On determining matrix language of code-switching between Southern Min and Mandarin
普通话与闽南话的语码转换:主体语判定理论之探讨
Wang Sunglan 王嵩岚
Abstract 摘要
This paper asks whether there is a universally applicable code-switching model. To answer this question, Myers-Scotton’s (2002) Matrix Language Frame model was tested with Southern Min/Mandarin code-switched data. The results showed that the two criteria (i.e. the morpheme order principle and the system morpheme principle) proposed to identify the matrix language in this model were found inapplicable. This is because Southern Min and Mandarin share most of their morphosyntactic structure and have a limited amount of inflectional morphology. To solve this theoretical problem, one supporting theory of the matrix language frame model (i.e. the uniform structure principle) and other possible criteria were also tested, but they were not successful. With the re-introduction of an additional criterion (i.e. the morpheme counting principle) to identify the matrix language, this study proposes a revised version of the matrix language frame model which was applied to re-analyze the Southern Min/Mandarin code-switched data. The results show that the matrix languages of 92.63% of the Southern Min/Mandarin bilingual clauses (340 in total) were unambiguously identified. This suggests that unlike
the original model, the revised version of the matrix language frame
model is able to cover a wider range of code-switched data (i.e. bothtypologically similar and different language pairs). With the empirical success of the original matrix language frame model reported in the previous literature and the success of additional principle proposed to particularly analyse code-switched data of a typologically similar language pair (Southern Min and Mandarin), this study argues that the revised version of the matrix language frame model is universally applicable.
Keywords 关键词
Mandarin 普通话 Southern Min 闽南话 Code-switching 语码转换 The Matrix Language Frame Model 主体语结构模式理论
Journal of Chinese Linguistics vol.44, no.2 (June 2016): 357-383
Copyright © 2016 Journal of Chinese Linguistices. All rights reserved.