act of code-switching itself creates ("brought-about meaning").

Diglossia

In a diglossic situation, some topics are better suited to the use of one language over another. Joshua Fishman proposes a domain-specific code-switching model (later refined by Blom and Gumperz) wherein bilingual speakers choose which code to speak depending on where they are and what they are discussing. For example, a child who is a bilingual Spanish-English speaker might speak Spanish at home and English in class, but Spanish at recess.

Linguistic theories

In studying the syntactic and morphological patterns of language alternation, linguists have postulated specific grammatical rules and specific syntactic boundaries for where code-switching might occur.

Constraint-based model: Poplack (1980)

Shana Poplack's model of code-switching is an influential theory of the grammar of code-switching. On the contrary, cases like the noun phrases the casa white and the blanca house are ruled out because the combinations are ungrammatical in at least one of the languages involved. Spanish noun phrases are made up of determiners, then nouns, then adjectives, while the adjectives come before the nouns in English noun phrases. The casa white is ruled out by the equivalence constraint because it does not obey the syntactic rules of English, and the blanca house is ruled out because it does not follow the syntactic rules of Spanish. The equivalence constraint would also rule out switches that occur commonly in languages, as when Hindi postpositional phrases are switched with English prepositional phrases like in the sentence: "John gave a book ek larakii ko" ("John gave a book to a girl"). The phrase ek larakii ko is literally translated as a girl to, making it ungrammatical in English, and yet this is a sentence that occurs in English-Hindi code-switching despite the requirements of the equivalence constraint. Although the model has been challenged with counter-examples collected by other researchers, there is a conclusion that most agree on. The conclusion is that the practice of code-switching demonstrates grammatical proficiency of an equivalent level as a monolingual speaker's speech competence, unlike the claims that code-switching reflects incompetence in either of the two languages of a bilingual speaker.

Matrix language-frame model

Carol Myers-Scotton's Matrix Language-Frame (MLF) model is the dominant model of insertional code-switching.

According to the Blocking Hypothesis, in Matrix Language + Embedded Language constituents, a blocking filter blocks any Embedded Language content morpheme which is not congruent with the Matrix Language with respect to three levels of abstraction regarding subcategorization. "Congruence" is used in the sense that two entities, linguistic categories in this case, are congruent if they correspond in respect of relevant qualities.

The three levels of abstraction are:

Even if the Embedded Language realizes a given grammatical category as a content morpheme, if it is realized as a system morpheme in the Matrix Language, the Matrix Language blocks the occurrence of the Embedded Language content morpheme. (A content morpheme is often called an "open-class" morpheme, because they belong to categories that are open to the invention of arbitrary new items. They can be made-up words like "smurf", "nuke", "byte", etc. and can be nouns, verbs, adjectives, and some prepositions. A system morpheme, e.g. function words and inflections, expresses the relation between content morphemes and does not assign or receive thematic roles.)
The Matrix Language also blocks an Embedded Language content morpheme in these constituents if it is not congruent with a Matrix Language content morpheme counterpart in terms of theta role assignment.
Congruence between Embedded Language content morphemes and Matrix Language content morphemes is realized in terms of their discourse or pragmatic functions.

Examples

Example 1 is consistent with the Blocking Hypothesis and the system content morpheme criteria, so the prediction is that the Hindi or Urdu equivalents are also content morphemes. Sometimes non-congruence between counterparts in the Matrix Language and Embedded Language can be circumvented by accessing bare forms. "Cell" is a bare form and so the thematic role of "cell" is assigned by the verb -wek- 'put in/on'; this means that the verb is a content morpheme.

The Embedded Language Island Trigger Hypothesis states that when an Embedded Language morpheme appears which is not permitted under either the Matrix Language Hypothesis or Blocking Hypothesis, it triggers the inhibition of all Matrix Language accessing procedures and completes the current constituent as an Embedded Language island. Embedded Language islands consist only of Embedded Language morphemes and are well-formed by Embedded Language grammar, but they are inserted in the Matrix Language frame. Therefore, Embedded Language islands are under the constraint of Matrix Language grammar.

Swahili/English

Sikuona your barau ambayo uliipoteza. (Code-switching ungrammatical, English in bold)

"I didn't see your letter which you lost." (Translation)

Swahili/English

Nikamwambia anipe ruhusa niende ni-ka-check for wewe. (Code-switching, ungrammatical, English in bold)

"And I told him he should give me permission so that I go and check for you." (Translation)

Nikamwambia anipe ruhusa niende ni-ka-check for you. (Code-switching, grammatical, English in bold)

Example 1 is ungrammatical (indicated by the leading asterisk) because "your" is accessed, so the Embedded Language Island Trigger Hypothesis predicts that it must be followed by an English head (e.g., "your letter") as an Embedded Language island. The reason is that possessive adjectives are system morphemes. We see the same thing happen in example 2, which is therefore ungrammatical. However, the correct way to finish the sentence is not "for wewe", switching back to Swahili; rather, it should end with "for you", which would be an Embedded Language island.

