emails of 100 Sinhala-English language hybrids. The degree of ... frequent use of code-switching in emails of Sinhala-English bilinguals while statistically ...
CODE-SWITCHING IN EMAILS An Exploration of the Use of Code-switching in Emails of Sinhala-English Language Hybrids
R.M. Chitra Jayathilake
Department of Linguistics Faculty of Post Graduate Studies University of Kelaniya 2010
Student No.FGS/LING/MA/08/125 i
CODE-SWITCHING IN EMAILS
ii
Abstract English language was initially bestowed to a minority group of Sri Lankans due to British colonial invasion during pre-independence. Because of its pivotal significance as the International language and as the avenue for social, political and educational mobility and so on, English language education was introduced in the country after independence, exposing a majority of Sri Lankans to English language. Later, English language was given the status of the link language in the country adding official significance to it. Currently, the advancement of Science and technology in the country also directs Sri Lankans to be exposed to English language. Consequently, today, many Sri Lankans are language hybrids: they use, in different degrees, at least two languages - one of the National languages (Sinhala or Tamil) and the link language. This language hybridism has created a mushrooming offshoot in society named code-switching. Today, code-switching in oral communication has been highly frequent even on some media like television and radio channels, although it is less frequent in written discourses. However, it is currently observed that even in written media, people tend to code-switch, perhaps with the help of technology. Thus, the use of code-switching in written medium necessitates exploration. Accordingly, this study sought to explore the use of code-switching in Sinhala- English bilinguals’ emails as emailing is a main medium to code-switch in written discourses. This thesis, with its five chapters unveils the study. The first chapter will commence making a cursory view of the term bilingualism because code-switching – the broad sociolinguistic phenomenon explored in the study – is an outcome of bilingualism. A subsequent portion of this chapter is allocated to present the significance of the current research area and the need of the study before introducing and justifying the corpora selected for the research. Then, objectives derived from the broad research question will also be presented in this section. The second chapter offers a review of the literature on language codeswitching, including historical and contemporary views concerning its existence and development. Hence, it will set out by delineating the relevant terminology and explaining the concerns related to this broad concept named code-switching. Then it is dedicated to reviewing and defining the literature and to a discussion of the major findings of the existing research on code-switching and possible reasons for discrepancies in the findings. In addition, some research studies on code-switching, particularly in written discourses, will also be examined in the review. The third chapter presents the methodology employed in this study which explored the position of code-switching used in emails of Sinhala-English bilinguals. Employing a survey method, through a questionnaire, data were collected of 150 emails of 100 Sinhala-English language hybrids. The degree of code-switching in emails, the correlation of code-switching to recipients and subjects matter were explored in the study. The data were observed and statistically measured using Chisquire method. This chapter also presents the limitations of the study while disclosing the steps taken to address the ethical issues and attempts made to control extraneous variables in the study.
iii
Results are discussed in the forth chapter The findings give evidence to the frequent use of code-switching in emails of Sinhala-English bilinguals while statistically exploring the correlation between code-switching and recipients and subject matter of emails. The thesis while identifying the limitations of the study and implications for future research concludes suggesting the steps to be taken to develop Sri Lankan’s bilingual continua as the use of code-switching is being mushroomed in written media, as evident through the exploration of emails in this study.
iv
Acknowledgements I am deeply grateful to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and the Department of Linguistics of the University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka for the introduction of this Degree programme, MA in Linguistics.
I must also acknowledge my gratitude to the supervisor of this study, Professor Tissa Jayewardene for his insightful comments on this study and thesis.
An expression of thankfulness is extended to all the academic members of the Department of Linguistics for their commitment towards the MA programme.
My sincere gratitude is also extended to the colleague who assisted me in the statistical analyses of the data collected in this study.
v
The Table of Contents Page No. Declaration
ii
Abstract
iii
Acknowledgement
iv
List of Tables
vii
List of Figures
viii
The Table of Contents
ix
Chapter One – Introduction
1
1.1. Overview
1
1.2. A Brief Overview of the Use of English Language in Sri Lanka
1
1.3. Bilingualism
3
1.4. Attitudes towards Switching Codes
7
1.5. The Nature of the Problem
8
1.6. Corpora of Choice: Emails
11
1.7. The Operational Definition: Code-switching
11
1.8. Research Questions
12
1.9. Objectives of the Study
12
1.10. Summary
14
vi
Chapter Two – Literature Review
15
2.1. Code-switching
15
2.1.1. Codes
15
2.1.2. Definitions of Code-switching
16
2.2. Types of Code-switching
17
2.3. Some Perspectives on Code-switching
19
2.4. Functions of Code-switching in Oral Discourses
23
2.5. Code-switching in Written Discourses
25
2. 6. Summary of the Literature Review
29
Chapter Three – Methodology
30
3.1. Research Questions
30
3.2. Research Method
30
3.2.1. Piloting the Design
30
3.2.2. Fine-tuned Design
31
3.2.2.1. Introduction and Justification of the E-mail Survey Design 3.2.3. Participants
31 32
3.2.4. Procedure
33
3.2.5. Research Instruments
34
3.3. Data Collection
35
vii
3.3.1 Questionnaire and the Questions Employed in Semi-structured Interview
35
3.4. Data Analysis
36
3.5. Ethical Issues
38
3.6. Controlling Extraneous Variables
39
3.7. Limitations
40
Chapter Four – Results and Discussion
42
4.1. Description of the Participants
42
4.2. Choice of Language in Emails
45
4.3. The Relationship between the Language Choice and the Relationship to the Recipients
50
4.4. The Relationship between the Language Choice and the Subject of the Emails
53
4.5. Language Functions in Code-switching
55
4.6. Overall View of the Findings
57
Chapter Five – Conclusion
58
5.1. A Brief Summary of the Study
58
5.2. Pedagogical Implications
58
viii
5.3. Future Research
59
Appendix A: The First Email used in Selecting participants
61
Appendix B : The Second Email used in Selecting participants Appendix C : A Blank Questionnaire Used in Collecting Data
63
Appendix D – H : Five Forms of Completed Questionnaire
67
Bibliography
87
ix
List of Tables Table 1: Characteristics of the Participants. Table 1.1: Gender Table 1.2 : Age Table 1.3: Position
Table 2: Choice of Language in Emails
Table 3: Language choice of the email received and the reply
Table 4: The relationship between the language choice and the relationship
to the recipients
Table 5: The relationship between the language choice and the subject of the email
x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Language choice in emails- Amount
Figure 2: Language choice in emails- Percentage
xi
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 1.1. Overview This chapter serves as a preamble to the research for it briefly presents the background and the purpose of the study while exploring the broad research area to be examined in the study. Thus, the chapter will commence making a cursory view of the use of English language in Sri Lanka: it will briefly present the use of English language in the past and in the present. The
term bilingualism will also be explored briefly because
code-switching – the broad sociolinguistic phenomenon explored in the study – is an outcome of bilingualism. A subsequent portion of this chapter is allocated to present the significance of the research area and the need of the study before introducing and justifying the corpora selected for the research. Then, objectives derived from the broad research question will also be presented in this section before concluding the chapter.
1.2. A Brief Overview of the Use of English Language in Sri Lankai Sri Lankans were initially exposed to English language during the British colonial presence in Sri Lanka from 1796 to 1948. During that period, as English was the language of administration in the country used by the British Empire, some local administrators of the country had to use English language. Thus, during that time, political elite of Sri Lankans
i The information given in this section about the use of English Language in Sri Lanka is based on the researcher’s general understanding of the history of the country
1
were exposed to English language. Later in 1831, Colebrook Commission in Sri Lanka introduced some recommendations for the organization of the Education System in the country. According to this commission, English language was given much significance. For instance, English was made the medium of instruction in all the schools except in vernacular schools: English educated youths were given government white-collar jobs. As a consequence, during that period, even the social elite of society - a minority group of Sri Lankans- started using English language. For this minority group of Sri Lankans, English was both the language of education and communication. In the meantime, the majority of the ordinary people who obtained their school education in vernacular schools had no or little access and knowledge to English language; they used one of the national languages – Sinhala or Tamil - for their communication and as the medium of education. Thus, English language was used only among a minority elite group of Sri Lankans in the era of pre-independence. Even after independence in 1948, English continued to be the language of administration, and the language of the elite. However, due to a political decision in 1956, English language ceased to be the official language of the country although the elite minority continued to use English language for their communication and education. In the meantime, with the implementation of free education policy in the country in late 1940s, English was taught in all state-run schools from Grade III onwards, making all school children exposed to English while a National language was used as the medium of instruction. However, despite this free English education in the country, the use of English language was not popular among the majority of the ordinary people: English language education was not successful among the majority of Sri Lankans. Only the minority group of elite people continued to use
2
English language for communication and education. One reason for the limited use of English language among the majority could be attributed to the negative attitudes created towards English language, perhaps as retaliation against British colonialism. The use of English language was, thus, infrequent among the majority of people until early 1990s: it was common only among the political and social elite of the country.
But, due to the significance given to English language as the link language of the country, as the international language and as the easiest access to knowledge, social mobility and the world, the use of English language has become very popular even among the majority of Sri Lankans, during the past two decades. Further, with the advancement of technology and diverse avenues of English education, many Sri Lankans attempt to use English language. Thus, many Sri Lankans, especially the ordinary majority group of people, use English language in different degrees, in addition to their national languages, for communication purposes. Accordingly, Sri Lankans’ mode of communication is not limited to a single language but expanded to an amalgam of two or three languages – Sinhala, Tamil and English.
1.3. Bilingualism The term bilingualism is used in diverse ways in society: generally, bilingualism is used to refer to human beings’ ability to use two languages: it is considered as ability gained being exposed to two languages. Linguistically, bilingualism is mainly viewed in two different ways: for some, it means an equal ability to communicate in two languages: for others, it is the ability to communicate in two languages, but with greater skills in one language. In fact, it is common that many bilinguals are
3
dominant in one language than in the other language. Thus, taking a moderate aspect, bilingualism can be basically defined as the ability to communicate naturally and fluently in more than one language in language contexts.
Currently, more than two third of the entire world-population is thought to be bilingual or multilingual – the ability to use more than two languages. Majority of the world community is exposed to at least to two languages, presumably to one’s national language and to the international language which functions as the link language among different communities across the world. There are two predominant perspectives on the nature of bilingualism – fractional and holistic (Reyes (n.d.) para2-5): the fractional view describes bilinguals as two monolinguals in one person while the holistic view, (Grosjean, 1982 as quoted in Reyes: 2003), explains that each bilingual is a unique individual integrating knowledge of both languages to create a linguistic component which functions independently of each other language. According to this holistic viewpoint, the total of the two languages is great as its interaction with each other language enhances the role of each.
As defined previously, a person may be equally fluent in both languages, or s/he may be more fluent in one language than in the other language. Some argue, in general sense, that one must be equally fluent in both the languages to be identified as a bilingual where as some others argue that if a person is simply capable in communicating in two languages, s/he is a bilingual This controversial rebuttal in identifying a bilingual person perhaps, then, results in modifying the term, bilingualism,
4
as bilingual continuum which explains the constantly changing nature of the degree of bilingualism.
