We also have to remember that rhetorical theory teaches that audience iscritical to understanding how languages are used. The three books under reviewonly nominally deliberate on the role of the reader in written codeswitching,a gap that needs to be filled. Future scholarship has to account for the ques-tion of reception, or how codeswitched texts are read and the ethics of suchreadings. Skillful writing encodes multiple layers of information and rhetoricalappeals into texts to facilitate the communication and interpretation of suchworks. Audiences, for their part, grant authority to the writer before they evenengage with the logic of an utterance. “Indeed,” Gilyard reminds us, “writ-ing is largely an exercise in creating the listener” (119). However, the take onwritten codeswitching as rhetorical practices by these books does foregrounda holistic approach to writing that includes both the production and receptionaspect of texts, and thereby asks the kinds of questions which will inevitablylead to greater scholarly, pedagogical, and theoretical development of the field

transculturation

medium of written codeswitching (paper notebooks, the internet, writing itself,etc.) is important to understand the message and that written codeswitchingfundamentally differs from oral varieties.

codeswitching on paper exhibitsa “fluidity in language and script choice, interferences between languages anda degree of code-mixing... [as well as] a sense of norms and genres”

What is needed is critical literature that studies codeswitching in writtendiscourse as thoroughly as that which has been developed for the oral formsof the phenomenon.

n True to the Language Game, Keith Gilyard questions the efficacy of“code-switching pedagogy,” stating that there are “no reputable studiesdemonstrating that speech varieties translate neatly into writing varieties, nopossibility that teachers can teach appropriateness” (129). He concludes hiscriticisms with calls for a reevaluation of the term “code” in the context ofits sociolinguistic origins. He also highlights a striking assumption by com-position as a field: that we have prematurely adopted a pedagogy developedthrough research on spoken language varieties without assessing its appli-cability for written discourse. This questions the field’s implicit marking ofcodeswitching1 as unconventional and illegitimate. At best, writing teacherssay codeswitching is acceptable in community exchanges but not in profes-sional or high stakes settings

manipulate their literacy and language repertoires to express,communicate, and make gains through writing, using multilingual practices to accomplish what they need with writing. The potential of recognizing these practicesis great: When multilingual writers are allowed to draw on these resources in theirwriting, they express sharp insight into culture and language, are hyperaware ofaudience, articulate similarities and differences among writing styles in multiplelanguages, and often write themselves into new intellectual and professi

I feel like if I can't write it's a lot of things inside me, a lot offeelings that I can't, um, I can't send them to other people, you know. 'Cause, uh,I find myself when I'm writing.

Faridah reveals her developed literate repertoire when she explains that she's"more comfortable writing" in multiple languages than speaking them. She sayssuch a preference for writing gives her time to decide "why I am using this word,this is what I mean from this word." She says that in Arabic "a word has manymeanings. And you can choose this word and maybe it can make this person really mad. You cannot use another word that has the same meaning to make himhappy."

understanding literate activityis understanding how we "constantly make our worlds—the ways we select from,(re)structure, fiddle with, and transform the material and social world we inhabit,

languages are activities, somethingwe do rather than something we deploy.

Meanwhile, linguistic and literate multiplicity has been depicted as a matter ofmovement: Suresh Canagarajah (2006) suggests multilingual writers are "shuttling"among their languages as they write; Ilene Crawford (2010) theorizes rhetoric "asthe study and practice of movement" in order to treat "both roots and routes ascomplex compositions of physical, emotional, and intellectual movement"

"It is now widely conceded that human motion is definitive of social life more often than it is exceptional in our contemporary world"

of Ms. Rosa Peveryday pedagogidismantle t

e. Check out the following sho

We all code mesh.

Here is an abridgedin re

ation but must adialects, b

ey straight trippin.

n uncritical habit of mind that justifies ineq-uity ... by accepting the existing order of things as given ... a form ofracism that tacitly accepts dominant White norms and privileges." (135)

is what it is'" (PAG

because of her work with the NA