The Embedded Language Implicational Hierarchy Hypothesis can be stated as two sub-hypotheses:

The farther a constituent is from the main arguments of the sentence, the freer it is to appear as an Embedded Language island.
The more formulaic in structure a constituent is, the more likely it is to appear as an Embedded Language island. Stated more strongly, choice of any part of an idiomatic expression will result in an Embedded Language island. The approach focuses on the repudiation of any rule or principle which explicitly refers to code-switching itself. This approach does not recognize or accept terms such as "matrix language", "embedded language", or "language frame", which are typical in constraint-based approaches such as the MLF Model.

Rather than posit constraints specific to language alternation, as in traditional work in the field, MacSwan advocates that mixed utterances be analyzed with a focus on the specific and unique linguistic contributions of each language found in a mixed utterance. Because these analyses draw on the full range of linguistic theory, and each data set presents its own unique challenges, a much broader understanding of linguistics is generally needed to understand and participate in this style of codeswitching research.

For example, Cantone and MacSwan (2009) analyzed word order differences for nouns and adjectives in Italian-German codeswitching using a typological theory of Cinque that had been independently proposed in the syntax literature; their account derives the word order facts of Italian-German codeswitching from underlying differences between the two languages, according to Cinque's theory.

Myers-Scotton and MacSwan debated the relative merits of their approaches in a series of exchanges published in 2005 in Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, issues 8(1) and 8(2).

Other theories

Much remains to be done before a more complete understanding of code-switching phenomena is achieved. Linguists continue to debate apparent counter-examples to proposed code-switching theories and constraints.

The Closed-class Constraint, developed by Aravind Joshi, posits that closed class items (pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, etc.) cannot be switched. The Functional Head Constraint developed by Belazi et al. holds that code-switching cannot occur between a functional head (a complementizer, a determiner, an inflection, etc.) and its complement (sentence, noun-phrase, verb-phrase). According to Ena Lee and Steve Marshall, people are also able to switch from their bi/multilingual identity to a strict monolingual identity whenever they are required to do so. According to Barbara Mellix, bi/multilingual writers can oftentimes feel "diminished"

The extended control process model states the following:<blockquote>"Language control signals operate on a subcortical gate that acts as a constructor of utterance plans. The gate interacts with frontal regions to select a syntactic structure and binds roles in that structure to a specific lexical content. Plans are constructed in the planning layer of competition queuing CQ network. The competitive choice layer of this network allows serial order to emerge from the parallel activation of items in the plan." Age is a significant factor in determining how many AAVE forms vs. more standard forms are produced by a given student with a significant downshift in classroom AAVE production occurring around the transition from preschool to kindergarten and first grade. Craig and Washington (2004) found a reduction in five out of six morpho-syntactic characteristics studied across the transition from pre-kindergarten to kindergarten including null copula, zero articles, zero past tense, zero plurals, and zero prepositions. The bidialectism developed by these children offers similar advantages to other kinds of bilingualism including increased executive function and advances in critical thinking. As an example of this code-switching in action, see the following transcript of Rachel Jeantel's testimony in the trial of George Zimmerman for the murder of Trayvon Martin below. This transcript was analyzed in Rickford and King (2016); the bolded elements represent places where initially a null copula (indicated by the symbol ∅) was used which was switched to an overt copula (s) when asked for clarification by the court reporter:<blockquote></blockquote>The structure of African American English differs significantly from standard English, particularly in the use of the Invariant "be". An illustration of this distinction is evident in its application for habitual or repeated actions. In instances involving actions in the present with subjects other than "I," the use of a form of "be" is omitted. For actions in the past tense, "was" or "were" is employed, while present tense questions utilize a conjugated form of "be." Questions pertaining to habitual actions employ the combination of "do" and "be." Notably, the Invariant "be" also serves to indicate future actions, wherein it may be optionally combined with an auxiliary. Unlike the verb "to be", the Invariant "be" lacks variant forms such as "is", "are", or "am".

Cantonese and English

The following examples demonstrate two types of code-switching (intra-sentential and inter-sentential code-switching) by Cantonese-English bilingual children. The examples are taken from the Hong Kong Bilingual Child Language Corpus.