The cause for this bilingual continuum may be attributed to the degree of exposure to each language. That is, some individuals may be simultaneous bilinguals (Reyes (n.d.) paras 2-5) who are simultaneously exposed to two languages since their babyhood or childhood while others may be sequential bilinguals who receive the exposure to their native language before acquiring the second language( Reyes (n.d.) paras 2-5). For instance, a Sri Lankan child from the social elite group may be a simultaneous bilingual as s/he may have been exposed to both Sinhala and English since his/her babyhood: a Sri Lankan who learns English later in his/her life, after s/he has already mastered Sinhala would be identified as a sequential bilingual. Simultaneous bilinguals may have an equal ability to communicate in both the languages while sequential bilinguals may be dominant in communicating in one language than in the other. In addition to these simultaneous and sequential bilinguals, there may be some others who may comprehend both languages well but unable to produce anything in the Second Languagei. In other words, they are receptive bilinguals: their listening and reading skills are good in the Second Language although they do not produce any language element in speaking or in writing in the Second Language. Accordingly, it is obvious that the ability to employ each language may not be equal in many individuals: it may be difficult to identify balanced bilinguals who can employ both the languages with identical capability. Thus, this imbalanced bilingualism results in creating different levels of bilingualism based on the degree of it.
i
A language an individual learns later in his/.her life, after s/he has acquired the mother tongue is identified as Second Language.
5
Perhaps due to this imbalanced degree of bilingualism among the majority of people in society, the attitude towards the employment of two languages has been two-fold: on the one hand, it has been considered as something of a remarkable language achievement. Thus, bilingualism, whatever the degree is, considered as an asset to an individual: it can, moreover, be considered the language property of a society. On the other hand, contrary to this positive attitude towards bilingualism, there exist some negative views on it as well. For instances, bilinguals are not properly skilled in any language; it is only partly believed that children exposed to bilingual speech communities outshine the children raised in monolingual
societies,
in
their
expression
and
originality
in
communication. The other view is that mixing the two languages may have negative educational consequences in children as well.
Nonetheless, the existence of bilingual or multilingual societies creates a number of socio-cultural and political issues regarding the choice of a language. In this vein, the issues such as “what is the language to be used as the medium of instruction in educational contexts, at school levels and at tertiary levels?”, what language should be used in media such as television and radio?”, “ what is beneficial to be used at home?”, what is appropriate for publication? , what language is good for judiciary and parliamentary affairs? , and so forth are raised. These language issues may create dispute in language policy and management in countries as well.
The debate over language choice for communication in bilingual or monolingual societies such as Sri Lanka and India seems so far centered on three main facets. Accordingly, three
alternative practices frequently
focussed have been, (i)to strict to one language, perhaps the language of the majority and the powerful, completely ignoring the use of another language;(ii) to give translated versions of the same discourse in all the
6
languages concerned, and (iii)
to use
bilingual or multilingual
communication within the same discourse.
One method of bilingual or multilingual communication can basically be identified as code-switchingi : (despite the fact that this term is written both as two separate words and as one hyphenated word, this study restricts to use the term as a hyphenated word to maintain consistency, unless otherwise
specified).
Code-switching
is,
hence,
an
outcome
of
bilingualism. That is, individuals becoming fluent bilinguals may tend to be language hybridsii due to their overlapping competences in the two languages (this term code-switching will be delineated in detail in the following chapter - Literature Review.): one way in manifesting this language hybridism is using two languages (code-switching) in the same discourse.
1.4. Attitudes towards Switching Codes In the past, and to some extent even today, switching from one code to another in communication was pejoratively considered as a substandard mode of communication, used frequently by people who are not fluent in the languages. Benson (2001: pp23-25) supports this view stating that historically code-switching was employed by individuals who possessed inferior intelligence levels or a low mastery of a Second Language. Although tradition of language usage concerned code-switching as an
i
It is my personal preference to write the term code-switching as a hyphenated word, without any space after the free morpheme code. A practice I will generally follow throughout this paper. Original spelling will be preserved in quotations and when paraphrasing scholars who routinely use an alternate form. ii
Although this word –hybrid – is currently used with negative connotation in some contexts, it is objectively used in this essay to indicate persons of mixed language varieties.
7
inferior language phenomenon, speech communitiesi have normally been switching codes in discourse: using two languages in same communication gradually increased perhaps due to people’s gradual exposure to different languages; switching codes in same communication has rapidly been increasing perhaps due to people’s attitudinal change towards it. Presently, the attitude towards code-switching is changed.
The attitude towards code-switching, today is not totally negative but twofold: it is either considered as a skilled code which can be employed effectively or as an inferior mode of communication which destroys the norms of both or all the languages concerned. Being positive about the concept of code-switching, Becker (1997: pp3-.5) explores that codeswitching is currently considered to be an indicator of “bilingual ability” rather than merely a demonstration of language deficiency. However, even today to some extent, the negative view towards it is prevalent in society.
1.5. The Nature of the Problem Whatever the attitudes have been towards code-switching, language observers would have undoubtedly noticed that using two languages in the same discourse has become a regular, common phenomenon in society, particularly in oral production of language. Today, it is excessively used on some popular, mushrooming television and radio channels of both local and foreign services. To quote just some instancesii, in a local television channel, the compeer is observed saying “api dan yanne wasare i
A speech community simply means a group of people, either homogeneous or heterogeneous, who regularly interact by speaking. ii These are some observation protocols, recorded by the researcher during the period of 2009 to October of 2010.
8
janapriyama geetha ahannai. ^wms oeka hkafka jif¾ ckm%shu .S;h wykakhs - we are now ready to listen to the most popular song of the year) So hurry up guys. Sms ekak ikmanata send karanna (tia tï tia tlla blaukg send lrkak $ send a text message (SMS) soon)”. On another International channel on television, it is observed that both Hindi and English languages are frequently used. Not only on media, but even in teaching contexts either at school level or at tertiary level education in Sri Lanka, it is noticed that code-switching is being promoted with the introduction of English medium instruction in education. To quote another instance, while promoting a type of English education among Sri Lankans , an audio-visual advertisement is presented as “ there is no meKs (pani) in company…”All these instances give evidence that using two languages in the same discourse, in communication, especially in speaking, has been a common phenomenon in Sri Lanka.
Today, it is noticed that even in written discourses, particularly in semiformal written correspondence, also this phenomenon of codeswitching appears. This is highly common in the commercial world, especially in written advertisements. An extreme end in this regard is noticed, on some name boards of shops such as “cynvrella” “Hermitage fol ”i and the like. The advancement of technology, perhaps may have promoted this type of language variation within the same discourse. In short text messages sent with the help of the facility called Short Messages Service (SMS) through mobile, wireless phones also code-switching is used in abundance today.
Code-switching in its oral production has generally been researched, devoting attention to its form, meaning, and grammatical patterns. i
Do
9
However, very little research focuses on code-switching in writing, irrespective of the fact that code-switching in written production is also used among language hybrids. The degree of code-switching in its written production is not identical to the degree of its oral production. But, there is a gradual trend to switch codes in written discourses as well: this trend seems to be identical to the previous degree of the use of oral codeswitching. Thus, it is doubtful whether the degree of code-switching in written discourses exceeds the degree of its oral production with the use of technology used for written discourses.
This issue necessitates reviewing literature and research on codeswitching further, focussing on written code-switching: the issue of codeswitching in written discourses is needed to be explored referring to samples of all the genres, of code-switched written discourses. However, this study narrows its exploration to emails mainly due to feasibility aspects of time duration. Thus, this study takes a look at a series of cases of code-switching involving Sinhala- English bilinguals in their emails in an attempt to take a step in the less-investigated area of Sinhala-English written code-switching. It is generally observed that Sinhala – English bilinguals sometimes code-switch in emails. For instance, email users of Sinhala-English hybrids either use the alphabet of English to write in Sinhala (as in “Eka Marai”i - tal
udrhs
-
to indicate “It’s
wonderful”) or use Sinhala fonts to write Sinhala words when writing in English. Thus, the degree of code-switching in emails and its relationship to the recipient and the subject matter of emails need to be explored.
i
Refer to footnote numbers iv and v.
10
1.6. Corporai of Choice: Emails E-mail meaning Electronic Mail is the same as a letter, but is exchanged in a different way by creating an account with an Internet Service Provider such as Yahoo, Google and so on for any written correspondence, be it formal or informal; be it personal or official. According to a Q3 (2007) market update from Radicati Group the number of e-mail users worldwide will grow from 1.2 billion in 2007 to 1.6 billion in 2011, at an average annual growth rate of 7 percent over the next four years. Supporting that, it is also said that, by 2008, the Yahoo Company alone has served 260 million email users. Thus, it is obvious that E-mail is a widely popular mode of communication in the world: it is also becoming excessively frequent among Sri Lankans, especially among Sri Lankans who display at least a fair degree of exposure to English language. E-mail correspondence is becoming popular in Sri Lanka perhaps due to the rapid demand of computer technology in all fields related to education, business, culture, politics and the like. Thus, researching the usage of language in emails would be useful for any concern related to Linguistics, particularly to Sociolinguistics.
1.7. The Operational Definition: Code-switching It is necessary to create an operational definition of the term codeswitching for this study, as the term in general is viewed in diverse ways (The term and its related issues will be delineated in the next chapter in detail). Hence, exploring the feasibility aspects of the study also, the term i
Corpora (singular word is corpus) are a body of spoken or written texts available for analysis..
11
code-switching defined for the study is “the use of two languages- Sinhala and English, irrespective of diverse varieties within the language, in the same discourse”. To be specific, the operational definition of codeswitching is the alternative use of Sinhala and English languages within the same discourse.
1.8. Research Questions As stated, the overall purpose of this study is to examine the use of code switching in emails employed by bilinguals of Sinhala and English users of language. The following research question will be explored in this study.
A three-ply question would be posed in the study. First, the study would examine whether bilingual individuals (Sinhala and English) would frequently switch codes when involved in writing emails: the degree of the use of code-switching in emails would be explored, in this vein. Then, whether code-switching is related to the recipients is explored. Thirdly, the relationship between code-switching
and the subject matter of emails
would be searched.
1.9. Objectives of the Study As previously stated, this research aims to examine a series of instances of code switching involving Sinhala and English bilinguals in their emails, with a view to initiate an exploration in the less-investigated area of Sinhala-English written code-switching, in emails. This exploration would
12
be useful in reviewing the two-fold attitude towards the use of codeswitching and the role played in code-switching in emails, broadly in written discourses.
The objectives of this study are originated from the research questions initially presented and created with a view to contribute to any language policy in the country. The study examines the use of code switching in emails among bilingual speakers of English and Sinhala languages, in terms of the degree of code switching in emails, correlation of codeswitching to email recipients and subject matter. To word the objectives in other words:
to determine the use of code-switching in emails among bilinguals of English and Sinhala languages, verifying the degree of code switching in emails among bilinguals of English and Sinhala languages
to determine if there is any relationship between code-switching and recipients of emails.
to determine if there is any relationship between code-switching and subject of emails.
