自解嚴以來，台灣許多政治人物在公開場合發表談話中常將國語、台語交互使用，這種將不同語言互用的現象，在語言學上稱為「代號轉換」（codeswitching）。本研究目的旨在探討政治人物如何藉著國、台語交雜使用的情況來達到政治動員及滿足自我政治訴求之目的。 研究方法主要採用質化研究方法及文獻分析，並依以下步驟進行：蒐集與政治論述相關之資料、整理語料、並分析語料。結果顯示藉著分析政治人物的語言轉換使用，可以提供觀察台灣近年民主化過程中政治運作方式，並藉著分析語言的選擇，表達的方式與對象，進一步瞭解「愛國主義」、「本土化」或是「族群認同」等政治意識是如何藉著語言建構及表現在政治人物的語言使用與選擇之間，以遂其政治目的。

In this paper, we use speech samples from Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidates in the 1995 televised campaign to argue that language choice can be studied as an interpersonal management strategy and as part of a power struggle where different ethnic groups are fighting over power, resources and representation. We argue that a deft choice of language, i.e. either Mandarin or Tai-yu2 can highlight the tension and contention of the charged issues such as national identity. Taiwan’s colonial past, her uncertain political future vis-à-vis China and the increasing democratization further provide much of the needed aspiration for the debate of a national identity. The 1995 televised presidential campaign speeches by the DPP candidates provides an invaluable source for our approach not only because the 1996 presidential election is the first direct presidential election in Chinese history but also because the then opposition party, DPP has been seen as coming of age to contend with the Kuomingtang (KMT) for issues on national identities and Taiwan’s political future. We adopt Hall (1996)’s notion of identities as “constructed within, not outside, discourse. We need to understand them as produced in specific historical and institutional sites within specific discursive formations and practices by specific enunciatively strategies” (4). Moreover, they emerge within the play of specific modalities of power, and thus are more the product of the marking of difference and exclusion, than they are the sign of an identical, naturally constituted unity (4). In supporting these claims, I adopt Bakhtin’s notions of “translinguistics” and “dialogues” to help us see language as an ideological site where different voices contest each other for domination. Under this framework, the analysis of language choice can be seen as speakers trying to adopt opposing ideologies and admitting the possibility for dominance (Bakhtin 1981; Hill and Hill 1986). Situating individual use and choice of a language in a broader socio-political context will enhance our understanding of the relationship between ideologies of language and ideologies of the nation-state. The paper is structured into the following sections: 1) ambiguities in language choice; 2) studying codeswitching in a socio-political context; 3) language choice from colonialism to emerging democracy; 4) the changing meaning of becoming Taiwanese in Taiwan; 5) text and discussion; 6) conclusion.