|i.||in contrast to 'borrowing'|
|iii.||with indexical (or other discourse) function only, for instance indicating group membership or 'otherness' (in conversational analysis, in contrast to language switching).|
Ever since Haugen (1953) gave prominence to 'switching', it has been customary to differentiate between 'borrowing' (also called 'importation') and 'switching' (Haugen 1956: 50 actually worked with a trichotomy 'importation'/'integration'/'switching'). Gumperz (1964) introduced the term 'codeswitching' for switching with a discourse function (see below, section 5.2). However, over time it was employed increasingly for any kind of switching, irrespective of its functions. 'Code' there simply means 'language' or 'variety'. However, some conversation analysts (e.g. Alvarez-Caccámo 1998; Meeuwis and Blommaert 1998) have recently reclaimed the term and advocate making explicit the distinction between code-switching, where the code and the switch have emblematic meaning and discourse functions, and language or variety switching or alternation where the 'codes' and the 'switch' may not necessarily be communicatively meaningful. Meeuwis and Blommaert suggest that the 'codes' may not be two distinct languages but may be, for instance, two lects, one of which is mixed and one of which is not.