13
1.10. Summary Language hybridism is a common phenomenon in Sri Lanka due to Sri Lankans’ exposure to their National languages and to the link language, English. One result of language hybridism in the country is code-switching among people: code-switching has been mushrooming in oral media, even in semi formal dialogues as particularly evident on some television and radio programmes. Perhaps considering oral code-switching as a precedent, people seem to switch codes even in written media, especially in media where technology is highly used for communication. Although oral code-switching has been researched, there is an inadequacy of research on written codeswitching. These necessitate research on code-switching in written media as it would contribute to any language policy in the country. Accordingly, this study is designed to research the use of code-switching in emails of Sinhala-English bilinguals.
14
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Code-switching As previously stated, code-switching can be defined as the concurrent use of more than one language in the same discourse in communication. Although the term code-switching is briefly introduced in the proceeding chapter for the purpose of the introduction of the study, it is imperative to define the term code before comprehensively delineating the term, codeswitching.
2.1.1. Codes Sociolinguists (for instance, Gumperz, 1982; Trudgill, 1983; Hudson, 1996) define the term code as any identifiable speech variety, including both a particular language and a particular variety of a language. That is, according to these sociolinguists, for instance, both Sinhala Language and English language are two codes while they also consider two varieties of the English language such as the Liverpool variety and the Yorkshire varietyi to be two different codes. Further, the regional varieties of Sinhala language such as the downsouth variety and the upcountry variety can be considered as two different codes. Hence, according to Sociolinguistics’ point of view, there can be multifarious number of codes in a world. However, the general identification of the term code, in colloquial sense, is confined to a language such as Sinhala, Tamil or English.
i
Two different dialects (language varieties) of English language used in UK.
15
2.1.2. Definitions of Code-switching The term – code-switching – has been defined in diverse ways. As Gumperz (1982) defines, code-switching is “the juxtaposition within the same speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical systems or subsystems” (p. 59). Thus, according to Grumperz’s definition, different languages such as English, Tamil and Sinhala could be identified as grammatical systems and varieties within each of these languages can be considered as grammatical subsystems. For instance, Sinhala language is a grammatical system while the down-south variety of Sinhala is a grammatical subsystem. Trudgill(1983) explicates code-switching as “switching from one language variety to another when the situation demands”(p. 75) while Myers-Scotton (1988) describes it as “the use of any two or more linguistic varieties in the same conversation, whether they are different languages, styles, or dialects” (p. 201). Myers-Scotton seems to clarify Grumperz’s brief explanation of “grammatical systems or subsystems’(p.59). Hudson (1996) explains it stating that “anyone who speaks more than one language chooses between them according to circumstances (p. 51). Numan and Carter (2001) also briefly define the term as “a phenomenon of switching from one language to another in the same discourse” (p.275). Nilep (2006: para 2) states that code-switching is a practice of parties in discourse to signal changes in context by using alternate grammatical systems or subsystems, or codes. All these definitions presented during the era of 1982 to 2006 indicate that definitions and explanations are more or less the same: code-switching is changing back and forth between two language codes, in a single discourse. However, general understanding is that if two or more languages (not varieties of the same
16
language) are alternated between any given discourses, it is code-switching. Simply put, code-switching can be defined as the alternation of languages in the same discourse.
2.2. Types of Code-switching Since the origin of the language phenomenon – bilingualism -, researchers have been identifying diverse branches or types of code-switching, introducing terminology to refer to them. These types of code-switching are usually based on the degree of code-switching and contexts of code-switching. Hence, it is imperative to introduce them before exploring the existent literature on codeswitching. There are two types of code-switching according to Blom and Gumperz’s (1972: pp.407-434) classification: these two researchers have distinguished two types of code-switching such as situational code switching and metaphorical code switching. If a change occurs due to the change in the language situation, that is a situational code-switch. To word it differently, situational code-switching is related to a change in situation or language context. For instance, if a new participant joins an activity, often changing the conversation topic or setting, code-switching may occur and that type is delineated as situational code switching. Metaphorical code-switching, on the other hand, is a conversational strategy to enhance or ease conversational acts such as elaborations, clarifications, requests, denials or topic shifts. As stated, although the term metaphorical code-switching is introduced in 1972, Gumperz (1982: pp59-99) has re-named it as conversational code-switching.
In the meantime, Benson (2001: p 25) has shown that code-switching has also been referred to as codemixing, codeshifting, language alternation, 17
language mixture and language switching. However, some other sociolinguists make a distinction between code-switching and code-mixing: according to them, all instances of alternation of languages are not code-switching. For example, Sridhar and Sridhar (1980 pp.407-434) and Halmari (1997: pp 1-24.) explicate that code-switching and code-mixing refer to intersentential and intrasentential language alternation, respectively. That is, code-mixing can be understood as the switching of codes that occurs within sentences: usually code-mixing occurs at the level of words or idiomatic expressions. However, if any changes occur beyond the level of a single sentence, they are identified as instances of code-switching. As McKay and Hornberger, (1996) state codemixing can be employed at every level of lexical and syntactic structure by bilinguals.
Code-mixing must also be distinguished from borrowing for borrowings are generally used to fill lexical gaps by monolinguals, while code-mixing and code-switching are not employed to fill gaps by monolinguals. A very good example of a word recently borrowed by Sinhala monolinguals is Tsunami from Japanese language, while the word Baila and karoke were borrowed by the Sri Lankans formerly. These three words seem completely assimilated into the usage of Sinhala unlike the instances of code-switching and code-mixing: that is, mixed elements such as code-mixing and code-switching often retain features of the donor language (Gibbons, 1987).Exploring the phenomenon of borrowing, Hudson (1996) states that: …borrowing involves mixing the systems themselves, because an item is ‘borrowed’ from one language to become part of the other language. Everyday example abound – words for foods, plants, institutions, music and so on , which most people can recognize as borrowings ( or Loan words), and for which even they can name the source language ( p. 55).
18
To round up, researchers have identified different versions of language hybridism, using diverse terms such as code-switching, code-mixing, intrasentential and the like. Although they may slightly vary in their definitions, all these terms are offshoots of bilingualism. It can also be assumed that the practice of code-switching may not indicate language deficiency. As many researchers also state (for instance, Heller, 1988; Schieffelin, 1994; Reyes, 2004) code-switching may not signify a shortage of language knowledge rather, serves a communicative role in conversation.
2.3. Some Perspectives on Code-switching While defining the term code-switching, researchers have presented diverse viewpoints on the phenomenon, code-switching. Their points of views are mostly focussed on the use of code-switching, in relation to social, emotional or linguistic status of speakers.
According to Gal (1979):
Differences between speakers occur in part because linguistic features can assume social significance, symbolizing the statuses and values of the subgroups with which they are associated. They can, therefore, be used by speakers in “impression management” (p. 5).
While Gal expounds the term in relation to social status, Lipsky (1985) relates code-switching to emotional status of speakers. Lipsky supports his/her standpoint mentioning that “in the United States Hispanic communities it is usually a shift from English to Spanish which conveys the subtle insinuation of favors, since Spanish is felt to be ‘closer to the heart’” (p. 13). ). Heller’s (1988) perspective is related to linguistic claim: Heller claims that “code 19
switching provides a clear example of the ways in which individuals draw on their linguistic resources to signal changes in the different aspects of context which they wish to foreground, to make salient…” (p. 10).
Additionally, while Foley (1997), Myers-Scotton (1993a) and Siegel (1995) explain that the use of code-switching often reflects the social or cultural identities of the speakers, Kroskrity (1993), Nishimura(1995) and Woolard (1989) explicate that the switch to a particular language in bilingual discourse can also be used to signal ethnic identity. Pease-Alvarez and Vasquez (1994) clarify that this relationship between language choice and ethnicity is especially prevalent among language-minority children in the U.S. However, it is doubtful whether this correlation between language choice and ethnicity is frequent only in individuals of language-minority because both individuals of language-majority and language-minority in Sri Lanka, that is, Sinhalese and Tamils, seemingly frequent to code-switch, as evidenced in Sri Lankan language contexts. According to Becker (1997), “[B]ilinguals use codeswitching as a way to emphasize a particular message by creating situations that force the addressee to interpret their language switch” (p.12). Becker also claims that code-switching is employed by bilinguals to “indicate a shift in discourse modes, e.g. from narration to comment or from assertion to question” (p. 13). Becker (1997) further expounds that “[C]odeswitches are often triggered by unconscious factors and consequently, bilingual speakers are often unaware of their spontaneous alternation between languages” (p.8). That is, individuals tend to code-switch either consciously or unconsciously.
It is noteworthy to examine here that if an individual code-switches unconsciously, that individual, perhaps, should have acquired the language elements also subconsciously or s/he, perhaps, should have been a
20
simultaneous bilingual rather than a sequential bilingual. Becker (1997: p. 8) classifies unconsciously motivated code-switches to three categories such as (i) code-switches that result from a momentary inclination during the production stage of speech. (ii) code- switches that are triggered due to the frequent exposure of such items in other language (iii) code-switches due to the untranslatability of a given item into another language. Becker’s’ three types of unconscious code-switching can be described in other words. Accordingly, unconscious code-switches occur due to preference, habitual use or inability in translation. In the meantime, Becker (1997) explains the category called conscious code-switching as “by consciously switching from one language to another, the bilingual sends a signal to the addressee to search for additional meaning [italics added] beyond the content of the message” (p. 15). That is, if an individual needs to clarify certain language elements further, s/he may take a conscious attempt by code-switching. However, the instances commonly observed in mushrooming media channels may not be classified under either category. For instance, some code-switches neither produce any additional information, nor do they signify as speakers’ unconscious attempts in codeswitching. Perhaps, this conscious category of code-switching can be explained in relation to Trudgill’s view, according to Trudgill, “speakers switch to manipulate or influence or define the situation as they wish, and to convey nuances of meaning and personal intention” (2000:105). Based on this perspective, it can be hypothesized that code switching is used for self expression by modifying language for the sake of personal purposes. Quite parallel to Becker’s (1997, as quoted in Shin, 2010: pp 95-100) conscious-unconscious classification of code-switching, while focussing on the social
motivation
of
code-switching
in
a
research,
Myers-Scotton
(1993.b:pp199-211) differentiates between unmarked and marked uses of language. Unmarked is the conventional type of code-switching where as marked is the unexpected type of code-switching. When linguistic choices are
21
expected in the speech community, code-switching is classified as the unmarked: the choice is determined by the social context and situational factors outside the content of particular communication. When speakers switch languages unexpectedly ignoring social factors or other institutional constraints affecting linguistic choices, those instances are classified as marked codeswitching. The parallelism in these two categorizations - consciousunconscious and marked-unmarked – is that the first category is based on the speaker’s intention where as the latter classification is founded on the linguistic contexts or the setting of the discourse. In other words, the consciousunconscious category is a speaker-oriented classification while the markedunmarked category is a situation-oriented classification. Since they both refer to both intentional and unintentional attempts, there are ,to a certain extent, parallel perspectives.
In the meantime, Auer (1995) also introduces another classification: Auer distinguishes between participant-related and discourse-related codeswitching (p.115-127). The former is motivated by the language preferences, or the participants’ competences, and the latter plays a role in structuring conversational acts including turn-taking and repair. Auer’s categorization seems quite similar to Myers-Scotton‘s (1993) marked-unmarked classification of code-switching. However, in contrast to Myers-Scotton‘s (1993) perspective, Auer (1998) shows that in the model suggested by Myers-Scotton (1993), one must assume the appropriate choice of language for the occasion before any unexpected language choice could be interpreted (p.27). Thus, Auer (1998) suggests that code-switching is a conversational activity: it should be contextually analyzed.
