Although a number of descriptive and predictive factors have been identified as significant in relation to language shift, a straight-forward search for the causes of language shift and maintenance has been unsuccessful. Several scholars have developed theoretical or empirical models to describe language maintenance and shift and have more or less presented these models as applicable universally. In the light of data from a language shift situation, this paper will explore the validity of two models namely, ‘Perceived Benefit Model’ and ‘Network Analysis’. The paper will demonstrate  that because of the diversity of the range of variables and their relative values in different social and cultural contexts, it is not possible to develop a mathematical formula which has the predictive power for something as complex as language maintenance and viability. The paper will conclude that in the absence of a single universally accepted paradigm for the consideration of language maintenance and language shift, the researchers should combine different models to suit the requirements of the language situation that they intend to study.

Asif, S. I. (2005a) Siraiki: A sociolinguistic study of Language Desertion. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Lancaster University.

Asif, S. I. (2005b)  Shame: A major cause of Language Desertion. Journal of Research (Faculty of Language & Islamic Studies), BZU, Multan, 8: 1-13

Asif, S. I. (2005c) Siraiki language practices and changing patterns of language usage. ELF Research Journal, Shah Abdul Latif University, Khairpur, 4: 85-101.

Clyne, M. (1991) Community Languages: The Australian Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

David, K. M. (ed.) (2002) Methodological and Analytical Issues in Language Shift Studies. Frankfurt: Peter Lang Pub Inc.

Dorian, N. (1981) Language Death: The Life Cycle of a Scottish Gaelic Dialect. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 

Edwards 1994 Edwards, J. (ed.) (1984) Linguistic Minorities, Policies and Pluralism. New York: Academic Press.

Fasold, R. (1984) The Sociolinguistics of Society. Oxford: Blackwell.

Fishman, J. A. (1965) Who speaks which language to whom and when? Linguistique, 2: 67-88.

Gal, S. (1979) Language Shift: Social Determinants of Linguistic Change in Bilingual Austria. New York: Academic Press.

Gal, S. (1996) Language shift. In Goebl, et al. (eds.) Contact Linguistics Vol 1 (pp. 586-93). Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter.

Hill, J. and Hill, K. (1986) Speaking Mexicano: Dynamics of Syncretic Language in Central Mexico. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Karen, M. E. (2000) Motivations: language vitality assessments using the perceived benefit model of language shift. In Kindell, G. and Lewis, P. (eds.) Assessing Ethnolinguistic Vitality: Theory and Practice (pp.65-77). Dallas: SIL International.

Karen, M. E. and Stalder, J. (2000) Assessing motivations: techniques for researching the motivations behind language choice. In Kindell, G. and Lewis, P. (eds.) Assessing Ethnolinguistic Vitality: Theory and Practice (pp.189-205). Dallas: SIL International.

Kulick, D. (1992) Language Shift and Cultural Reproduction: Socialization, Self, and Syncretism in a Papua New Guinean Village. Cambridge; New York; Victoria: Cambridge University Press.

Li Wei (1994) Three Generations, Two Languages, One Family: Language Choice and Language Shift in a Chinese Community in Britain. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.

Li Wei (1996) Network analysis. In Goebl, et al. (eds.) Contact Linguistics Vol. 1 (pp. 805-11). Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter. 

Li, Wei and Milroy, L. (2003) Markets, hierarchies and networks in language maintenance and language shift. In Dewaele, J., Housen, A. and Li Wei (eds.) Bilingualism: Beyond Basic Principles (pp.128-140). Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.

Nijmegan, K. (1996) Language loss. In Goebl, et. al. (eds.) Contact Linguistics Vol 1 (pp. 579-85). Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter.