Sociolinguistics : Code Switching

CODE SWITCHING

Definition of Codes witching

Codes witching has been defined in a number of ways by different researchers over time, depending on the point of view of their study. Sometimes the terminology overlaps and sometimes the terminology is used differently by different researchers (Milroy and Myusken 1995: 12). From the 1970s onwards codes witching has evolved as one field of research with many publications and organizations (Kovács 2001: 62). However, although the growing amount of research has clarified many aspects of switching, it has also created a terminological jungle as every researcher tends to define the terms somewhat differently (Kovács 2001: 62). There has been an attempt to unify this terminological jungle in the 1990s by the ‘Network on Code-switching and Language Contact’ (funded by the European Science Foundation). However, this turned out to be an impossible task to do. (Milroy and Muysken 1995: 12.)

One example of the difficulties of defining seems to be the fact that the term codes witching’ itself is spelled differently by different researchers. The following spellings are used: code switching, code-switching and codes witching. This study will adopt the spelling ‘codeswitching’. Code switching can be defined as “the alternate use of two or more languages in the same utterance or conversation” (Grosjean 1982: 145). Myers-Scotton (1988: 157) describes codeswitching as the use of two or more languages in the same conversation without a noticeable phonological assimilation from one variety to the other. In general, one can say that a prerequisite for codeswitching is a juxtaposition of elements from two codes (Winford 2003: 103). Apart from two or more alternating languages, the term codeswitching has also been used about different styles within the same language, for example formal and informal speech between monolinguals, but in the field of bilingualism and multilingualism it is used to refer to the alternate uses of two languages (Romaine 1995: 170). This study acknowledges that codeswitching can be used by monolinguals when changing styles, but here it narrows down the scope of codeswitching as alternation between two languages, English and Finnish.

Codeswitching has been studied quite a lot. According to Bailey (2000: 165- 166), codeswitching research has focused on the following issues: 1) syntax, 2) discourse/conversation management functions and/or 3) more global social/metaphorical functions. Syntactic approaches to codeswitching focus on the linguistic factors constraining codeswitching, what kind of codeswitching is allowable. In contrast, social approaches, such as discourse management functions and social/metaphorical functions, have highlighted the multiple social and discursive functions of codeswitching (Bailey 2000: 166). These three different approaches to codeswitching research also demonstrate the two ways which are employed when studying codeswitching. These are a linguistic and a social approach (Winford 2003). Linguistic approach deals with a sentence, the attempt being to identify the linguistic principles and constraints that govern the production of codeswitched utterances (Winford 2003: 126).

The social approach focuses on the motives and social meanings of codeswitching. In that approach codeswitching is seen as a communicative event, codeswitching as happening between speakers. (Winford 2003: 125.) This study will adopt the social approach, as interaction in the language classroom can be seen as a communicative event; furthermore, the study will look at functions of codeswitching which can be seen as being part of the social approach.

Types of Codeswitching

Some researchers identify Blom and Gumperz’s categories of situational and metaphorical codeswitching as the types of codeswitching (Botztepe 2003: 11).Others consider their distinctions as the types of codeswitching (Merritt et al. 1992) although these types could also be considered as functions of codeswitching (see chapter 4.3). From these two references one can see that the writers do not always make a clear-cut distinction between types and functions of codeswitching. As this study explores both the functions and types of codeswitching, the use of these terms must be thought of carefully. Therefore, this study will base its categorization of codeswitching types on Poplack’s (1980) work. She identifies the following types: intra-sentential switching, inter-sentential switching and tag-switching, which is also called extrasentential switching by Milroy and Muysken (1995).

According to Poplack (1980), the first type of codeswitching is inter-sentential switching. It takes place between sentences, i.e. the switch occurs at a clause or sentence boundary where each clause or sentence is in a different language (Romaine 1995: 122). Furthermore, inter-sentential switching may take place between turns. This type of switching requires the least integration as codeswitching happens between sentences. An example of inter-sentential switching is from Poplack (1980): Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in Spanish y terminó en espanol. (Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in Spanish and finish it inSpanish.)

The second type of codeswitching is tag-switching, which requires only little integration of the two languages. Poplack (1980) uses the term tag-switching. In contrast, Milroy and Muysken (1995) employ the term extra-sentential switching or emblematic switching to refer to tag-switching. Poplack (1980) also uses the term extra-sentential switching, however, when using this term she refers to both tag-switching and inter-sentential switching. This is her way of separating them from intra-sentential switching. This study will follow Poplack and employ the term tag-switching instead of extra-sentential switching when talking about switches that are neither inter- nor intrasentential switches. Tag-switching involves inserting a tag in one language to an utterance which is otherwise in another language (Romaine 1995: 122).