In sum, reviewing the diverse perspectives presented by researchers, it is noted that their perspectives are not consistent, even though they have explored the phenomenon of code-switching in relation to how, when and why
22
code switching is used. What is significant from the perspectives is that almost all the researches have focused on functions of code-switching in different domains.
2.4. Functions of Code-switching in Oral Discourses Researches have been conducted on functions of code-switching, focussing on oral discourses, mostly of oral discourses in classroom contexts and generally on spoken discourses in informal language contexts. All the findings are mostly based on Sociolinguistics, Linguistics or Pragmatic functions and variations of language. Although Zentella (1997) states that “pinpointing the purpose of each code switch is a task as fraught with difficulty as imputing the reasons for a monolingual’s choice of one synonym over another, and no complete accounting may ever be possible” (99), sociolinguists have pointed out a number of different socio-pragmatic functions of code-switching since the introduction of the term code-switching. Among the number of motives identified for the switching from one language to another, some highly significant factors identified are reviewed below. According to Crystal (1987: pp.365-367) compensation for the speaker’s language deficiency, solidarity among the speakers and their desire to express particular attitudes are some main reasons for code-switching in oral discourses. Accordingly, a speaker may speak in the other language for a while, if s/he is physically or emotionally not comfortable due to any deficiency in language caused due to distress, tiredness or distraction encountered by him/her. Crystal’s (1987: 365) view that solidarity of speakers also plays a main role in code-switching can be justified as it is obvious in
23
speech communities: however, it is not only solidarity; interrelated with this solidarity aspect is power exercised among members of speech communities. Thus, both power and solidarity among speakers may be two inter-related sociolinguistic phenomena for speakers to switch codes. That is, on the one hand, if a listener wishes to express high solidarity with a particular social group in developing rapport s/he may respond with a similar switch. On the other hand, if a speaker wishes to maintain high power and to exclude others from a conversation s/he may also switch codes. An example of such a situation may be in a domestic context when the family members need to exclude domestic servants from a conversation and to maintain a degree of comfort and power. Eldridge (1996: 306) explores the functions of classroom codeswitching as equivalence, floor-holding, reiteration, and conflict control. If students use native equivalents of a certain lexical item in target language and therefore switch code to their native tongue, it is identified as equivalence. This process can be explained in relation to the deficiency in linguistic competence of target language. If a student avoids gaps in communication by code-switching, the function is identified as floor-holding mechanism. Eldridge(1996)
explains the function of reiteration in code-switching
explaining that “messages are reinforced, emphasized, or clarified where the message has already been transmitted in one code, but not understood” (306).
Inadequacy of culturally equivalent lexis for some expressions among the native language and target language perhaps leads to violation of the intended meaning , thus to misunderstandings and misinterpretation. Code-switching is employed, according to Eldridge, to avoid these types of conflicts in language usage.
24
Supporting Eldridge’s view, Skiba (1997: paras 2-4) suggests that in the instances where code switching is used due to an inability of expression, it serves for continuity in speech instead of presenting interference in language. That is, code-switching used in shortage of language elements functions to maintain the floor of discourse, thus, to sustain cohesion of the discourse. In this regard, code-switching functions as a supporting phenomenon in communication of information and in social interaction. Therefore, codeswitching may serve for communicative purposes in the way that it is used as a tool for transference of meaning.
In the meantime, Mattson and Burenhult (1999:61) have identified functions of code-switching in classroom contexts and named them as topic switch, affective functions, and repetitive functions. Accordingly, in topic switch cases, the teacher alters his/her language according to the topic that is under discussion in classroom. Affective functions are the expressions of emotions used by the teacher to build solidarity and intimate rapport with the students. Code-switching would function as repetitions made by the teacher to transfer the necessary knowledge with further clarity.
Valdés-Fallis(1988: pp. 111-39), McClure(1981: pp.69-94), Gumperz, (1982: 59-99)and a few others categorized the functions under the topics such as direct quotations, emphasis, clarification or elaboration, focus/topic and so on. In the meantime, Zentella (1997:99) distinguishes three main categories of communicative strategies accomplished by code-switching: they are footing, clarification, and crutch-like mixes.
Trudgill (2000:p. 105)) explains that people switch codes to manipulate or influence or define the situation as they wish, and to convey nuances of meaning and personal intention. Thus, according to Trudgill, code-switching is mainly for self expression, in other words for personal intentions. Trudgill’s
25
clarification seems to be an umbrella clarification as it demands to identify different types of personal intentions in conversation. That is, there are different types of personal needs such as to develop phatic relationship or to bridge some deficiency in linguistic ability.
Both Sert (2005) and Shin (2010) investigated the functions of codeswitching in classroom contexts. Shin exploring the functions of codeswitching in a Korean Sunday school states that code –switching is used in directives, to invoke figures of authority and to avoid saying things which might be found offensive (pp.100-102). These findings are based on Korean bilingual discourse: it hypothesizes that the use of Korean in bilingual discourse may index Korean ethnic identity by evoking the traditional social ideology of relative status and increasing solidarity.
While exploring the
functions of code switching from the teachers’ and the students’ perspective Sert (2005:Paras 8-10) emphasizes that, it would be appropriate to deal with the use of code switching in its naturally occurring context; The teachers’ use of code switching is not always performed consciously; which means that the teacher is not always aware of the functions and outcomes of the code switching process. Thus, Sert justifies that classroom context as a natural authentic context of language use.
However, in multilingual classrooms, if code-switching to be effective, all the participants should be multilingual. Cook’s (2002:p. 333) foresight also supports this view. Cook foresees some negative aspects in code-switching in classrooms: Cook, referring to multilingual classrooms, states that the function of code switching in multilingual classes may create problems, as some students somehow are neglected as they may not be multilingual.
All these findings indicate that there are a few significant functions in code- switching. Among them, language deficiency seems to be generally
26
significant factor as many researches have identified that function in their studies. However, all these researchers have explored the aspect of codeswitching in spoken discourses. As stated previously in the preceding chapter and in this chapter, code-switching has become a common perspective even in written discourses although there is less research on them.
2.5. Code-switching in Written Discourses As previously stated, in many years, researches on language alternation have focussed on oral code-switching. Presently, interest on language variation, particularly on code-switching, has been renewed: interest in codeswitching has gradually been directed to written code-switched discourses as well. This seemingly, to a great extent, has been influenced by new media: that is, the use of email, SMS (Short Message Service) messaging, Skype messages, Chat messages and the like has considerably caused code-switching in written discourses. Although some researchers have initiated to explore the written discourses in this vein, at present, there are no adequate findings to come to general agreement as most of the existing views on code-switching having all been developed for spoken discourses.
However, reviewing the inadequately-available research on written discourses is also vital, even to Sri Lanknas: as stated in the preceding chapter, there is a group of people in speech communities who seem to hold the strong negative views towards code-switching, irrespective of the medium of its usage - verbal or written. Quite contrary to their views, at another extreme end, there is another group of people waiting for the use written code-switching even in the mainstream at education levels, despite a strong English-only or Sinhalaonly sentiment being voiced among many teachers and the public.
27
Montes-Alcalá (2005: pp.173-185) exploring the functions of codeswitching in personal letters, primarily reveals that code-switching is a valid strategy among educated bilinguals to communicate in writing. Then, she also states that not only the individuals who normally code-switch when speaking, but even those people who usually do not engage in oral code-switching will shift languages when writing to another bilingual speaker. The researcher highlights the view that biculturalism plays a central role in code-switching. Therefore, it is suggested that bilinguals should not be forced to give up any of their languages.
Bishop (2006) focussing on the Spanish/English code-switching that occurs among Hispanic-Americans in general, with testing among MexicanAmerican young adults in particular, has explored the interplay of advertising code-switching and the language context of the medium in terms of message recall, perceptions of advertiser cultural sensitivity and expectations of a service provider’s degree of empathy and responsiveness. Bishop’s (2006: pp.79-91) results demonstrated that embedded message elements of an advertisement evidenced higher recall when their language differed from the context language of the medium. However, there has been no support for the hypothesis which proposed that when the embedded language of a codeswitched advertisement matched the context language of the medium, the advertiser would be perceived as more culturally sensitive to the reader of the magazine than when the embedded language of the advertisement differed from the medium’s context language. The overall results show that the context language of the medium and direction of code-switching may sometimes interact to influence consumer expectations.
28
2. 6. Summary of the Literature Review Throughout this chapter, the significant literature of code-switching was presented and reviewed, with reference to its historical development, uses in bilingual or monolingual communities and the like. With respect to all these findings mentioned above, it may be concluded that code-switching is not always an obstruction or insufficiency in language, but may be considered as a useful strategy employed by language hybrids. All these findings in general lead to the notion that the use of code-switching somehow builds a bridge from known to unknown, thus, may be considered as an important phenomenon in language hybridism. Moreover, code-switching as a strategy also plays diverse roles in communication, such as to maintain power and solidarity, clarification, emphasis and the like. Yet, most of these findings are based on verbal discourses on code-switching: it should be noted that oral code-switching may differ from written code-switching, as far as its use, function and structure are concerned. The existing literature on written code-switching is not adequate to generalize any of the points disclosed of written code-switching. As written discourse vary in their structure, much research on different written genre is needed before drawing any conclusion of the role of code-switching in written discourses.
The following chapter unfolds the methodology employed to explore the functions of code-switching in emails used among Sinhala and English bilinguals.
29
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY This study, as previously disclosed, was aimed to explore the use of code-switching in emails of Sinhala-English Sri Lankan bilinguals. Thus, a survey is conducted employing statistical methods to analyze data of 150 emails of 100 subjects.
3.1. Research Questions The following three main questions were raised in order to explore the use of code-switching in emails used among Sinhala-English bilinguals. What is the language choice in emails?
Is there a correlation between the language choice and the relationship to the recipients?
Is there a correlation between the language choice and the subject of the email?
3.2. Research Method 3.2.1. Piloting the Design It was imperative to pilot test the design before initiating the procedure particularly because the data collection was dependent much on subjects’ degree of participation. In the pilot session of data collection, a sample of
30
individuals whose email addresses were on the list of the researcher’s personal email account was requested to send a few emails they had sent solely for research purposes: they were offered to replace any confidential issues such as personal names, dates and the like. However, the rate of the responses was low: it was assumed that participants were not willing to expose their emails, especially to a person they personally contact with. Thus, the mode of data collection was altered slightly. Accordingly, piloting the procedure was helpful to revise and fine-tune the proper procedure of the study.
3.2.2. Fine-tuned Design Thus, after piloting, the research design for this study was decided. Accordingly, the research design used in this study followed naturalistic enquiry where the researcher tried not to intervene in the research setting and did not try to control naturally occurring events (Allwright and Bailey, p.40; Brown:1988. pp.1-6). Accordingly, the survey method was selected for the study as the area of survey research encompasses any measurement procedures that involve asking questions of respondents, unknown respondents in particular. Of many survey methods, an email survey was chosen for this study.
