Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [code-switching] determination of codeswitched and borrowed items

Expand Messages
  • mostari hind
    hi Muhamed , of course Poplack s work on Nonce borrowing vs borrowing is of great interest and the most agreed among linguists ; when a word is neither
    Message 1 of 7 , Feb 26, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      hi Muhamed ,
      of course Poplack's work on Nonce borrowing vs borrowing is of great interest and the most
      agreed among linguists ; when a word is neither phonologically or morphologically integrated , it is regarded as CS not borrowing , but here again , it depends on its frequency
      some linguists classify a non integrated word as borrowing if  it occurs frequently  in the recipient language .
      From French/English : we have : il presente one man show : ( He presents a one man show) here one man show is frequently used in the french speech , it is a borrowed expression , also , it is phonologically integrated in the french language since it is pronounced with a french accent .
       
       
      hope it helps
      best regards
      Mostari
      --- On Thu, 2/26/09, Zoubir Dendane <zdendane@...> wrote:

      From: Zoubir Dendane <zdendane@...>
      Subject: Re: [code-switching] determination of codeswitched and borrowed items
      To: code-switching@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 8:26 PM






      Salaam Muhammad,
      I've just read your message and an example of borrowing (I think) crossed my mind:
      In Canadian French, they say 'Je vais crosser la rue'; this is a morohologically adapted borrowing as the verb 'to cross' is used with the French {- er} suffix morpheme for the infinitive, instrad of the French verb traverser. (Meaning: I'm going to cross the street). Here in Algeria Aeabic, we have a great number of borrowings of all types.
      Hopr this will help. Good luck.
      Zoubir    

      --- On Mon, 2/23/09, salman riaz <salman.riaz@ yahoo.com> wrote:

      From: salman riaz <salman.riaz@ yahoo.com>
      Subject: [code-switching] determination of codeswitched and borrowed items
      To: code-switching@ yahoogroups. com
      Date: Monday, February 23, 2009, 12:52 PM

      Hi all,

      it has been a long-standing issue as to how to determine whether a loan item is a codeswitched or a borrowed item. over time, several opinions have surfaced, one of the most influential being Shana Poplack's approach, which states that if a loan item is morpho-syntacticall y and phonologically integrated into recipient language it should be considered an instance of borrowing, whereas one that does not that of codeswitching. i wonder whether some of you would kindly explain to me the idea of morpho-syntactic integration. examples from English or Urdu would be of immense help.

      regards,

      Muhammad Salman Riaz

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      Messages in this topic (3) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
      Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar
      To Post a message: code-switching @ yahoogroups.com
      To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      code-switching-unsubscribe @ yahoogroups.com
      Web page: http//groups.yahoo.com/group/code-switching

      Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
      Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
      Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe



      Recent Activity


       2
      New Members

       1
      New LinksVisit Your Group





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • salman riaz
      Hi Mostari,Zoubir and Jim,   Thank you so much for your help, for which I am highly indebted to you all. Undoubtedly, Poplack s ‘purely linguistic’
      Message 2 of 7 , Feb 27, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Mostari,Zoubir and Jim,
         
        Thank you so much for your help, for which I am highly indebted to you all. Undoubtedly, Poplack's ‘purely linguistic’ approach is illuminating. However, the deeper I delve into it the graver the matter appears. The yardstick of phonological integration is especially problematic, rather unconvincing. And as for morphological integration, we know that only a few loan items receive morphological integration. But what of the huge bulk of those items which do not undergo morphological modification – most of which are treated as instances of borrowing, rather than codeswitching, in bilingual literature?
         
        Let’s turn to another point. In Poplack’s approach, there are three levels of integration that a loan item must pass to be considered a case of borrowing: phonological, morphological, and syntactic. I fail to understand what syntactic integration refers to. Is it something related to a loan item’s falling in a different word-order in the recipient language? If this is so, every loan item finding its way in a varying word-order must be considered a case of borrowing. Please let me know if I am wrong.
        Regards,
        Muhammad Salman Riaz
        salman.riaz@...



