Overlapping Codes and Codeswitching

In intercultural communication, the sender and the receiver often have over­lapping codes,"codes which provide an area of commonality' but which also contain areas of unshared codification" (Smith, in Samovar and Porter, 1972, p. 291). Even if the code they use at home is very different, members of minority groups are usually compelled to learn and make some use of the language of the majority because in education, business, and politics this language dominates.

Restricted codes of communication seem to be common among intimate dyads. A study of young lovers (Bell et al., 1987) found the number of personal idioms they used—that is, "words, phrases, or nonverbal signs they had created that had meaning unique to their relationship" (p. 47)—to be highly correlated with love, commitment, and closeness. This proved to be true for both premarital and marital relationships. The couples studied had private idioms, which they used only when they were alone, and public idioms, which they could use when others were present: the private idioms were usually sexual references or euphe­misms and sexual invitations (for example, "Let's go home and watch TV'), whereas the public idioms were often nicknames, confrontations, teasing insults, and re­quests.

Shifts in codes occur in many different communication contexts. A recent analysis of such American television interviewers as Mike Wallace, Phil Donahue, and Tom Snyder (Scotton, 1988) argues that a pattern of frequent codeswitching within a single conversation can be used by a speaker for the purpose of negoti­ating power. Codeswitchingis referred to here as shifting to different styles (casual, quasi-literary, and so on) and introducing shifts in vocabulary. For example, in the following excerpt from one of his television shows, Phil Donahue is interviewing a sociologist on the subject of police brutality:

Donahue: Ah why-why is it—why is it important to beat up a guy who's handcuffed? Wh—I don't understand the…sociological explanation for that kind of behaviour.

Sociologist: Ahm, I believe that the—that they did not recognize it as brutality (pause). That it's just their way of doing their job.

Donahue: And controlling people.

Sociologist: That's right.

Donahue: And if you don't get the upper hand 'right now, Buddy' (pause)

Sociologist: That's right.

Donahue: This guy is gonna get you.

Sociologist: That's right. Some people can only be controlled through fear and abuse. (5.24.81)

(Note: Italicized words represent switch to a casual style.) (Scotton, 1988, p. 199)

In her analysis, Scotton is concerned with what she terms "interactional power"— that is, "the extent to which a speaker shows her/himself off to advantage, in an interaction relative to other participants" (p. 199). This strategy might be effected through controlling the direction or sequence of the interaction (sometimes known as "controlling the floor") or the topics that are discussed. Another tech­nique for gaining interactional power might be emphasizing personal experience or expertise or calling other kinds of favorable attention to oneself. When code-switching takes place, argues Scotton, participants who have greater power because of their status usually do most of the switching; and such codeswitching is self-enhancing.

Date: 2015-12-24; view: 904