3.2.2.1 Introduction and Justification of the E-mail Survey According to many researchers ((Walliman: 2005. pp. 92-100), any survey is generally a scientific study of people’s attitudes, behaviors, preferences, practices, concerns, knowledge et cetera. Surveys can take forms of postal surveys, interviews or email surveys. Although email surveys carry
31
the same form as ordinary written surveys, they are carried out via email addresses. Emails can be sent to get numbers and statistics, or a questionnaire to obtain information, data, opinions and numbers. Therefore, the nature of email surveys can be both descriptive and qualitative.
In general, there are many benefits for researchers using email surveys (Walliman, N.:2005: pp. 92-100). For instances, response speed of email surveys is faster than that of postal mail while email surveys can help researchers reach some targeted participants across geographical borders with the reduction of costs and time. Besides, email surveys are helpful for the researchers as emails are in the form of text documents on computers, sorting out data is both less time consuming and effort consuming. Above all, the focus of this research is on language use in emails: thus, email survey may be the best method for the research.
3.2.3. Participants After acquiring some email addresses freely accessible on some lists of email addresses prevalent in Sri Lanka, an email was circulated among a group of individuals – approximately about 150 individuals. At that time, the details of their gender, age, ethnicity, profession or education were not known to the researcher. Through this email circulated, they were informed of the overall purpose of the survey, without informing them of the area of research focus. Their voluntary participation in the survey was also initially required. The email circulated initially (see Appendix A) enquired the languages they use for communication, especially for written communication: they were asked to rank the ability of their use of each language. Then, individuals whose responses indicated that they would use both Sinhala and English languages competently (above 50% of proficiency for Sinhala and English languages, based on self-
32
ranking) were inquired in a follow-up email (see Appendix B), if they would like to participate in a sociolinguistic study on language use: to minimize subject expectancyi of the research, the individuals were not particularly informed of the focus of the study. Individuals were requested, then, to participate in the study, by completing the questionnaire distributed. Accordingly, 100 (to address the issue of subjects’ mortalityii, 105 individuals were initially contacted) participants were selected based on the degree of their bilingualism – Sinhala and English. That is, the participants whose common standard is being bilingual in Sinhala and English (as previously stated above 50% of proficiency) were examined for the purpose of the research. Thus, the selection criterion for the subjects was based initially on their Sinhala-English bilingualism.
Besides, the questionnaire about their personal information revealed that the subjects’ ages ranged approximately from 25 to 50 years old. All of them had completed at least General Certificate (Advanced Level) of Examination either in Sinhala or English.
3.2.4. Procedure Via email-survey (the questionnaire), these participants were, first, asked to give information based on any three emails that they have sentiii during the period of past three days. The number of emails was selected as three due to possible feasibility aspects of the participants: they were asked to i
It is the natural tendency among some human beings to help the researcher to achieve apparent aims of the research. ii Possible dropout of subjects iii These participants were requested to open their “sent” email box and to select the emails they have sent during the past three days.
33
refer to emails of three days to maintain regularity and availability of emails. Participants were provided with a questionnaire to collect data of their emails (see Appendix C for the Questionnaire emailed). The questionnaire used for the study was modeled on the questionnaire used by Goldbarg (2009). Then, as a follow-up activity, five of the participants were contacted, based on random basis, over the internet (using Chat service) to have a dialogue with the researcher, with a view to verify further the data mentioned in their emails.
3.2.5. Research Instruments Procuring data reflective of natural bilingual performance is very difficult per se, but particularly when dealing with a linguistic phenomenon which discloses personal and sensitive linguistic behaviour of individuals. In other words, one of the main problems in procuring reliable data for this type of sociolinguistic study occurs due to its high sensitivity of linguistic behavior to contextual features.
Since the design of the research was a survey, the main research instrument used to collect data, as mentioned previously in Section 3.2.4, was a questionnaire where the participants were also asked to provide voluntarily either some extracts of their emails or complete versions of their emails they have sent in three days prior to the email survey.
In addition to this research instrument, a few other questions were used to collect further details of five participants at the semi-structured interview over the internet. Prior to the interview, the participants were informed of the need and the procedure of the interview: the interview was conducted through Chat. The intention of these interviews was to further explore interesting uses of language that emerged from the questionnaires and to get the participants' 34
personal thoughts on code-switching in their written communication through emails.
3.3. Data Collection It is noticed that previous research, in exploring the corpora of emails, has used public mailing list emails or the researchers' own emails or those of their social network members (Crystal, 2001) for the analysis of language in emails. In contrast to them, as previously stated, for this research data collected from the questionnaire and the email texts were used (See Appendices D- H for a randomly collected completed questionnaire) The design used in the study was able to analyze data on 100 participants and emails and details on 150 email text samples (although there were 151 emails, due to some feasibility aspects in counting, only 150 emails/email-extracts were explored).
3.3.1 Questionnaire and the Questions Employed in Semistructured Interview As far as questionnaires are concerned, mail surveys are common. They, particularly email questionnaires, are relatively inexpensive to administer for the exact same instrument can be sent to a wide number of people simultaneously and promptly. Emails allow the respondent to fill it out at their own convenience and to reply online. Although it is usually probable to experience low rates of responses for mail and email surveys, participants’ prior willingness to take part in the research, received prior to data collection, minimized the low rates of responses. Since questionnaires do not usually reveal detailed responses, two attempts were taken to address this issue: that is, both a sample of respondents 35
was interviewed and volunteers were asked to attach either extracts or complete versions of the emails they have used in filling the questionnaire.
Accordingly, the questionnaire asked ten questions about the language(s) used in emails - relationship to email recipients, email subjects, and function of particular language choices. Additionally, as stated previously, the participants were voluntarily requested to provide excerpts or full versions from emails they wrote. The follow-up semi structured interview with five participants too was based on the questionnaire and the information provided in the completed questionnaire.
3.4. Data Analysis Data analysis was performed both on a statistical test called a Chisquire test and descriptive analysis through observation of the data. A Chi-square test, (Brown ;1988: pp184-189) popularly known as χ2 test, is a statistical hypothesis test used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the expected frequencies and the observed frequencies in one or more categories. In this study, Chi-squared (X2) tests were used to test the independence of the variables, namely whether code choice was independent of each of the other variables of interest: chi-squared tests were performed to test for associations of the following: The relationship between code choice and the subject matter of the email
The relationship between code choice
and the relationship to the
recipient
36
The X2 tests were performed using MINITAB 14 statistical software with a view to minimize any possible mistakes in manual calculation. Thus, the test was based on the formula: ( Fo Fe ) 2 Fe
2
F= Frequency Fo= Observed Frequency
Fe= Expected Frequency To compute this statistical test, the p = 0.000 (probability) level of significance was selected in the Chi-squared distribution as this level would indicate a highly significant statistical association or dependence between variables. Then, the degrees of freedom (df) or the parameters of a distribution was also determined by counting the number of levels of each variable, using the following formula: df=(r-1) (c-1) (c= columns, r= rows) In order to compute this test further, it was also necessary to find the Critical Value based on the degrees of freedom (df) counted: Critical Value, simply, is the value of the dependent variable at a critical point of a function. To word it statistically, Critical Value is a number which causes rejection of the null hypothesis if a given test statistic is this number or more, and
37
acceptance of the null hypothesis if the test statistic is smaller than this number. The null hypotheses would be rejected if Chi squired value becomes greater than the Critical value as also indicated in the following formula.
χ2 stat > χ2 α χ2 stat
= Chi-squire value
χ2 α = Critical value
3.5. Ethical Issues Following ethical issues in procuring reliable data is necessary for any research: it was highly imperative in this sociolinguistic research due to its high sensitivity of linguistic behavior to contextual features (the code of Oxford Brookes University, 2003 as quoted in Walliman, 2005, pp. 355-357). Thus, the following attempts were taken to address ethical issues of the study.
Since email users may be harmed indirectly due to some computer viruses, any such possibilities were scanned and avoided by guarding the safety of the documents before sending emails.
Prior to the research, all participants were assured, that the data would be used only for the research purpose.
Since respondents’ user-names appear in email versions, researchers may identify respondents. Thus, participants were assured that confidentiality would highly be guaranteed. That is, an assurance is
38
given that participants’ identities and information would not be provided to another party for any reason, without their prior consent.
The use of volunteered email excerpts by-passed privacy issues as participants did not divulge messages they were not comfortable in unfolding.
To respect participants’ privacy informants’ consent was required before commencing the survey.
Before proceeding with the study, the participants’ consent was also taken to analyze the data.
The research caused no harm to the participants.
The subjects’ participation was voluntary.
The participants were offered access to a summary of the research findings on their request.
3.6. Controlling Extraneous Variables The following attempts were taken to control the extraneous variables in the research (Brown, 1988, pp.29-42).
Artificiality was minimized because data of authentic emails were explored.
39
Participants’ mortality was also addressed as more than 100 participants were initially taken for the study and 100 participants were taken for the actual data collection.
Researcher expectancy was reduced since the researcher had not known the participants prior to the study.
Although participants were informed of the overall intention of the research, as mentioned previously, with a view to minimize the Hawthornei effect, they were not informed that the focus of research was code-switching.
Controlling extraneous variables in such a manner the reliability of data collection was maintained to a great extent in this research.
3.7. Limitations Despite the combined methods of data collection – the questionnaire and the semi structured interview - and the above attempts to control extraneous variables in the study, caution should be exercised in interpreting the implications of the results of the study. One reason is that this study was relatively small, based on a relatively limited set of extracts of emails in which participants engaged. Besides, the researcher’s attempt to explore the use of language by examining directly the emails/ extracts of emails sent by the participants was not very successful as the number of extracts collected was very low. The other limitation is the restricted accessibility to private data
i
It is possible for participants to be pleased at being included in a research and this pleasure may change the actual results of a study.
40
sources.Therefore, before drawing any conclusions about code-switching in emails, future research will need to further examine this phenomenon.
The findings of this study will be discussed in the next chapter.
41
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter is both a systematic presentation of the data collected from the questionnaire employed in the study, which explored the use of codeswitching in emails among Sinhala- English bilinguals, and a scientific discussion of the results. A sample collection of completed questionnaire is attached (see Appendices G).
4.1. Description of the Participants As previously mentioned, all the participants, whose emails were used for the research, claimed that they were fluent in Sinhala and English. They were chosen for the study based on their self-ranking of their proficiency in both the languages. That is, the participants who stated by ranking, that they were good in both were selected for the research. The following Table 1 (three sub-tables titled 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 based on gender, age and position) displays the data, other than their language proficiency ranking, on participant characteristics. It is noticed that both males and females were among the participants and irrespective of their gender, age and position they both have, in a fair quantity, contributed emails to the research. Thus, participants covered fairly a good cross-section of email users.
42
Table 1: Characteristics of the Participants.