        ________________________________
        From: mostari hind <hmostari@...>
        To: code-switching@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 4:46:50 AM
        Subject: Re: [code-switching] determination of codeswitched and borrowed items



        hi Muhamed ,
        of course Poplack's work on Nonce borrowing vs borrowing is of great interest and the most
        agreed among linguists ; when a word is neither phonologically or morphologically integrated , it is regarded as CS not borrowing , but here again , it depends on its frequency
        some linguists classify a non integrated word as borrowing if  it occurs frequently  in the recipient language .
        From French/English : we have : il presente one man show : ( He presents a one man show) here one man show is frequently used in the french speech , it is a borrowed expression , also , it is phonologically integrated in the french language since it is pronounced with a french accent .
         
         
        hope it helps
        best regards
        Mostari
        --- On Thu, 2/26/09, Zoubir Dendane <zdendane@yahoo. com> wrote:

        From: Zoubir Dendane <zdendane@yahoo. com>
        Subject: Re: [code-switching] determination of codeswitched and borrowed items
        To: code-switching@ yahoogroups. com
        Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 8:26 PM

        Salaam Muhammad,
        I've just read your message and an example of borrowing (I think) crossed my mind:
        In Canadian French, they say 'Je vais crosser la rue'; this is a morohologically adapted borrowing as the verb 'to cross' is used with the French {- er} suffix morpheme for the infinitive, instrad of the French verb traverser. (Meaning: I'm going to cross the street). Here in Algeria Aeabic, we have a great number of borrowings of all types.
        Hopr this will help. Good luck.
        Zoubir    

        --- On Mon, 2/23/09, salman riaz <salman.riaz@ yahoo.com> wrote:

        From: salman riaz <salman.riaz@ yahoo.com>
        Subject: [code-switching] determination of codeswitched and borrowed items
        To: code-switching@ yahoogroups. com
        Date: Monday, February 23, 2009, 12:52 PM

        Hi all,

        it has been a long-standing issue as to how to determine whether a loan item is a codeswitched or a borrowed item. over time, several opinions have surfaced, one of the most influential being Shana Poplack's approach, which states that if a loan item is morpho-syntacticall y and phonologically integrated into recipient language it should be considered an instance of borrowing, whereas one that does not that of codeswitching. i wonder whether some of you would kindly explain to me the idea of morpho-syntactic integration. examples from English or Urdu would be of immense help.

        regards,

        Muhammad Salman Riaz

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        Messages in this topic (3) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
        Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar
        To Post a message: code-switching @ yahoogroups. com
        To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
        code-switching- unsubscribe @ yahoogroups. com
        Web page: http//groups. yahoo.com/ group/code- switching

        Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
        Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
        Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

        Recent Activity

         2
        New Members

         1
        New LinksVisit Your Group

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • mostari hind
        hi salman  , But what of the huge bulk of those items which do not undergo morphological modification – most of which are treated as instances of borrowing,
        Message 3 of 7 , Mar 13, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          hi salman  ,
          But what of the huge bulk of those items which do not undergo morphological modification – most of which are treated as instances of borrowing, rather than codeswitching, in bilingual literature?

          The answer is the freqeuncy criterion : if the item is repeatedly used by the recipient speech community , so generally , it is a loan word .
          if it is aoccaionally  used ; here it is considered as CS
          I focus -word- not expression or long streches of words , which are considered as cases of
          inter or intra sentential CS .
           
          - for your second question : syntactic intergration means that the word order changes
          for example if the word belongs to Fr where the order is : SVO
          and is adapted syntactically to another language where the order let's  say OVS ( for instance ) here , there is a synatctic intergration , but the word need not to be ' morphologicaly and synatctically and phonologically adapted , to call it loan word ,  if it is only phonologically and/or morphologically and/or syntactically intergrated , so, it is a loan word .
          But here again, there are # approaches and criteria for these terminologies , so you have to adopt one , to be precise .
           
          best regards
          hope it helps
          Mostari
          ALGERIA

          --- On Sat, 2/28/09, salman riaz <salman.riaz@...> wrote:





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.