Explore the vast range of titles available.

It is quite commonplace for bilingual speakers to use two or more languages, dialects or varieties in the same conversation, without any apparent effort. The phenomenon, known as code-switching, has become a major focus of attention in linguistics. This concise and original study explores how, when and where code-switching occurs. Drawing on a diverse range of examples from medieval manuscripts to rap music, novels to advertisements, emails to political speeches, and above all everyday conversation, it argues that code-switching can only be properly understood if we study it from a variety of perspectives. It shows how sociolinguistic, psycholinguistic, grammatical and developmental aspects of code-switching are all interdependent, and findings in each area are crucial to others. Breaking down barriers across the discipline of linguistics, this pioneering book confronts fundamental questions about what a 'native language' is, and whether languages can be meaningfully studied outside of the individuals who use them.

This paper argues that thesociolinguistic backgroundis a relevant part of literary analysis, especially inmultilingualsettings.Twentieth- and twenty-first-centurywriters in Alsace (e.g.Arp, Vigée, Weckmann) have continued to deploy atrilingualrepertoire (French, German, Alsatian Dialect), characteristic of this area's literature for centuries. Strategiclanguage choices, code-switching, andself-translationcharacterize their work and give it a sense ofidentity. But sociolinguistic surveys show that knowledge of Alsatian and German is declining in Alsace; this trilingual output is therefore the swansong of a dying breed.

Code‐switching is one of the most striking aspects of language contact to the observer. It provides the clearest synchronic evidence that contact is occurring, both in societies and for individuals. This chapter discusses how code‐switching fits in with other manifestations and outcomes of contact, including borrowing and translanguaging on the one hand, and language change and shift on the other. Code‐switching can embody different types of significance within a contact situation, from accommodation to divergence and from language maintenance to language shift. It is found alongside pidginization and creolization/decreolization in many parts of the world, and contributes to the process of convergence of different varieties. A significant locus of language contact nowadays is that of online writing. Different varieties interact online as well as in speech, and much recent research on code‐switching focuses on its use in social media.

This article will review the parameters of a grammatical variable within the putative variety ‘Multicultural Paris French’, i.e. its distribution and use within a group of young banlieue speakers. The structure in question stands out as it has rarely been found in previous corpora in France: indirect questions following verbs like savoir, where the question word is post-verb (je sais pas il a dit quoi). We discuss which groups use the new forms in Paris, referring briefly to some comparable changes in London. This structure appears to be an instance of ‘change from below’ (Labov, 2007), which seems to have emerged in the speech of young people of immigrant background. It might also, on the other hand, be a long-standing vernacular variant, which has re-emerged, with specific identity-related significance, in this particular group of speakers. Its exceptional character in the Paris context highlights a lack of evidence for the emergence of a more wide-ranging, distinct multiethnolect, as found in London and other European capitals.

The papers in this Special Issue present some of the results of the Multicultural London English/Multicultural Paris French project, supported by the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) from October 2010 to December 2014 and by the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) from 2010–2012. The project compared language variation and change in multilingual areas of London and Paris, focusing on the language of young people of recent immigrant origin as well as that of young people whose families had lived in London or Paris for many generations. Similar projects in other European cities have documented the emergence of new ways of speaking and rapid language change in the dominant ‘host’ language, which are attributed to the direct and indirect effects of language contact; see, for example, Wiese 2009 on young people's language in Berlin, Quist 2008 on youth language in Copenhagen, and Svendsen and Røyneland 2008 on Norwegian). In London, young children from diverse linguistic backgrounds tend to acquire English in their peer groups at nursery school rather than from their parents, many of whom do not speak English or are in the early stages of learning English. Since their peers speak a wide range of different languages, the only language the young children have in common is English; and since many of their friends are also acquiring English, there is no clear target model, a high tolerance of linguistic variation, and plenty of scope for linguistic innovation. By the time they reach adolescence, young people's English has stabilized, and many innovations have become part of a new London dialect, now known as Multicultural London English (Cheshire et al., 2013). New urban dialects and language practices such as these have been termed ‘multiethnolects’: they contain a variable repertoire of innovative phonetic, grammatical, and discourse-pragmatic features. In multiethnic peer groups, where local children from many different linguistic backgrounds grow up together, the innovative features are used by speakers of all ethnicities, including those of local descent such as, in London, young monolingual English speakers from Cockney families. Nevertheless they tend to be more frequent in the speech of bilingual young people of recent immigrant origin, and by young speakers with highly multiethnic friendship groups (see further Quist 2008 for an account of the use of features associated with a multiethnolect in conjunction with nonlinguistic ‘markers’ of style, such as tastes in music and preferred ways of dressing). Our project aimed to determine whether a similar outcome had occurred in multicultural areas of Paris.

[...]the different sounds of a new language can be used as material for poetical rhyme. (ii) Artists can represent multilingualism, real or fictional, just as one can represent any other characteristic of an individual or a group; they may also use it to index or symbolise various types of contrast inherent in those individuals. (iii) The use of different varieties may carry a political or social message, as for example when writers in formerly colonial settings choose to write in creole despite the fact that they are therefore seriously limiting their potential audience. [...]as a pointer for future work, a few general points can be made about the connections between linguistic and artistic multilingualism and multiculturalism.

In this paper the letters of bilingual artists are proposed as a new source of evidence for understanding the relationship of bilinguality with individual identity. This approach is first situated within a more qualitative tradition in sociolinguistics, which allows the speaker’s individuality to be understood in more depth. Thanks to having two modes of expression, linguistic and artistic, bimodal bilinguals provide new insights into the impact of being immersed in a new culture and language. A sample of the correspondence of two 19th century bicultural and bilingual artists, Lucien Pissarro and Vincent van Gogh, is analysed. Comparisons are made between their linguistic style, especially their code-switching, and their biculturality as manifested in the artistic field. Their works, like their use of language, show the intermingling of influences of their culture of origin and that of their adoption. It is suggested on the basis of this study that investigating bimodal bilingualism may provide a bridge to help us understand the connections between language, identities and the way different cultural experiences are brought together.

We report on a survey of language attitudes carried out as part of a project comparing youth language in Paris and London.1 As in similar studies carried out in London (Cheshire et al., 2008), Berlin (Wiese, 2009) and elsewhere (Boyd et al., 2015), the focus was on features considered typical of ‘contemporary urban vernaculars’ (Rampton, 2015). The respondents were pupils aged 15–18 in two secondary schools in a working-class northern suburb of Paris. The survey included (1) a written questionnaire containing examples of features potentially undergoing change in contemporary French; (2) an analysis of reactions to extracts from the project data: participants were asked to comment on the speakers and the features identified. Quantitative analysis had shown that some of these features are more widespread than others and are used by certain categories of speaker more than others (Gardner-Chloros and Secova, this volume). This study provides a qualitative dimension, showing that different features have different degrees of perceptual salience and acceptability. It demonstrates that youth varieties do not involve characteristic features being used as a ‘package’, and that such changes interact in a complex manner with attitudinal factors. The study also provides material for reflection on the role of attitude studies within sociolinguistic surveys.