Table 1.1 Gender
Male
Female
No. of participants for the data collection
42
58
No. of emails contributed to the study
62
88
Table 1.2: Age
Age
Male
Female
10-19yrs
08
15
20-29yrs
16
20
30-39 yrs 05
08
40-49yrs
13
15
10-19yrs
16
26
20-29yrs
17
34
30-39 yrs 10
14
40-49yrs
14
group No. of participants for the data collection
No. of emails contributed to the study
19
43
Table 1.3 Position
Category of the position No. of participants for the Student at a school
Male Female 07
13
Undergraduate
08
10
Business personnel
12
06
Graduate academic
10
16
Media personnel
03
06
Artist
01
03
Other
01
04
Student at a school
09
14
Undergraduate
14
17
Business personnel
16
06
Graduate academic
12
25
Media personnel
04
14
Artist
05
06
Other
02
06
data collection
No. of emails contributed to the study
However, there is a slight discrepancy in the degree of contribution. To quote a few instances, the contribution of the participants of the age range 3039 was relatively small while the participants of 20-29 age groups contributed much to the research. In the meantime, female participants belonging to the age range 20-29 have contributed much to the research than its male counterparts. This could be attributed to the biological nature of participants’
44
age and gender. However, this preliminary posit necessitates further exploration of language choice in the field of email surveys. As far as the participants’ position is concerned, with the exception of five participants, all the others belong to the categories mentioned in the questionnaire. Hence, the data include emails referring to the fields of business, education, media, art and the like: thus, it seems a cross-section of different fields in society.
4.2. Choice of Language in Emails With a view to address the research questions, first the choice of language in emails used by the participants is explored. The relevant question in the questionnaire explored whether the participants used one language (English or Sinhala) or code-switched in writing emails. The degree of codeswitching is also explored by asking the language they used most in emails. Accordingly, the question asked if the participants used:
English only
Sinhala only
Code-switched but used English mostly
Code-switched but used Sinhala mostly
Code switched using both languages in almost equal amount
Accordingly, Table 2, Figure 1 and Figure 2 were drawn from the data to indicate the language choice in email: Table 2 indicates the choice of language both in number and in percentage while Figure 1 and 2 display them in number and in percentage respectively.
45
Table 2: Choice of Language in Emails
Choice of Language
Amount Percentage
English only
36 24.00 %
Both but mostly in English
60 40.00 %
Both about the same each
14 9.33
Both but mostly in Sinhala
%
22 14.67 %
Sinhala only
18 12.00 %
Total
150
It is evident from the data presented in Table 2 that English was highly used in emails , as particularly indicated with ‘English only’ accounting for 36 while ‘both but mostly English’ accounting for 60. The least percentage indicated for “both about the same each”, accounting for 9.33%. When “English only’ and “Sinhala Only’ percentages are compared it is obvious that ‘English only’ is exactly doubled the value of ‘Sinhala only’. These results underscore the preference to use English in emails. What is interesting to note is that in more than one third of the total emails (40%) English is mostly used. This finding also supports that English is the preferred language in emails. However, as the total percentage of emails where code-switching has occurred accounts for more than half, 64.00 % (the total sum of 40.00 %, 9.33 % and
46
14.67), it can be assumed that code-switching is mostly preferred to the use of a single language in emails. It is also noteworthy to mention that equal degree of code-switching is relatively very low, accounting for less than 10 per cent. The columns in Figure 1 also clearly display these findings. To round up, it can be assumed that code-switching is preferred in emails, i.e. in the mode of writing, to the use of a single code.
Figure 1: Language choice in emails- Amount
47
Figure 2: Language choice in emails- Percentage
Further to the language choice of emails, the questionnaire also enquired whether the email was a reply to an email or not, using the question, “was this email a reply?” Eighty two emails answered positively while there were 68 negative responses to the question. This finding shows that more than half the emails taken for the study were replies to emails received by the participants. The purpose for unveiling this issue was to know if the replying
48
emails followed the same language choice of the initial (receiving) emails. The finding indicates that the language choice of the replies is not exactly parallel to the language choice of the receiving emails. As indicated in Table 3 (below), a considerable difference is seen in ‘English only’ and in ‘Both but mostly in English’. There is an increase in the section ‘Both but mostly in English’. Thus, it can be assumed that emails are preferred to be written in English with a little switching to Sinhala. Writing emails using only English also shows a downward trend, as the number has decreased to 18, from 25. All these findings highlight the preference for code-switching in emails, favouring the language English. This finding further underscores the previous findings where it is noticed that code-switching is preferred to the use of a single code in emails.
Table 3: Language choice of the email received and the reply
Language Choice of Language Choice of the Email received
the Reply
25
18
Both but mostly in 30
39
English only
English Both about the same 10
10
each Both but mostly in 13
13
Sinhala Sinhala only
02
01
49
4.3. The Relationship between the Language Choice and the Relationship to the Recipients Table 4: The relationship between the language choice and the relationship to the recipients
English
Both but Both
Both but Sinhala
only
mostly
about
mostly
in
the
in
English
same
Sinhala
Total
only
each family
3
10
2
3
2
20
16
30
5
11
3
65
16
18
1
7
2
44
Other
1
2
6
1
11
21
Total
36
60
14
22
18
150
member, /relation close friend, colleague, classmate professor/ instructor/ teacher / client
50
The second research question in exploring the language used in emails is to test if there is a correlation between the language choice and the relationship to the recipients. The data collected from the questionnaire are tabulated in the Table 4 described above. However, to verify the data, it was imperative to test the correlation between the language choice and the relationship to the recipients statistically as well. Accordingly, while creating a hypothesis and its null hypothesis, the correlation was measured using a Chisquared test. These hypotheses and the results of the chi-squired test are presented below. Ho: There is no relationship between the language choice and the relationship to the recipients H1: There is a relationship between the language choice and the relationship to the recipients
English only 3 4.80 0.675
Both but mostly in English 10 8.00 0.500
2
16 15.60 0.010
30 26.00 0.615
5 6.07 0.188
11 9.53 0.226
3 7.80 2.954
65
3
16 10.56 2.802
18 17.60 0.009
1 4.11 2.350
7 6.45 0.046
2 5.28 2.038
44
4
1 5.04 3.238
2 8.40 4.876
6 1.96 8.327
1 3.08 1.405
11 2.52 28.536
21
Total
36
60
14
22
18
150
1
Both Both about but the mostly same in Sinhala each Sinhala only 2 3 2 1.87 2.93 2.40 0.010 0.002 0.067
Total 20
Chi-Sq = 58.873, DF = 12, P-Value = 0.000
51
( Fo Fe ) 2 Fe
2
= 58.873
Fo= Observed Frequency Fe= Expected Frequency Significance level is 95%, DF = 12, Critical value is 21.0261
Chi-Sq = 58.873
> Critical value = 21.0261
According to the results of the statistical test computed, it is evident that Chi squire value is 58.873. Since this Chi squire value is greater than the Critical value, (Chi-Sq = 58.873
>
Critical value = 21.0261), the null
hypothesis that there is no relationship between the language choice and the relationship to the recipients is rejected. In other sense, as P value is less than the Alpha value (α = 0.05 > P= 0.000), the null hypothesis is rejected. Accordingly, the statistical finding is that there is a relationship between the language choice and the relationship to the recipients.
To round up, switching codes in emails is significantly correlated to the recipient of the email.
52
4.4. The Relationship between the Language Choice and the Subject of the Email In exploring the language choice in emails, a question was posed to measure if there is a correlation between the language choice and the subject of the email. The data collected for this purpose is presented in the Table 5 below. Chi-squired test was also performed, as mentioned previously, to statistically verify the data. The results are presented below with the hypotheses posed to perform the Chi-squired test. Ho: There is no relationship between the language choice and the subject of the email H1: There is a relationship between the language choice and the subject of the email
English only 3 9.36 4.322
Both but mostly in English 11 15.60 1.356
Both about the same each 5 3.64 0.508
Both but mostly in Sinhala 14 5.72 11.986
Sinhala only 6 4.68 0.372
2
11 7.44 1.703
11 12.40 0.158
3 2.89 0.004
3 4.55 0.526
3 3.72 0.139
31
3
19 15.84 0.630
36 26.40 3.491
3 6.16 1.621
4 9.68 3.333
4 7.92 1.940
66
4
3 3.36 0.039
2 5.60 2.314
3 1.31 2.194
1 2.05 0.540
5 1.68 6.561
14
Total
36
60
14
22
18
150
1
Total 39
53
Chi-Sq = 43.739, DF = 12, P-Value = 0.000
Significance level is 95% , DF = 12,
Critical value is 21.0261
( Fo Fe ) 2 Fe
2
= 43.739
Table 5: The relationship between the language choice and the subject of the email
English
Both but Both
Both but Sinhala
only
mostly
about
mostly in only
in
the
Sinhala
English
same
Total
each persona
3
11
5
14
6
39
work
11
11
3
3
3
31
19
36
3
4
4
66
Other
3
2
3
1
5
14
Total
36
60
14
22
18
150
related and official work related and nonofficial
54
As indicated, Chi squire value is 43.739. Since this Chi squire value is greater than the Critical value, (Chi-Sq = 43.739
>
Critical value =
21.0261), the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between the language choice and the subject of the email is rejected. To indicate it in another method, as P value is less than the Alpha value (α = 0.05 > P= 0.000), the null hypothesis is rejected. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected, indicating that there is a relationship between language choice and subject of emails. This statistical test results underscore the correlation between codeswitching and the subject matter of emails. Although Becker (1997) explains that code-switching is triggered by unconscious factors, the results of this study that code-switching is highly correlated to subject matter and recipients reveal that code-switching in written discourses is not an unconscious process. The finding that code-switching is correlated to subject matter and recipients also supports Blom and Gumperz’s (1972: pp.407-434) classification on code-switching. That is, as Blom and Gumperz elucidate code-switching occurs due to the language context (situational code-switching) and as a conversational strategy to enhance or ease conversational acts (metaphorical code-switching). Thus, reasons to switch languages in emails also can be categorized under situational and metaphorical code-switching.
4.5. Language Functions in Code-switching In addition to the above questions the questionnaire also attempted to find the overall language functions of code-switching in emails. Accordingly, the reasons for them to use Sinhala and English are explored. The reasons 55
collected from the completed questionnaire are categorized below in the ascending order of frequency. Reasons to Switch to Sinhala:
To develop a close friendly, informal relationship
To emphasize certain messages
To break monotony
To get fun
When the writers are not sure of spellings
In expressing culturally-specific language expressions
When they do not know the spellings of the word
When they do not know the word
Unconsciously ( what is meant is subconsciously)
Reasons to switch to English
For easy expressions
In referring to some words related to physical contacts and features such as sex
In greetings
To refer to common English phrases ( eg. Let’s do it, don’t worry, you know)
Although the findings given here are collected from the details of completed questionnaire, as Zentella (1997: 99) states that investigating the purpose of each code-switch in emails is a difficult task. However, these reasons given here underscore that the functions of code-switching in written discourses is, to a certain extent, similar to the reasons to code-switch in oral code-switching. For instance, Trudgill’s (2000:p. 105)) explanation that people’s primary intentions in code-switching are to manipulate or influence or
56
define the situation as they wish, and to convey nuances of meaning and personal intention can be applicable even to code-switching in emails. Further, explanation given by Crystal (1987: 365-367), is quite parallel to the reasons in code-switching in emails as well: Crystal states that compensation for the speaker’s language deficiency, solidarity among the speakers and their desire to express particular attitudes are main reasons for code-switching. Thus, it is possible to posit that the overall functions in code-switching are similar irrespective of the media - oral or written. It is interesting to note, however, that one particular reason to code-switch in emails is due to language deficiencies in spelling.
