What is the difference between code switching and translanguaging

Before reading your article, I thought that these concepts mostly bring threats to the purity of the speech. However, there are some significant benefits that translanguaging and code-switching possess.

I hope that for our society these concepts will impact only in a positive way. Although, applying them in every day language practice should be consciously limited to keep each language repertoire. Like Liked by 1 person. Like Like. You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Google account.

You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. Share this: Twitter Facebook.

Like this: Like Loading To any person knowledgeable enough to define a word by recognizing the affixes attached to a root word, they will immediately say that the previous description of code switching is basically translanguaging, because of the prefix trans- , meaning across, over, and beyond, plus the root word language, which is commonly understood as autonomous named language.

But translanguaging does not follow this logic. The use of -ing embodies the notion that language must not be considered as a named entity independent of people and society. Instead, translanguaging puts forward that language is a practice dependent on people and society, and therefore is a verb. This leads us to defining translanguaging as a practice not only of bilingual and multilingual speakers, but of all people and of all societies.

Likewise, instead of starting from a common and very abstract idea of the existence of named languages, translanguaging starts from viewing the reality that the speech of a bilingual or multilingual speaker is a product of how this speaker works out a set of linguistic features, also known as their linguistic repertoire or idiolect.

This linguistic repertoire refers to all the vocabularies, grammar features, and even pronunciations and accents that a speaker has already acquired from their various encounters as a social being.

From the speaker's perspective, however, these linguistic features are not separated and divided. In simple words, a bilingual or multilingual speaker uses all of their linguistic knowledge; they do not separate these into autonomous, structured, and separate named languages, but regard all of these together as handy tools to make meaning and sense. This is a great article. Thank you for taking the time to write it. Serious academic stuff aside, these signs not just really interesting, but really funny.

Makes you chuckle at the cleverness when you see them. Trying to explain it in English never does it justice. Thanks again for explaining it. Thank you for the article, It covers a lot of important and often neglected aspect of communication through language: to embrace diversity and to transfer identity and interpersonal connections.

Your article sums-up all of these aspects brilliantly. Applied Linguistics Applied Linguistics publishes research into language with relevance to real-world problems. Read More. Translanguaging In contrast, is not an object or a thing-in-itself to identify and analyse; it is a process of meaning- and sense-making. A couple of years ago, I spotted this sign during a morning stroll, in Chungyuan, Taiwan.

Image credit: Sign courtesy of Li Wei. Subscribe to the OUPblog via email: Our Privacy Policy sets out how Oxford University Press handles your personal information, and your rights to object to your personal information being used for marketing to you or being processed as part of our business activities. Recent Comments. Bhim Gautam 11 th May