Oldal 29 [29]
OCR
THE CONVERSATION ÁNALYTICAL (CA) FRAMEWORK Conversation Analysis (CA)? is to give a local interpretation of language alternation as a conversational activity relying on interactional evidence rather than on extra-linguistic assumptions. Auer claims that code-switching should be taken seriously as a conversational activity, a “contextualization cue”*. As such, he distinguishes between two main types of code-switching: participant- and discourse-related code-switching. Any language alternation therefore provides cues either about “attributes of the speaker” or “the organization of the ongoing interaction”. All these cues have to be interpreted at a conversational level, where they first become relevant". Auer does not reject the need for a larger-scale extra-conversational explanation of code-switching instances. However, he claims that analysis of language alternation should be implemented fin the framework of conversation analysis, which, taking into account grammatical restrictions where necessary can work up and relate to larger scale sociolinguistic statements””. In line with that, according to the CA model, all instances of code-switching have to be analyzed at a conversational level and, following that, in the wider social context. However, opponents of this model claim that all interactions and conversations occur in a social context, therefore no sequential conversational analysis can be implemented without a simultaneous, extra-conversational sociolinguistic analysis. Auer’s CA model has been criticized for ignoring “the texture that aspects of the wider social context provide to conversational partners” and downgrading — or even ignoring — “speaker motivation”. Although according to Conversation Analysis it is necessary to interpret the act of code-switching in a wider social context, it primarily focuses on the local, conversation and interaction specific examination of code-switching. As such, it demonstrates how the meaning and function of code-switching can be interpreted in the actual interaction against the idiosyncratic variables of the individual relevant in the local context of the conversation. As it does not assume the a priori existence of an objective social reality and categories, it is also wary of making global interpretations or setting up a normative framework of code-switching. Ihe main purpose of the CA approach is to minimize the subjective interpretation of code-switching against a social reality subjectively constructed through the perception of the analyst. It focuses on the sequential analysis 33 Auer, Bilingual Conversation 44 Auer, Ibid., 6 45 Auer, Ibid., 12 16 Auer, Ibid., 96 "7 Auer, A conversation analytic approach to code-switching and transfer, 209 18 Myers-Scotton — Bolonyai, Calculating speakers: code-switching in a rational choice model, Language in Society, 5 + 27e