4.6. Overall View of the Findings As noticed from the description of subjects, this study seems to represent a cross section of Sinhala-English bilinguals, referring to diverse age groups and different categories of employment. Thus, the results may be applied to any regulations related to Sri Lankans’ language policies. As noted, majority of people prefer to code-switch to the use of a single language, especially with the help of technology. This underscores the use of codeswitching in written media. Code-switching in emails, however, is dependent on the receivers of emails and the subject matter of emails, highlighting that code-switching is linked to language functions. As code-switching is highly used among Sinhala- English bilinguals, what is needed, perhaps, is to help Sri Lankans progress through their bilingual continua, without highlighting the necessity to be monolingual.
57
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION
5.1. A Brief Summary of the Study This study sought to add to the limited data available about the codeswitching in written communication, particularly of email practices.
The
research problem was derived from the observation of mushrooming oral codeswitching in semi-formal discourses even on some popular media and the initializing of code-witching in some written discourses. While exploring and statistically analyzing data of 150 emails used by Sinhala-English 100 bilinguals, several results and posits are identified. What is significant is that the use of code-switching is preferred in emails to a single language: codeswitching is significantly correlated to the recipients and the subject matter of emails. The following implications and suggestions are made based on the results.
5.2. Pedagogical Implications The conclusion of this study has implications for the design of language policies particularly in Sri Lanka. Following implications are also drawn from the findings of the study
58
The overall results of the study clearly indicated that code-switching is highly preferred to a single language in emails. Thus, it is imperative to take this issue into consideration in drawing language policies for the country, without just bearing negative attitudes towards code-switching: it also necessitates having a well-understanding of the phenomenon called language hybridism. It is also noticed that English is highly used in code-switched emails irrespective of the differences in participants. Thus, the findings underscore the necessity to regularize patterns for code-switching: it would ,thus ,not destroy the usage of any National language, be it Sinhala or Tamil.
5.3. Future Research Acknowledging some restraints of the current study, some suggestions can be made for future research.
The overall objective of the study was to explore the use of codeswitching in written media. However, this study narrowed itself to research the use of language in emails. Future explorations are required to collect diverse genres of written discourses to enhance the validly of findings.
Repetitive studies where the focus is on Tamil-English bilinguals can be researched in a future study.
Although the number of emails concerned for the study was quite sufficient for a survey research, the number of email extracts received was relatively small which limits the generalizability of the findings.
59
Future studies are expected to gather a greater number of emails to enhance generalizability.
Participants whose ability in English is not as proficient as those of the participants in this study can be taken as subjects: they may exhibit a wide variety of findings.
Although this study covered a cross-section of language users, it did not differentiate the findings according to gender. Thus, another important analysis involves contrasting groups of male and female participants: thereby future research can investigate the degree to which gender differences influence on code-switching.
“Given time, do these bilinguals turn to be monolinguals in using emails, perhaps to English language?” This would be an interesting exploration for a future research.
The research design followed in this study considered the data collected from questionnaire. Further analyses employing other research designs would be helpful to add some significant insight into the field of codeswitching.
A comparative exploration can be conducted to explore the degree of code-switching in oral and written communication of the same participants.
It is important to explore correlation of code-switching to other variables such as time and proficiency in the National language.
60
Appendix A
Dear Sir/Madam, This email is meant to collect some details of you solely for a research purpose. I assure you that the data would be used only for the research purpose. Your voluntary contribution to this study would be highly appreciated. Please be kind enough to indicate your language proficiency of Sinhala and English, in writing: please underline the appropriate option and reply.
Your language proficiency in writing: (Please underline one option) In Sinhala – 100%, 75%, In English - 100%,
75%,
50%, 50%,
40%
25%,
below 25%,
0
40% , 25%,
below 25%,
0
Thank you.
61
Appendix B
Dear Sir/Madam,
While being grateful to you for responding to the initial email sent to you, this is to ask whether you would volunteer to provide some further details of your use of language/s for the sociolinguistics research, and a few personal details, by completing the questionnaire attached. The research requires you to provide some information of the language used in your emails.
I must assure you again that the data would be used only for the research purpose. Confidentiality would highly be guaranteed: your identities and information would not be provided to another party for any reason.
Thank you.
62
Appendix C Questionnaire Used in Survey Language use in emails This study is for research purposes only.
Your contribution is highly
appreciated, in advance. There are two parts in this questionnaire – Part A and Part B. Please answer all the questions. Part A 1. Choose the answer which suits you most. You are a/an a. student at a school b. undergraduate c. business personnel d. academic e. other(please specify) 2. What age range do you belong to? a. 10-19 b. 20-29 c. 30-39
63
d. 40-49 e. Other (please specify) 3. You are a (a). Male (b). Female 4. The highest examination you have passed in: Sinhala: O /L English: O/.L
Part B Please give details three emails that you sent during the last three days. Email No. …2…(give any number for this email to help in sorting) 1. Was this email a reply to an email received from someone else? a.. Yes
b.. No
2. If so, was that written in … a. English only b. Sinhala Only c. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala
64
e. Both Sinhala and English about the same each 3. Select one that suits best to the relationship of the recipient of your email a. family member/relation b. close friend/ colleague/ classmate c. professor/instructor/teacher/client f. other (please specify)……. 4.What language was your email written in? a. English only b. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English c. Sinhala and English about the same each d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala e. B Sinhala Only 5. If you used both Sinhala and English, please describe briefly what types of issues you wrote in English and what type of issues you wrote in Sinhala. Eg. Greetings in Sinhala, warnings in English Sinhala: Jokes, pun on words English: greetings, important messages 1. Choose the response that describes best the subject of your email
65
a. Personal b. work related (official or academic) informal d. work related (official or academic) formal c. other (please specify)……. 6. Are you willing to provide the email for the research purpose? If so, please paste it here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like). 7.Are there any excerpts from this email that you would be willing to provide as a sample? If so, please paste them here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like).
66
Appendix D Questionnaire Used in Survey Language use in emails This study is for research purposes only.
Your contribution is highly
appreciated, in advance. There are two parts in this questionnaire – Part A and Part B. Please answer all the questions. Part A 1. Choose the answer which suits you most. You are a/an a. student at a school b. undergraduate c. business personnel d. academic e. other(please specify) 2. What age range do you belong to? a. 10-19 b. 20-29 c. 30-39
67
d. 40-49 e. Other (please specify) 3. You are a (a). Male (b). Female 4. The highest examination you have passed in: Sinhala: O /L English: O/.L
Part B Please give details three emails that you sent during the last three days. Email No. …2…(give any number for this email to help in sorting) 3. Was this email a reply to an email received from someone else? a.. Yes
b.. No
4. If so, was that written in … a. English only b. Sinhala Only c. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala
68
e. Both Sinhala and English about the same each 3. Select one that suits best to the relationship of the recipient of your email a. family member/relation b. close friend/ colleague/ classmate c. professor/instructor/teacher/client f. other (please specify)……. 4.What language was your email written in? a. English only b. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English c. Sinhala and English about the same each d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala e. B Sinhala Only 5. If you used both Sinhala and English, please describe briefly what types of issues you wrote in English and what type of issues you wrote in Sinhala. Eg. Greetings in Sinhala, warnings in English Sinhala: Jokes, pun on words English: greetings, important messages 2. Choose the response that describes best the subject of your email
69
a. Personal b. work related (official or academic) informal d. work related (official or academic) formal c. other (please specify)……. 6. Are you willing to provide the email for the research purpose? If so, please paste it here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like). 7.Are there any excerpts from this email that you would be willing to provide as a sample? If so, please paste them here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like).
70
Appendix E
Questionnaire Used in Survey Language use in emails This study is for research purposes only.
Your contribution is highly
appreciated, in advance. There are two parts in this questionnaire – Part A and Part B. Please answer all the questions. Part A 1. Choose the answer which suits you most. You are a/an a. student at a school b. undergraduate c. business personnel d. academic e. other(please specify) 2. What age range do you belong to? a. 10-19 b. 20-29
71
c. 30-39 d. 40-49 e. Other (please specify) 3. You are a (a). Male (b). Female 4. The highest examination you have passed in: Sinhala: A /L English: A/.L
Part B Please give details three emails that you sent during the last three days. Email No. …1…(give any number for this email to help in sorting) 5. Was this email a reply to an email received from someone else? a.. Yes
b.. No
6. If so, was that written in … a. English only b. Sinhala Only c. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English
72
d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala e. Both Sinhala and English about the same each 3. Select one that suits best to the relationship of the recipient of your email a. family member/relation b. close friend/ colleague/ classmate c. professor/instructor/teacher/client f. other (please specify)……. 4.What language was your email written in? a. English only b. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English c. Sinhala and English about the same each d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala e. B Sinhala Only
5. If you used both Sinhala and English, please describe briefly what types of issues you wrote in English and what type of issues you wrote in Sinhala. Eg. Greetings in Sinhala, warnings in English Sinhala: I didn’t know the word/phrase correctly
73
English: things referring to campus, subjects I do 3. Choose the response that describes best the subject of your email a. Personal b. work related (official or academic) informal d. work related (official or academic) formal c. other (please specify)……. 6. Are you willing to provide the email for the research purpose? If so, please paste it here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like). No, sorry 7.Are there any excerpts from this email that you would be willing to provide as a sample? If so, please paste them here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like).
74
Appendix F Questionnaire Used in Survey Language use in emails This study is for research purposes only.
Your contribution is highly
appreciated, in advance. There are two parts in this questionnaire – Part A and Part B. Please answer all the questions. Part A 1. Choose the answer which suits you most. You are a/an a. student at a school b. undergraduate c. business personnel d. academic e. other(please specify) 2. What age range do you belong to? a. 10-19 b. 20-29 c. 30-39
75
d. 40-49 e. Other (please specify) 3. You are a (a). Male (b). Female 4. The highest examination you have passed in: Sinhala: BA English: MA
Part B Please give details three emails that you sent during the last three days. Email No. …1…(give any number for this email to help in sorting) 7. Was this email a reply to an email received from someone else? a.. Yes
b.. No
8. If so, was that written in … a. English only b. Sinhala Only c. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala
76
e. Both Sinhala and English about the same each 3. Select one that suits best to the relationship of the recipient of your email a. family member/relation b. close friend/ colleague/ classmate c. professor/instructor/teacher/client f. other (please specify)……. 4.What language was your email written in? a. English only b. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English c. Sinhala and English about the same each d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala e. B Sinhala Only
5. If you used both Sinhala and English, please describe briefly what types of issues you wrote in English and what type of issues you wrote in Sinhala. Eg. Greetings in Sinhala, warnings in English Sinhala: past experiences as an undergraduate( esp jokes), in emphasizing , to be friendly, to ease the tension etc
77
English: academic matters, greetings, profession 4. Choose the response that describes best the subject of your email a. Personal b. work related (official or academic) informal d. work related (official or academic) formal c. other (please specify)……. 6. Are you willing to provide the email for the research purpose? If so, please paste it here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like). 7.Are there any excerpts from this email that you would be willing to provide as a sample? If so, please paste them here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like). My initial supervisor was changed. It was tough for me.
78
Appendix G
Questionnaire Used in Survey Language use in emails This study is for research purposes only.
