code switching malay language and english language
TRANSCRIPT
INTRODUCTION
Code switching is a common phenomenon in bilingual society. Crystal (1987)
says that code switching occurs when a speaker who is a bilingual alternates his or her
speech between two languages. People who code switching swapping their language to
another language that they know while they are speaking or writing
Myers-Scotton (1993) defines code switching as the selection by bilinguals of
forms from an embedded language (or languages) in utterances of a matrix language
during the same conversation. People who code switch have a matrix language in their
utterances. Usually, if the people have more knowledge on one code, the code will be the
matrix language and other code will be embedded into the matrix language.
Matrix language does not necessary be speakers own mother tongue. It can be any
language that speakers master. For example, Puan Halimahton is a migrant from
Malaysia to United Kingdom. Even though her first mother tongue is Malay language but
as she worked at United Kingdom for many years, her competency on English language
has increased. Therefore when she speaks, the matrix language would be English
language and sometimes she embeds Malay word.
The knowledge of utilizing two or more languages of bilingual society gives an
advantage to them to swap the language intra-sententially or inter-sententially on
different purposes. Bilingual people ought posses the knowledge of both languages
morpheme and syntax. This enables them to utilize the knowledge to achieve different
purposes such as to emphasize and to get conformation.
Code switching may be done consciously or unconsciously depending on context
and function. While chatting with friends, speakers may unconsciously code switching.
When an English teacher of standard 1 asks her students whether they understand the
lesson or not, she might be using inter-sentential code switching.
“Do you understand me? Faham tak?”
She consciously code switching so that the students would understand what she is
saying.
In our research, we focus on code-switching of Malay and English language. We
have narrowed down our research focus on these two languages only. Either Malay or
English language will become the matrix language and the other language will be
embedded into the matrix language. We predict that most of our participants which are
Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) students will code switch more as they are using
English in learning session and reading reference materials mostly in English. Our
participants are enrolling courses like Development Management, Hospitality and
Tourism, Accountancy, Economy and Teaching English for Young Learners (TEYL).
We are curious to investigate who code-switch more between male and female
and which word classes do code-switch occur more often. We also like to know in what
context and function do the participant code-switch. From these questions, we have
developed three research questions which are:
a) Is there a difference in the frequency in which men and women code-switch
during a conversation?
b) In what context ad function do they code-switch?
c) Which word classes do code switch occur most often?
Our data analysis and findings are based on these questions.
LITERATURE REVIEW
As a start, it is essential to define the notion of bilingualism and concentrate on
the primary feature of bilingual speech production, in which the research is concerned.
Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (1999, p.36) terms
bilingualism as “the use of at least two languages either by an individual or by a group
of speakers, such as the inhabitants of a particular region or a nation.” Bilingual
speakers have more linguistic resources at their disposal than do monolingual speakers.
Therefore, bilinguals often employ strategies for maximising the potential expressiveness
of their linguistic inventory.
When bilingual speakers communicate, they frequently integrate linguistic
material from both of their languages within the same discourse segment (Bonvillain,
2003). This linguistic process is widely known as ‘code switching’. From the
sociolinguists’ point of view, code switching (CS) is studied to understand why people
who are competent in two languages alternate languages in a particular conversation or
situation. Therefore, the concept of CS, as defined by Gumperz, 1973(cited in Dewaele
et. al, 2003), refers to the alternate use of two or more languages in the same utterance or
conversation. Another definition of code switching is the act of changing from one
language to another takes many forms associated with a certain mood of the speaker,
circumstances of speech production or the interlocutors being present (Richards and Platt,
1999).
Early research in this area has identified the types of CS and the factors affecting
it. More specifically, CS varies according to the situation (situational code switching) and
within a conversation (metaphorical code switching). Under the metaphorical category,
CS differs according to discourse function. For example, to include or exclude someone
from a conversation, to convey intimacy, or to emphasize a message.
“Gumperz’ (1982) seminal work lists six functions of code-switching: quotation (a
quote is code-switched), addressee specification (a code-switched message aims
at a particular/different addressee), interjection (an interjection is code-
switched), repetition (a code-switched message repeats what has just been said),
message qualification (i.e. a code-switched message elaborates what has been
said), personification or objectification (a code-switched message implies a
“personal’ or “objective” tone).”