According to Poplack (1980: 589), the insertion of a tag to an utterance has virtually no ramifications for the rest of the sentence. This is because tags have no syntactic constraints, they can be moved freely, and they can be inserted almost anywhere in a discourse without violating any grammatical rules (Poplack, 1980: 589). To take some English examples of tags: you know, you mean are tags, for instance, se sininen talo, you know (that blue house, you know).

The third type of codeswitching is intra-sentential codeswitching which requires a lot of integration and is usually associated with the most fluent bilinguals (Poplack 1980). Intra-sentential switching occurs within a sentence. As this is so, it also involves the greatest syntactic risk as words or phrases from another language are inserted into the first language within one sentence or utterance. As two languages are mixed within a sentence, there are also two different grammars in play which means that the speaker has to know both grammars in order to produce a grammatically correct utterance. Poplack (1980: 589) refers to this type of codeswitching as a more intimate type than inter-sentential switching since both the codeswitched segment and those around it must adapt to the underlying syntactic rules of the two languages. This is to say that the speaker needs to know the two grammars to avoid ungrammatical utterances. An example of intra-sentential switching between English and Spanish is from Poplack (1980: 589): Why make Carol SENTARSE ATRAS PA’QUE everybody has to move PA’QUE SE SALGA? (Why make Carol sit in the back so everybody has to move for her to get out?). Apart from mixing within clause or sentence boundary, intra-sentential switching can include mixing within word boundaries (Romaine 1995: 123).

For example, an English word may get a Finnish inflection as in simplekin where –kin is a Finnish inflection meaning ‘also’. Figure 1 shows the different types of codeswitching and the degree of language mixing in a sentence. One can see that in the first, inter-sentential switching, there is no codeswitching within a sentence but the two different languages are in different sentences or clauses (the two circles represent the two sentences or clauses). The second situation, tag-switching, has little switching within a sentence or a clause, but this codeswitching is usually a tag. The circles in the figure demonstrate this as the two interlocked circles comprise one sentence or clause where in the middle there is little codeswitching. In the third case, intrasentential switching, the amount of codeswitching is the greatest.

Function of Codeswitching

There are different categories of functions. As background information, the work of Gumperz (1982) on codeswitching and its functions will be introduced. Secondly, Auer’s (1995) functions of discourse-related and participant-related codeswitching will be introduced and their relevance to classroom research will be discussed. Gumperz and Auer base their research on naturally occurring everyday talk and institutional discourse. Merritt et al.’s (1992) and Canagarajah’s (1995) studies are looked at in more detail in this chapter as they study the functions and types of codeswitching in ESL classrooms and language classrooms.

Ø  Conversational functions of codeswitching

Gumperz (1982) talks about conversational codeswitching which he defines as “the juxtaposition within the same speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical systems or subsystems” (Gumperz 1982: 59). This means that two languages are codeswitched within one utterance or between utterances. Gumperz’s view on codeswitching differs from the views introduced above (chapter 2) as he focuses on the language use; codeswitching is seen as something happening in a conversation. As part of conversational codeswitching Gumperz (1982: 75-84) suggests a number of conversational functions of codeswitching. They are as follows: quotations, addressee specification, interjections, reiteration, message qualification and personalization versus objectivization.

Ø  Discourse-related and participant-related codeswitching

Auer is the pioneer in analysing codeswitching as an interactional phenomenon (Bailey 2000: 168). Furthermore, Auer (1995, 1998) ha s based his analysis of codeswitching on conversation analysis. A strong argument in Auer’s research is the fact that he has a sequential approach to codeswitching, according to him “any theory of conversational code-alternation is bound to fail if it does not take into account that the meaning of code-alternation depends in essential ways on its ‘sequential environment’” (Auer 1995: 116, inverted commas inthe original). In other words, the meaning of codeswitching has to be interpreted in relation to the preceding and following utterances.

Auer (1995: 120-121) even rejects the listings of conversational functions of codeswitching such as the ones by Gumperz above since the categories can be ill-defined, they do not bring the researchers any closer to a theory of codeswitching (i.e. why codeswitching may have a conversational function) and the listings imply that codeswitching has the same conversational status in both directions (i.e. from language A to language B and vice versa). In contrast, he offers a theory of the sequentiality of codeswitching as an answer to analysing codeswitching.