Your contribution is highly
appreciated, in advance. There are two parts in this questionnaire – Part A and Part B. Please answer all the questions. Part A 1. Choose the answer which suits you most. You are a/an a. student at a school b. undergraduate c. business personnel d. academic e. other(please specify) 2. What age range do you belong to? a. 10-19 b. 20-29
79
c. 30-39 d. 40-49 e. Other (please specify) 3. You are a (a). Male (b). Female 4. The highest examination you have passed in: Sinhala: Advanced level English: O/.L
Part B Please give details three emails that you sent during the last three days. Email No. …2…(give any number for this email to help in sorting) 9. Was this email a reply to an email received from someone else? a.. Yes
b.. No
10. If so, was that written in … a. English only b. Sinhala Only c. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English
80
d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala e. Both Sinhala and English about the same each 3. Select one that suits best to the relationship of the recipient of your email a. family member/relation b. close friend/ colleague/ classmate c. professor/instructor/teacher/client f. other (please specify)……. 4.What language was your email written in? a. English only b. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English c. Sinhala and English about the same each d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala e. B Sinhala Only
5. If you used both Sinhala and English, please describe briefly what types of issues you wrote in English and what type of issues you wrote in Sinhala. Eg. Greetings in Sinhala, warnings in English Used only English
81
Sinhala:
English:
6. Choose the response that describes best the subject of your email a. Personal b. work related (official or academic) informal d. work related (official or academic) formal c. other (please specify)……. 6. Are you willing to provide the email for the research purpose? If so, please paste it here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like). 7.Are there any excerpts from this email that you would be willing to provide as a sample? If so, please paste them here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like). Dear Sir, As mentioned in the paper, I searched the library to find the journal. But I could not find the journal in the university library. Therefore, can you please extend the deadline of submission of the assignment until we discuss the question in class?
82
Appendix H
Questionnaire Used in Survey Language use in emails This study is for research purposes only.
Your contribution is highly
appreciated, in advance. There are two parts in this questionnaire – Part A and Part B. Please answer all the questions. Part A 1. Choose the answer which suits you most. You are a/an a. student at a school b. undergraduate c. business personnel d. academic e. other(please specify) 2. What age range do you belong to? a. 10-19 b. 20-29
83
c. 30-39 d. 40-49 e. Other (please specify) 3. You are a (a). Male (b). Female 4. The highest examination you have passed in: Sinhala: A Level English: O.Level
Part B Please give details three emails that you sent during the last three days. Email No. …1…(give any number for this email to help in sorting) 11. Was this email a reply to an email received from someone else? a.. Yes
b.. No
12. If so, was that written in … a. English only b. Sinhala Only c. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English
84
d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala e. Both Sinhala and English about the same each 3. Select one that suits best to the relationship of the recipient of your email a. family member/relation b. close friend/ colleague/ classmate c. professor/instructor/teacher/client f. other (please specify)……. 4.What language was your email written in? a. English only b. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in English c. Sinhala and English about the same each d. Both Sinhala and English but mostly in Sinhala e. B Sinhala Only 5. If you used both Sinhala and English, please describe briefly what types of issues you wrote in English and what type of issues you wrote in Sinhala. Eg. Greetings in Sinhala, warnings in English
Sinhala: In highlighting, in clarifying, uncertainty in spelling and words
English: referring to official duties, greetings, to express some
85
ideas easily 7. Choose the response that describes best the subject of your email a. Personal b. work related (official or academic) informal d. work related (official or academic) formal c. other (please specify)……. 6. Are you willing to provide the email for the research purpose? If so, please paste it here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like). 7.Are there any excerpts from this email that you would be willing to provide as a sample? If so, please paste them here. (You may change the personal names, proper nouns, the dates and the like).
86
BIBLIOGRAPHY Allwright, D., & Bailey, K. M. (1991). Focus on the Language Classroom: An Introduction
to
Classroom
Research
for
Language
Teachers.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Auer ,P. (1998). Code-switching in Conversation: Language, Interaction, and Identity.London: Routledge.
Auer, P. (1995). The pragmatics of code- switching: A sequential approach. In L. Milroy & P. Muysken (Eds.), One speaker, two languages: Crossdisciplinary perspectives on code-switching (pp. 115-135). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Becker, K. (1997). “Spanish/English Bilingual Codeswitching: A Syncretic Model,” Bilingual Review, Jan-Apr, Vol. 22, Issue 1, 3-31. Benson, E. (2001). “The Neglected Early History of Codeswitching Research In the United States.” Language & Communication 21: 23-36.
Bishop, M. M. (2006).The role of language codeswitching in increasing advertising effectiveness among Mexican American youth, PhD dissertation, The university of Texas at Arlington .
Blom, J., & Gumperz, J.J. (1972). Social meaning in linguistic Structures: Code-switching in Norway. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics (pp.407-434). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
87
Brown, J.D. (1988). Understanding Research in Second Language Learning: A teacher’s guide to statistics and research design.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Cook, V. (2002). Portraits of the L2 User. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. P. 333.
Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge
Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
.Eldridge, J. (1996). Code-switching in a Turkish secondary school. ELT Journal, 50,4: 303-311. Gal, S. (1979). Language Shift: Social Determinants of Linguistic Change in Bilingual Austria. New York: Academic Press. Gibbons, J. (1987). Code-mixing and code choice: A Hong Kong case study. Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters. GOLDBARG,R.N.(2009).“Spanish-English
Communication”.
.Department
Codeswitching in Email of
Anthropology
University
of
Massachusetts Boston. Retrievedfrom :http://www.dipp.nrw.de/lizenzen/dppl/dppl/DPPL_v2_en_062004.html
88
Grosjean,F.(1982).
Life
with
two
languages:
An
introduction
to
bilingualism.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Gumperz, J.(1982). “Conversational Code-Switching.” Discourse Strategies. Ed. John Gumperz. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 5999.
Halmari, H. (1997). Government and code-switching explaining American Finnish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Halmari, H., & Smith, W. (1994). Code-switching and register shift: Evidence From Finnish-English child bilingual conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 21(4), 427- 445.
Heller, M. (Ed.). (1988). Codeswitching: Anthropological and sociolinguistic perspectives. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hudson (1996). Sociolinguistics (2nd Edi.), Cambridge University Press.
Kroskrity, P. V. (1993). Language, history, and identity: Ethnolinguistic Studies of the Arizona Tewa. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Language and Communication, 8: 199-211. Lipski, J. M. (1985), “Linguistic aspects of Spanish-English language switching,”Tempe: Arizona State University, Center for Latin American Studies. Mattsson, A. & Burenhult-Mattsson, N. (1999). Code-switching in second language teaching of French. Working Papers 47: 59-72. p.61.
89
McClure, E. (1981). “Formal and functional aspects of the codeswitched of
discourse
bilingual
children,”
in
Latino
Language
and
Communicative Behavior, vol. 6, ed. R. P. Duran, Norwood, NJ: ABLEX, 69-94.
Mckay, S. L., & Hornberger, N. H. (1996). Sociolinguistics and language teaching. Cambridge. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Montes-Alcalá, C. (2005). ¡Mándame un e- mail! Cambio de códigos español-inglés online. In L. Ortiz & M. Lacorte (Eds.), Contacto y contextos lingüísticos: El español en los Estados Unidos y en contacto con otros lenguas (pp. 173-185) . Myers-Scotton,
C.(1983).
Comment:
Markedness
and
code
choice.
International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 44, 115-136.
Myers-Scotton, C. (1988). “Self-Enhancing Codeswitching as Interactional Power,” Language and Communication, 8: 199-211.
Myers-Scotton, C. (1993a), Social Motivations for Codeswitching: Evidence from Africa, Clarendon Press: Oxford. Myers-Scotton, C. (1993b), “Common and Uncommon Ground: Social and Structural Factors in Codeswitching,” Language in Society, 22 (4), 475503.
Myers-Scotton, C., & Bolonyai, A. (2001). Calculating Speakers: Codeswitching in a Rational Choice Model. Language in Society, 30(1), 1-28.
90
Nilep, C. (2006).“Code Switching” in Sociocultural Linguistics.
Nishimura, M. (1995). A functional analysis of Japanese/English codeswitching.Journal of Pragmatics, 23, 157-181. Numan, D. & Carter, D. 2001. Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Pease-Alvarez, C., & Vasquez, O. (1994). Language socialization in ethnic minority communities. In F. Genesee (Ed.), Educating second language children: The whole child, The whole curriculum, the whole community (pp. 82-102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Poplack, S. (1980). 'Sometimes I'll start a sentence in English y termino en espanol', Linguistics, 18, 581-616. Poplack,
S.
(1981).“Syntactic
Structure
and
Social
Function
of
Codeswitching." LatinoLanguage and Communicative Behavior. Ed. Richard Durán. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 169-84. Poplack, S. (1988), “Contrasting patterns of codeswitching in two communities,” in Codeswitching: Anthropological and Sociolinguistic Perspectives, ed. M. Heller, Berlin:Mouton de Gruyer, vol. 48, 215244.
Radicati Group (2007).Q3.MarketUpdate. Retrieved from: http://software.tekrati.com/research/9512/.
91
Reyes, I. (n.d.). Bilingualism in Holistic Perspective.University of Arizona, Tucson. To appear in the Encyclopedia of Bilingual Education in the US Editor Josu González SAGE Publications. Retrieved on 10.10.2010 from: www.u.arizona.edu/~ireyes/bibDoc/Reye... Reyes, I. (2004). Functions of code switching in schoolchildren’s conversations.Bilingual Research Journal, 28(1), 77-96.
Schieffelin, B. B. (1994). Code-switching and language socialization: Some Probable relationships. In L.E. Hewett, R.M. Sonnenmeier, and J.F. Duchan (Eds.), Pragmatics: from theory to practice (pp. 20-42). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Sert, O. (2005) The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XI, No. 8, August 2005. Retrieved from: http://iteslj.org/ Articles/Sert-CodeSwitching.html
Shin , S. (2010). The functions of Code-switching in a Korean Sunday School. Heritage Language Journal, 7(1) Winter, (91-116).
Siegel, J. (1995). How to get a laugh in Fijian: Code-switching and humor.Language in Society, 24, 95-110.
Skiba, R. (1997). Code Switching as a Countenance of Language Interference. The Internet TESL Journal. 3,10. Retrieved from: ttp://iteslj.org/Articles/Skiba-CodeSwitching.html
92
Sridhar, S. N., & Sridhar, K. K. (1980). The syntax and psycholinguistics of bilingual code mixing. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34(4), 407416. Trudgill, P. (2000). Sociolinguistics. London: Penguin. Valdés-Fallis, G.(1988). “The Language Situation of Mexican Americans.” Language Diversity: Problem or Resource. Eds. Sandra Lee McKay, and Sau-Ling Cynthia Wong. Cambridge, AM: Newbury House Publishers, 111-39.
Walliman, N. (2005). Your Research Project: A step-by-step guide for the first-time researcher (2nd ed.). New Delhi: Vistaar Publications.
Woolard, K. A. (1989). Double Talk: Bilingualism and the Politics of Ethnicity in Catalonia, Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA.
Zentella, A.C. (1997). Growing Up Bilingual: Puerto Rican Children in New York. Malden: Blackwell.
93
94
95