(cited in Journal of Conversational code switching and Relevance Theory)
According to Nancy Bonvillain (2003), code switching has a variety of linguistic
and interactional functions, such as emphasizing, marking discourse boundaries,
expressing emotions or opinions, and signaling in-group/out-group membership that can
have simple uses in expanding vocabulary. As a sentence produced by a bilingual may
begin in one language and finish in another, phrases from both tongues often succeed in
an apparently random order. The use of more accessible word may depend on speakers’
linguistic abilities in their two languages or momentary lapses of memory.
METHODOLOGY
The data for the research were collected from UUM students. A total of 15
respondents comprise of students from different courses such as Hospitality and Tourism,
Development Management, Accountancy, Economy and TEYL participated in the
research.
In approaching the participant to get the data during informal situation, we initiate
a conversation by greeting them and start talking about any matters. We do not utter any
English word at first as this will influence the participant utterance. We secretly record
the conversation by putting the recorder nearby us so that the record would be clear.
Sometimes when people ask are we recording their conversation, we have to pretend that
we are not recording and giving other excuses.
However in formal situation like meeting, discussion and meeting, we record the
conversation from far as not to interrupt the flow of the discussion. Recording formal
situation is easier than informal situation as we do not have to initiate the conversation.
This is because when we try to converse, there is a tendency to speak English to
encourage them to code-switch.
After that, we jot down the details of time, situation, styles, principal speaker and
language in a language diary. Usually we fill in the language diary after we get back to
our room as we do not usually carry around language diary with us.
After we have collected all the recordings, we transcribed the recordings using
Sony Fesorge and Express Scribe. Later we printed the transcription and start analyzing
the data. First we analyzed how much male and female code switch, we bracketed the
code switch that appear and count them. Second, we figured out what is the function of
code switching that appears in female and male transcription. Third we highlighted
English word that falls under the word classes of adjectives, nouns, adverb, verb and
pronoun and we counted the frequency.
.
FINDINGS
We have collected eight samples of recorded conversation among UUM students.
We divided the data into two general aspects which according to gender (male and
female) and to two different contexts (formal and informal situation). These aspects are
later analysed in order to obtain the frequency of both men and women code-switch
during a conversation and to know in what context and function do they code-switched.
The data consists of four formal conversations and another half is in informal
context. Within these contexts, we separated both formal and informal conversation into
two different genders. i.e. two of formal and informal male speakers and same goes to the
female speakers. All recordings took approximately 20 minutes of conversation. These
divisions of data collection are made particularly to avoid gender biasness and imbalance
of data.
Based on analysis of the data collections, we discovered that there is a big
difference in the frequency of male and female speakers code-switching during the
discourse. The results in Table 1 show that 77.5 percents of female speakers have a
tendency to code-switch during the conversation. Since their matrix language is a Malay
language, they switched to English mostly at the word level. It is probably because lacks
of equivalent word in Malay language. The words such as ‘empowerment’, ‘restrictive’
and ‘privileged card’ can be good examples of this probable reason. However, only 22.5
percents of male speakers tend to switch the language. In contrast to female speakers,
men used more tag switching in both contexts; otherwise, they inclined to use full Malay
or English language during their speech.
FREQUENCY OF MEN AND WOMEN CODE SWITCH
Table 1
Next, we examined the data based on our second research question which is to
identify whether formal or informal context encountered most frequent language
switching and the functions underlying this code-switch. Surprisingly, the results in the
following Table 2 show that most of UUM students used code-switching regularly in
formal context such as discussion and meeting compared to informal context. This is
probably because the teaching materials that have been provided in the formal discussion
77.5%
22.5%
are taken from English references. Therefore, the students may be employing a word
from one language in sequences spoken in another because the latter lacks a comparable
word expressing the desired meaning. As a result, they decided on using simple lexical
existence in their linguistic abilities.
CONTEXT OF CODE-SWITCHING
Table 2
In sequence to the previous analysis, there are various functions of code-switching
among UUM students. From our data analysis, we managed to discover three common
functions which are to emphasize, to get confirmation, and to express affective feelings.
The following excerpts are examples of each functions identified among UUM students.
To emphasize:
1. Speaker A : Kalau takde driver, aku jadi driver, I CAN BE THE DRIVER.
(Speaker A indicates that she can be a bus driver if there is no bus driver for a
trip)
2. Speaker B : Sebab kita memang TOTALLY penat
(Speaker B wants to emphasize the trip is going to be tiring. Instead of using the
word ‘memang’, she stressed the tone by adding English word ‘totally’)
76.3%
23.7%%
To get confirmation:
Speaker 3: Eh, Fitness Club tak leh ke?Speaker 2: Ada ke Fitness Club?Speaker 3: Ade!
