Re: CHAT: The Conlang Instinct

FFlores wrote:

> I insert English
> words and phrases into my Spanish when I speak to my brother.
This code-switching is very interesting to me: it is common the world over
when bilinguals talk to bilinguals.  The usual theory is that there is a
universal metagrammar, with two rules that control when switches happen:

1) switches happen only between free morphemes (the free morpheme rule)

2) switches happen only when the word order of both languages is in alignment
(the equivalence rule).

An example of the equivalence rule is switching between adjective and
noun.  If both languages are AN or NA, then it is possible; but if one is AN
and the other is NA, then it is not possible.

Switches that violate these rules constitute less than 1% of the data.  Note that
apparent violations can be induced by simple word borrowings (and bilinguals, unless
they are trying to avoid them, make more borrowings than others).

Here are some examples (accents omitted):

In Example 1, the text violates the free morpheme rule,
and was in fact written by an English-French bilingual who had suffered brain damage
and was attempting to write French (I have inserted hyphens between morphemes):

1)      *J'es avec une massio-dial a et except dans le cissuden.  We-de main pour
        la pousse tard being-ig maid mouche was tr-iel mal.

Examples 2, 3, and 4 are typical metagrammatical examples:

2)      Todos los Mexicanos were riled up.

3)      So you todavia haven't decided lo que vas a hacer next week.

4)      J'ai l'impression d'etre back in the country.

Example 5 is metagrammatical, but Example 6 is not, because it violates the equivalence rule:

5)      J'ai achete an American car.

6)      *J'ai achete an American voiture.

(because French, as a NA language, would require "une voiture americaine").

The following group of examples shows where switches are possible and not, due to
the equivalence rule:

7)      No se, porque nunca lo use.  (pure Spanish)

8)      I don't know, because I never used it.  (pure English)

9)      No se, porque I never used it (metagrammatical, actually recorded)

10)     No se, because I never used it (also metagrammatical)

11)     *No se, porque nunca I used it (unmetagrammatical)

12)     *I don't se, porque nunca lo use (unmetagrammatical)

13)     *I don't know, because I never lo use (unmetagrammatical)

The free morpheme rule also forbids switching between clitic and free morpheme:

14)     *Yo went to the store.

Switches between verbs in a serial-verb-like construction, though not actually
forbidden by the free morpheme rule, are quite infrequent, apparently because
the verbs are closely coupled:

15)     ?They want a venir.

It is also interesting that in immigrant communities, code-switching in ordinary
conversation may be socially required: those who speak only the language of the
country are perceived as assimilationist, while those who speak only the original
language, with no borrowings or code-switching, seem over-formal or show-offs.

ObConlang:  Have any artlangers thought about language-mixing strategies involving
multiple conlangs, or conlangs and natlangs?  And has talked occasionally about
Livagian-influenced English, I know.

--
Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis vom dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@...>
Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau,  || http://www.reutershealth.com
Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau,           || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Und trank die Milch vom Paradies.            -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)