Page 69 [69]
OCR
OPTIMALITY THEORY IN ANALYZING BILINGUAL USE Bhatt and Bolonyai, relying on the algorithmical representation of empirical data of code-switched instances have set up two community specific instantiations of the bilingual university grammar. The hypothetical ranking of constraints in Hindi-Kashmiri-English code-switching is a follows: {FAITH, PERSPECTIVE, FACE}>> POWER >> SOLIDARITY The constraints are ranked in ascending order of dominance from right to left. In this hypothetical ranking, Solidarity is the least dominant, the lowest ranked constraint, while Faith, Perspective, and Face are the most dominant, the highest ranked constraints. Faith, Perspective, and Face are equally ranked, which means that they are not in conflict with one another. When filtering the candidates, the constraint of Power outranks Solidarity, and Faith, Perspective, and Face outrank Power, and Solidarity, as well. Bhatt and Bolonyai have provided the algorithmic representations of four Kashmiri-Hindi-English code-switched instances to demonstrate how the hypothetical ranking has been computed. In the first example, the interaction of two constraints, Power and Solidarity have been examined and their ranking vis-a-vis each other has been set. Example [14] — The interaction of POWER and SOLIDARITY 1 A “mujhe nahiN cahiye but you should demand what is yours” (‘I don’t want (the land), but you should demand what is yours.’) (cited by Bhatt and Bolonyai and Bhatt)"?? Example [14] is in part the repetition of example [4a] cited above. As has been already pointed out that in that particular conversation, speakers switch to English to express assertiveness and authority, while Hindi expresses shared ethnicity, intimacy, and solidarity. Therefore, in this particular utterance, in line 1, the switch to English definitely complies with the constraint of Power. The monolingual candidate, however, complying with the constraint of Solidarity, would violate the constraint of Power. The two competing candidates, the English code-switch, and the monolingual Hindi, undergo at least two constraints, Power and Solidarity before becoming surface realizations. The other three constraints, Faith, Perspective, and Face are not relevant in this utterance. The interaction of the constraints and the competition of the candidates have been represented in a computational tableau. 181 Bhatt — Bolonyai, Ibid., 537 18 Bhatt — Bolonyai, Ibid., 537 67 +
