Linguistic discreteness and its variable expressions in multilingualism

Abstract

Aims and Objectives/Purpose/Research Questions: The aim of this research is to critically examine the concept of linguistic discreteness in multilingual practices, responding to contemporary debates that question the existence of languages as separate entities. We present a range of empirical data to demonstrate the theoretical necessity of maintaining the concept of language as discrete system in understanding multilingual practices. The research questions focus on how linguistic discreteness manifests in multilingual repertoires and the role it plays in the production and comprehension of the complexes of nuances of social-indexical meanings. Data, Methodology, Approach: This paper is a small-scale meta-analysis. The database comprises a diverse collection of empirical examples of code-switching drawn from documented studies, inter-personal interactions, media content, and linguistic landscapes. The research adopts a qualitative methodological approach to show creative, social-indexical uses of languages in multilingual contexts. Data and Analysis: Drawing from a range of empirical sources, this paper provides evidence to claim that multilingual repertoires do indeed exhibit discrete linguistic-epistemic inventories that are recruited routinely in complex ways in the production and comprehension of referential and social- indexical meanings. Findings/Conclusions: The key finding is that mobility of linguistic resources do not erase discreteness; in fact, it is precisely in the movement of various mobile resources where the discreteness of codes, or language “archives,” become significantly relevant in meaning-making. Originality: The paper reinforces the significance of linguistic discreteness through the synthesis of diverse examples to argue for the necessity of discrete linguistic systems in multilingualism studies. Significance/Implications: This paper underscores the persistent relevance of discrete linguistic systems in multilingual practices that facilitates complex meaning-making processes, enabling speakers to navigate and articulate social and referential meanings effectively. Methodologically, the research advocates for a nuanced analysis that recognizes the complexity and specificity of linguistic resources. Limitations: One limitation is the analytic focus, which does not capture the emic perspective of the speakers in multilingual practices.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.