Le code-switch et les emprunts sont tous les deux des phénomènes linguistiques très courants parmi les communautés multilingues. Malgré le fait qu’il y ait eu beaucoup de recherche à propos de ces phénomènes, il existe deux aspects qui n’ont pas été explorés de manière satisfaisante. Premièrement, la distinction exacte entre le code-switch et l’emprunt, et, deuxièmement, le code-switch parmi les enfants. Plusieurs chercheurs proposent que la différence entre le code-switch et l’emprunt existe dans la phonologie : les emprunts d’une langue à une autre subissent des assimilations phonologiques selon la langue de cible. Si celle-ci est une distinction nécessaire des emprunts, cela ne veut pas dire qu’il est suffisant pour les distinguer du code-switch. Ceci amène plusieurs chercheurs à postuler que la différence cruciale entre le code-switch et l’emprunt est que ce premier est soumis à un ensemble de contraintes. Toutefois, la nature de ces contraintes varie beaucoup parmi les théories. Le code-switch dans les locuteurs bilingues jeunes est un outil idéal pour tester la validité des théories proposées : plusieurs chercheurs proposent qu’il existe un aspect développemental de ces contraintes, qui informe de manière importante sur la nature de l’acquisition du langage bilingue. La cible de ce travail est de répondre à deux questions cruciales. Tout d’abord, s’il existe bel et bien un aspect développemental des contraintes concernant le code-switch, et, deuxièmement, comment le code-switch des enfants peut informer sur l’usage de langues multiples, particulièrement concernant l’acquisition du langage bilingue. / Code-switching and borrowing are both highly common linguistic phenomena in multilingual communities. Whilst much research has been carried out on these phenomena, there are two aspects of them which have not been satisfactorily explored. Firstly, the exact distinction between code-switching and borrowing, and secondly, that of code-switching in children. Many researchers state that the difference between code-switching and borrowing lies in phonology: borrowings from another language assimilate to the phonology of the language in which they have been inserted. Whilst this may be a necessary distinction of borrowing, it may not be sufficient to distinguish it from code-switching. This has led to many researchers to propose that a key difference between code-switching and borrowing is that the former is subject to a set of constraints, though these differ greatly between theories. Code-switching behaviour of young bilingual children is ideal for testing the validity of these theories: many researchers argue that there is a developmental aspect to constraints acting upon children’s code-switching, which provides valuable insight into the nature of bilingual language acquisition. The aim of this thesis is therefore to answer two crucial questions. Firstly, if there does indeed exist a developmental aspect to constraints acting on children’s code-switching, and, secondly, what bilingual children’s code-switching can reveal about multiple language use, particularly with regards to bilingual language acquisition.

No description available.

This study discusses the evolutionist approach to African history as an action plan for challenging the hegemony of English in university education and in the teaching and writing of literature in post-independence Africa. The researcher selected Zimbabwe’s university education and literary practice as the microcosm case studies whilst Africa’s university education and literary practice in general, were used as macrocosmic case studies for the study. Some two universities: the Midlands State University and the Great Zimbabwe State University and some six academic departments from the two universities were on target. The researcher used questionnaires to access data from university students and lecturers and he used interviews to gather data from university departmental Chairpersons, scholars, fiction writers and stakeholders in organizations that deal with language growth and development in Zimbabwe. Data from questionnaires was analysed on the basis of numerical scores and percentage of responses. By virtue of its not being easily quantified, data from interviews was presented through capturing what each of the thirteen key informants said and was then analysed on the basis of the hegemonic theory that is proposed in this study. The research findings were discussed using: the evolutionist approach to the history of Africa; data from document analysis; information gathered through the use of the participant and observer technique and using examples from what happened and/or is still happening in the different African countries. The study established that the approaches which have so far been used to challenge the hegemony of English in post-independence Africa are not effective. The approaches are six in total. They are the essentialist, the assimilationist, the developmentalist, the code-switch, the multilingualist and the syncretic. They are ineffective since they are used in a wrong era: That era, is the era of Neocolonialism (Americanization of the world). Therefore, the researcher has recommended the use of the evolutionist approach to African history as a strategy for challenging the hegemony in question. The approach lobbies that, for Africa to successfully challenge that hegemony, she should first of all move her history from the era of Neocolonialism as she enters the era of Nationalism. / African Languages / D. Lit. et Phil. (African Languages)