To express affective feelings:
Speaker 2: Saya tak campur. I don’t care what their problem because I don’t care. That’s not my problem, you know why?
(Speaker 2 annoyed with the problem that involving his friend)
Speaker 3: Woi, tengah watpe? Dengar cerita Lai accident eh?Speaker 1: Accident?! Are you serious? Betul ke ni?Speaker 2: Ha? Dia macam mana sekarang ni? Is he ok?(Speaker 2 expressed his concern towards his friend who is involved in the
accident)
Last but not least, we also analysed the occurrence of code-switching in word
classes. We focused on noun, pronoun, adjective, verb and adverb in order to know the
most significant word class in code-switching. The results indicate that 63.8 percents of
code-switching occurs in Noun, 19.4 percents in Verb, 9.3 percents in Adjective, while
less than 8 percents occur in Adverb and Pronoun. Therefore, the most common part of
speech that UUM students tend to code-switch is the Noun. It is probably because the
Noun covers a large proportion of English word classes so this is the reason why the
students used it during the conversation. The following example is extracted from
stretches of speech made by our respondents:
5.3%
Speaker 3: Kenapa amik Kelab DiRaja?
Speaker 2: Xde contoh je. Kalau Country Club biasanya Golf
Country..Kalau dekat Terengganukan ada ape...Terengganu
Country Club kot..Tu milik Sultan Mizan..Tu maybe kita leh
masukkan dalam Sports and Outdoor Club tapi tak ingatla dia
punya full name.. Country.. Ade tak Country Club kat mana-
mana your hometown ke?
Speaker 5: Kat Kedah memang ade….Emm Harvard..
THE OCCURRENCE OF CODE-SWITCHINGIN WORD CLASSES
Table 3
19.4%
9.3%
63.8%
63.8%
DISCUSSION
Even though our participants receive their tertiary education in English but still
they are not able to utilize it outside the class. The finding on what context and function
do code switch occur the most reveal that 76.3% of code switching happen in formal
situation like meeting, discussion and presentation whereas only 23.7% of code switching
occur in informal situation.
This is because maybe the participants are encouraged to use full English or code
switching more in formal situation as the classroom environment is conducive for the
participants to use English. A conducive environment here refers to no friends will laugh
or giving negative remarks as they code switch.
However, during informal situation, not many people code switch as speakers
may receive negative comments and remarks from other people. As Holmes states that
reactions to code-switching styles are negative in many communities, despite the fact that
proficiency in intra-sentential code-switching requires good control of both codes. Others
may see people who code switch are stuck up and damaging the language by mixing it
with other language.
CONCLUSION
Based on our research findings, we can conclude that women code-switch more
often than men because from our point of view, they probably have more linguistic
inventories of the two languages as they view both as an important language in tertiary
learning.
The most frequent part of speech that UUM students are likely to switch is the
Noun. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, Noun is one of the large proportions of
word classes used in daily conversation. Therefore, they are probably having a tendency
to use it in their speech if they cannot find the suitable word in Malay language.
UUM students have a propensity to use code-switching in two different contexts
such as discussions, meeting and informal conversations. The frequent use of code-
switching during formal situation might be the influences of the English references
provided by the lecturer or the existences of linguistics abilities within the speaker’s
itself. Since conversation constitutes a major part of human interaction, code switching
may serve a new dimension towards linguistics choices as it promotes different functions
for expressing affective purposes.
REFERENCES
Bonvillain, N. (2003). Language, Culture, and Communication: The Meaning of
Messages (4th Ed.). United States of America: Pearson Education, Inc.
Deweale, J.M., Housen, A. & Li Wei. (2003). Bilingualism: Beyond Basic Principles.
Great Britain: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Holmes, J. (2001). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (2nd Ed.). Malaysia: Pearson
Education Limited.
Milroy, L. (1987). Observing and Analysing Natural Language. Great Britain: Basil
Blackwell Inc.
Musyken, P. (2000). Bilingual Speech: A Typology of Code-Mixing. United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press.
Myers-Scotton, C. (1993). Social Motivations for code-switching. Evidence from Africa.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
JOURNAL:
Journal of Conversational code switching and Relevance Theory by Brian, Hok-Shing,
Chan (Refer Appendices)