The first example illustrates intra-sentential code-switching, where the child Alicia (age 2) inserted the English noun apple into her Cantonese sentence:

(Cantonese is in plain text; English is in italic.)

Alicia: apple. ([in Cantonese] "Eat some apples.")

The second example displays inter-sentential code-switching, where the child Kasen (age 2) switched to Cantonese amid an English dialogical context:

(English is in italic; Cantonese is in plain text.)

Mother: What is it? Do you know what it is?

Kasen: ！！([in Cantonese] "I want to see! I want to see!")

Research has found that Cantonese-English bilingual children's intra- and inter-sentential code-switching behaviour is shaped by different factors. The children's intra-sentential code-switching is influenced by parental input rather than developmental language dominance. On the other hand, the children's inter-sentential code-switching is affected by their developmental language dominance (besides pragmatic factors).

Roger Thompson's research it suggests that the interactions between Tagalog and English depend on what is taking place. In the classroom teachers prefer students to use English. When in media the Philippines tends to prefer using Tagalog over English but in smaller social interactions people use their local dialect over both.

According to the linguist Maria Lourdes S. Bautista, there are two contrasting types of code-switching in the Philippines: deficiency-driven and proficiency-driven. Deficiency-driven code-switching is when a person is not competent in one language and thus has to switch back to the language they are more familiar with. This is common among younger children, as in the example below given by Bautista: Selvamani, who moved from Sri Lanka to Quebec as a child and now identifies as Québécois, speaks to Das in French. When Selvamani's sister, Mala, laughs, Selvamani switches to Tamil to ask Mala why she is laughing. After this aside, Selvamani continues to speak in French. Selvamani also uses the word tsé ("you know", contraction of tu sais) and the expression je me pas poigner ("I will not be caught"), which are not standard French but are typical of the working-class Montreal dialect Joual. They are discussing the selection of a site for a new high school in the eastern Hopi Reservation. In their two-hour conversation, the three men primarily speak Tewa; however, when Speaker A addresses the Hopi Reservation as a whole, he code-switches to Hopi. His speaking Hopi when talking of Hopi-related matters is a conversational norm in the Arizona Tewa speech community. Kroskrity reports that these Arizona Tewa men, who culturally identify themselves as Hopi and Tewa, use the different languages to linguistically construct and maintain their discrete ethnic identities.

(Tewa is in italic; Hopi is in boldface.)

Speaker A: Tututqaykit qanaanawakna. ([in Hopi] "Schools were not wanted.")

Speaker B: Wédít'ókánk'egena'adi imbí akhonidi. ([in Tewa] "They didn't want a school on their land.")

Speaker C: Naembí eeyae nąeląemo díbít'ó'ámmí kąayį'į wédimu::di.

([in Tewa] "It's better if our children go to school right here, rather than far away.")

Latin and Irish

Irish annals were written in Ireland between the 8th and 17th centuries by Christian monks and priests. These were fluent in both Irish and Latin and wrote the annals in both languages, often switching between them within a single sentence.

An example is given below, from the 9th-century Martyrology of Óengus that gives a spurious etymology of the prince Connadil's name:

(Irish is in italic; Latin is in boldface.)

Conadail cli buadach Connadil Essa Macc Neirc hiConnachtaib .i. Conna ise intainm. ⁊tucc sua mater perpietatem additamentum sillabæ dil .i. dil lem Conna

(Conandil victorious prince Connadil of Ess Mac nEirc in Connacht, i.e. Conna, that is the name, and his mother, out of love, joined the addition of the syllable 'dil', i.e. dear is Conna to me.)

According to the scholar Nike Stam, "Many switches consisted of inserted Latin fragments: short phrases or single words. Some of these Latin phrases appeared to be of a formulaic nature and seemed to have originated in the medieval catena tradition. They are often used to provide cross-references to other sources or to combine conflicting opinions on a text. These are phrases like ut in proverbio dicitur ["as is said in the proverb"] and ut ferunt peritii ["as experience bears out"]. Most of the language switches, however, consisted of what Muysken called alternation: longer fragments like clauses or long phrases. This type of code-switching has been linked to bilingualism in societies that are strongly diglossic, and thus suggests that the scribes compiling and writing the glosses preferred to use their two languages according to specific norms."

Spanish and English

Researcher Ana Celia Zentella offers this example from her work with Puerto Rican Spanish-English bilingual speakers in New York City. In this example, Marta and her younger sister, Lolita, speak Spanish and English with Zentella outside of their apartment building. Zentella explains that the children of the predominantly Puerto Rican neighbourhood speak both English and Spanish: "Within the children's network, English predominated, but code-switching from English to Spanish occurred once every three minutes, on average."