Seite 52 [52]
OCR
CHAPTER 4 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 2 The principle of symbolic domination [POWER] According to Bolonyai and Bhatt those instances of code-switching can be classified under the principle of symbolic domination which enable “[social actors] to maximize symbolic dominance and/or social distance in relational practice, i. e., [social] actors switch to the language that is best positioned to index or construct power, status, authority, social distance, and/or difference between self and other(s)”!22. Therefore, such instances of code-switching are subsumed in this principle which enable the speaker to express or negotiate socio-cognitive structures or relational frames according to the perceived or desired social status of participants in interrelation to one another. The three principles of OT in bilingual use “framing relational-interpersonal communication” are Power, Solidarity, and Face'**. As a higher social status (dominance, power) cannot exist without presupposing a lower one (concurrence, solidarity), the principle of Power is in a complementary position in relation with the principle of Solidarity responsible for social concurrence. The principle of Solidarity and Face will be discussed in more detail later in this chapter. A code-switch complying with the principle of Power is a linguistic resource drawn upon to index, in unequal social relations, a higher, dominant, or superior position among the participants of a linguistic situation. In some diglossic language pairs, the direction of code-switching per se can assign a dominant position, but this rule cannot be taken as universal. It is always the given situation and the way in which participants position themselves in relation to one another that contextualizes code-switches as linguistic means serving to index unequal social status, power, or dominance. Code-switching as a means of indexing social relations has been widely discussed in the code-switching literature. Of the socio-pragmatic functions of code-switches enumerated by previous theorists, 26 have been classified under the principle of symbolic domination. To mention but a few, Power can express “they-code”™, “authority”, increasing social status or distance!”‘, and “powerwielding”””’. 12: D Bhatt — Bolonyai, Ibid., 528 Bhatt — Bolonyai, Ibid., 524 Gumperz, Discourse Strategies Amy Lin, Teaching in Two Tongues: Language Alternation in Foreign Language Classrooms, Research Report, 3. City Polytechnic of Hong Kong, 1990; Myers-Scotton, Social Motivations for Code-switching; Rosita Rindler Schjerve, Codeswitching as an indicator for language shift? Evidence from Sardinian-Italian bilingualism, in: Rodolfo Jacobson (ed.), Code-switching Worldwide II, Berlin, New York, Mouton de Gruyter, 1998, 221-247 Auer, Introduction, 1-24; Jens Normann Jorgensen, Children’s acquisition of code-switching for power yielding, in: Peter Auer (ed.), Code-switching in Conversation. Language Interaction and Identity, London, New York, Routledge, 1998, 237-258; Trine Esdahl, Language choice 12: œ 125 126 127 + 50 +
