Diglossia
Diglossia can be defined as the pattern of code or variety choice. It has been used both in narrow sense and in much broader sense. It has three criteria (in narrow and original sense) :
1. Two distinct varieties of the same language are used in the community, with one regarded as a high (H) variety and the other a low (L) variety.
2. Each variety is used for quite distinct functions; H and L complement each other.
3. No one uses the variety in everyday conversation.
H variety can be defined as a language that a nation used first and become like one of their culture. L variety can be defined as a language that used in a formal occasion. For example: A Germany speaks Swiss German in her everyday interactions with other Swiss German, but she use standard German in her office.
Attitudes towards the two codes in diglossia situation are complicated. People are generally admire the H variety. This attitude is reinforced by the fact that H variety is the one which is described and fixed or standardize in grammar books and dictionaries. However, attitudes to the L variety are varied and often ambivalent. In many countries L variety is used only locally, people may rate the variety very low indeed.
Diglossia is a characteristic of speech communities rather than individuals. Individuals may be bilingual. Societies or communities are diglossic. In other words, diglossia describes societal or institutionalized bilingualism, where two varieties are required to cover all the community’s domains.
Diglossia can be used in a boarder sense which give most weight to feature or criterion, the complementary functions of two varieties or codes in a community. Features are dispensed with and the term diglossia is generalized to cover any situation where two languages are used for different functions in a speech community, especially where one languages is used for H functions and the other for L functions. There is a division of a labour between the languages.
Diglossia has been described as stable situation. It is possible for two varieties to continue to exist side for centuries. But one variety may gradually displace the other.
Code-Switching or Code Mixing
Participants, solidarity and status
People sometimes switch code within a domain or social situation. When there is some obvious change in the situation, it is easy to explain the switch. A speaker may similarly switch to other language as a signal group membership and shared ethnicity with an addressee.
Switches motivated by the identity and relationship between participants often express a move along the solidarity. A switch may also reflect a change in the other dimensions, such as the status relations between people or the formality of their interaction.
Topic
Topic relates to the function dimension. For many bilingual certain kinds of referential content are more appropriately or more easily express on one language than the other.
Switching for affective function
Many bilingual or multilingual are adept at exploiting the rhetorical possibilities of their linguistics repertoire. Actually, it is not a simple case to choose code switching for the affective purpose.
Metaphorical Switching
Specific reason for switch can be identified with reasonable confidence. Though it would not be possible to predict when a switch will occur without knowing what the speaker intended to say next, it is often possible to account for switches after they have occurred.
Linguistic Constraints
Sociolinguistics who study the kind of rapid code-switching described in the previous section have been interested in identifying not only the functions or meaning of switches but also the points at which switches occur in utterances. Some believed there are very general rules for switching which apply to all switching behavior regardless of the codes or varieties involved. They are searching for universal constraints on switching. It has been suggested for examples of switches only occur within sentences at points where the grammars of both language match each