Ø  Functions of codeswitching in classrooms

Functions of codeswitching have also been studied in cla ssrooms. Most of this research has been conducted in a bilingual setting, i.e. the pupils encounter L2 in most if not all of their classes. For example, Merritt et al. (1992) have studied primary schools in Kenya and their aim was to make observations on how teachers used several languages during teaching and how they used codeswitching in the classrooms. Although the study was conducted in a bilingual setting, their results can be applied to foreign language classrooms as well since the findings described codeswitching in classrooms.

Another researcher, Canagarajah (1995), studied the functions of codeswitching in an ESL classroom in Jaffna, Sri Lanka. When Canagarajah’s study is compared to Merritt et al.’s, there seem to be similarities. Canagarajah describes various functions when Merritt et al. talk about different types of codeswitching. However, there seem to be similarities in these two studies. A comparison of these two studies shows that the types of codeswitching by one can be treated as functional categories by the other.

The Result of The Research in Terms of Types of Codeswitching in The Classroom and The Function if Codeswitching in The Classroom

The focus of this study will be on the interaction in the classroom; therefore all the participants in the classrooms will be looked at. I will not exclude some participants but analyse the situations as a whole. For instance, if the teacher has been speaking English but a pupil says something in Finnish to her, it is of interest how the teacher will react to this codeswitching, whether she will continue speaking in English or switch to Finnish.

The Function if Codeswitching in The Classroom

Ø  Inter-sentential codeswitching As suggested above, inter-sentential codeswitching occurs between sentences or clauses, or between turns. In the data this type of codeswitching is used in both secondary and upper secondary school when, for example, translating or explaining something (grammar, exercise etc.). Bo th the teachers and the pupils use inter-sentential codeswitching; furthermore, this type of codeswitching is used quite a lot in both secondary and upper secondary schools.

Ø  Tag-switching

Tag-switching means inserting a tag in one language to an utterance that is otherwise in another language. In classrooms this means that while speaking English the teacher or a pupil can insert a Finnish tag to the utterance, or vice versa. Furthermore, a tag can be moved freely in a sentence, they do not have syntactic constraints. Tag-switching occurs in secondary school, but there are only a few instances of it there. It is mostly employed by the pupils.

Ø  Intra-sentential codeswitching

Intra-sentential codeswitching occurs within a sentence. According to Poplack (1980), it requires a lot of integration and therefore it is only used by the most fluent bilinguals. However, I would argue that while Poplack’s view may be true of naturally occurring discourse, in classroom discourse there is intrasentential codeswitching although the participants are not all fluent bilinguals.

In the data this type of codeswitching occurs, for instance, when doing or checking exercises and teaching grammar and it is very common in those situations. Usually in those situations the base language is Finnish but the exercise or grammar examples are in English. I would treat those instances as intra-sentential codeswitching since the switching takes place within a sentence. The following examples will shed light on this matter.

Research Method and Analyzing in The Classroom

The method of the analysis is discourse analysis. First of all, discourse analysts are interested in discourse, whether spoken or written. In classroom research discourse analysis means the analysis of spoken language as used by the teacher and the pupils (Allwright and Bailey, 1991). Secondly, discourse analysts collect data by audio-recording or video-recording it and they transcribe the data. Thirdly, as part of discourse analysis I can introduce the issues of power or roles in my analysis when necessary.

There are two sets of data in this study, one is from the seventh grade in secondary school in Jyväskylä and the other is from upper secondary school in Jyväskylä the pupils being first year students there.2 From both of these I have chosen two 45-minute lessons, which are held right after one another. This means that the lessons are he ld in the same day; in the case of the seventh grade the pupils have a short break between lessons and in upper secondary school they do not have a break in between lessons. In other words the data consists of four 45-minute lessons.

The Research Problem Statement

There is still a lot one can study in the field of codeswitching in language classrooms. The present study answered the how – question, how codeswitching is employed in foreign language classrooms. It would also be important to know first hand from the teachers why codeswitching is employed. This would mean that besides observation, the teachers should be interviewed, and the basis for those interviews could be video-recorded lessons of the teachers. Furthermore, the present study focused on the micro-functions of codeswitching; therefore, it would be fascinating to investigate which macro- functions of codeswitching there are in EFL classrooms, i.e. to take into account language practices in the surrounding society and how it is visible in the teaching of English in Finland.

Yet another interesting area of research would be to study the phenomenon of borrowing in language classrooms, to make a detailed analysis on whether there is borrowing going on in classroom in addition to codeswitching. The present study indicated something of this sort in the form of hybrid forms; therefore, it would be fascinating to investigate it further. I think it is worthwhile to study codeswitching from different points of views in Finland since codeswitching is an everyday issue in most schools. However, it should not be randomly used since that will confuse the pupils, instead, the teachers should acknowledge their use of codeswitching and they should have a reason for employing it.