You are on page 1of 55

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

A. Background In linguistics, code-switching is the concurrent use of more than one language, or language variety, in conversation. Multilinguals—people who speak more than one language— sometimes use elements of multiple languages in conversing with each other. Thus, codeswitching is the use of more than one linguistic variety in a manner consistent with the syntax and phonology of each variety. Code-switching is distinct from other language contact phenomena, such as borrowing, pidgins and creoles, loan translation (calques), and language transfer (language interference). Speakers form and establish a pidgin language when two or more speakers who do not speak a common language form an intermediate, third language. On the other hand, speakers practice code-switching when they are each fluent in both languages. Code mixing is a thematically related term, but the usage of the terms code-switching and code-mixing varies. Some scholars use either term to denote the same practice, while others apply code-mixing to denote the formal linguistic properties of said language-contact phenomena, and code-switching to denote the actual, spoken usages by multilingual persons. Code-switching, which may be defined as the alternation between two or more languages in a speaker‘s speech, occurs naturally in the scheme of bilinguality. Studies have reported that code-switching often happened subconsciously; ‗people may not be aware that they have switched, or be able to report, following a conversation, which code they used for a particular topic‘ (Wardaugh in Ariffin, 2012). 1

However, although bilingual speakers claim that code-switching is an unconscious behavior, research has also shown that it is not a random phenomenon. As attested by Li Wei in Ariffin (2012), Sociolinguistics who have studied code switching draw attention to extralinguistic factors such as topic, setting, relationships between participants, community norms and values, and societal, political and ideological developments influencing speakers‘ choice of language in conversation.

Code-switching is, thus, seen as a purposeful activity, that is, there are functions and intentions assigned to this behavior (Gumperz, Myers-Scotton, Hoffman in Ariffin, 2012). Based on this assumption, this paper investigates how code-switching is used as a device to achieve the communicative intents and serve certain functions in a conversation. While the nature of code-switching is spontaneous and subconscious, studies have reported that it is actually used as a communicative device depending on the switcher‘s communicative intents (Tay, Myers-Scotton, Adendorff in Ariffin, 2012). Speakers use switching strategies to organize, enhance and enrich their speech in order to achieve their communicative objectives. The discourse-enhancing functions of code-switching have been much discussed in the literature. For example, speakers may code-switch to express solidarity and affiliation with a particular group (Gal and Milroy in Ariffin, 2012). In addition, code-switching can also be use to fill a linguistic or conceptual gap of the speaker (Gysel in Ariffin, 2012). It is seen as a communication strategy – it provides continuity in speech to compensate for the inability of expressions. Studies have also shown that speakers code-switch to reiterate or emphasize a point (Gal in Ariffin, 2012). By repeating the same point in another language, the speaker is stressing or

2

adding more point on the topic of discussion. In addition, code-switching is also used for different pragmatic reasons, depending on the communicative intent of the speakers such as a mitigating and aggravating message, effective production, distancing strategy (David in Ariffin, 2012) etc. The teaching and learning second or foreign language process in the classroom is one place where the code switching mostly happened, especially with the teacher talk and the students talk. However the researcher is interested to describe the teacher talk in the classroom and what makes it happened.

B. Problem Statement Based on the explanation above, the writer formulates research question as follow: ―How is the code switching in the teacher talk in EFL class?‖

C. Objective of the Research Based on the problem statement stated above, the objective of the research is stated as follow: ―To describe, interpret and explain code switching in the teacher talk in EFL class‖.

D. Significance of the Research The result of this research is intended to give description, interpretation, and explanation on the code switching, particularly in the teacher talk in EFL class. The result is hopefully will be useful for teachers in extending their knowledge about the code switching in the classroom.

3

E. Scope of the Research The scope of this research is restricted to the code switching in the teacher talk, particularly, in EFL class.

4

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A. Previous research findings

There have been some researchers on code switching carried out by different researchers. Some of the results are cited below. Cakrawarti (2011) who conducted a research on Code Switching and Code Mixing in the Teenlit Canting Cantiq by Dyan Nuranindya found that there are six types of code switching and code mixing used by the teenlit‘s writer, they are intra-sentential switching, inter-sentential switching, emblematic switching, intra-lexical code mixing, establishing continuity with the previous speaker, and involving a change of pronunciation. Intra-sentential switching is the most dominant among others. She also found ten reasons for this and mostly because of expressing group identity. Ariffin and Rafik-Galea (2012) who did their research on code-switching as a communication device in conversation reported that speakers employed code-switching to organize, enhance and enrich their speech. From the findings above it is interesting to find out more about code switching and the reason what makes people doing it. In related to this, the researcher is concerned more in finding out about this, particularly with code switching in the teacher talk in EFL class.

B. Some Pertinent Ideas In order to study the use of code-switching in classroom context, especially in English class of Junior High School; we should consider some aspects that related to this study, they are: (1)

5

as stated by Ramelan (1992) that.1 Language as a Means of Communication Many animals are capable of using sounds to communicate. and events in the human environment. and (8) the functions of students‘ code switching. and (3) ―language‖ (Ramelan 1992) are very closely related and not easily divisible. and again. ―… language is something that only human beings possess in the world. Ramelan (1992: 8) proposes that. Furthermore. 2. (6) the use of code-switching in English class. whereas other animals do not‖. since only human beings speak language. Moreover. the three elements mentioned above: (1) ―human beings‖. this in turn needs a means of communication called language. and which rather exhaustively catalogs things. (3) the types of code-switching. 6 . and is a special characteristic of ‗homo sapiens‘.language as a means of communication. Thus. ―with language man can express his ideas and wishes to 14 other people such as when he needs their help so that close operation among members of the group can be carried out‖. (5) the functions of code-switching. one cannot be separated from other people since he or she needs each other. In addition about the characteristics of human language. (2) code-switching in a bilingual or multilingual community context. Meanwhile. Thus. (4) the possible factors causing codeswitching. as a social being. processes.2. but only humans who have created with the unique ability to employ speech for communication. language is considered ―as a criterion which is used to identify human beings‖ (Ramelan 1992). Carrol (1953) in Ramelan (1992: 10) states: Language is an arbitrary system of speech sounds or sequences of speech sounds which is used or can be used in interpersonal communication by an aggregation of human beings. (7) the functions of teachers‘ code-switching. the cooperation between them is depend on communication. (2) ―community‖.

and in a society‖. Finnochiaro (1974) in Sugestiningrum (2002: 6) cites that. ―we cannot communicate in any real sense without language. language also has devices. communication is through language‖. or other people who have learned the system of that culture. but the culmination of true. Raghunathan (2004: 1) argues that. ―it [language] is based on social agreement‖ (Ramelan 1992: 11). ―social‖. ―language is the development of the basic form of communication between human beings.painting and sculpture – and through dance. ―language is a system of arbitrary vocal symbol used for human communication‖. opinions and feelings to other human beings. ―spoken‖. besides ―arbitrary‖. and ―complete‖.Moreover. to express and to organize their ideas. Based on these statements. It means that language still becomes the most effective means of communication. there is ―no logical explanation‖ or ―no reasoning‖ (Ramelan 1992) to explain or to describe this characteristic. other than through gestures. As a means of communication. Moreover. that make a different of communication between humans and animals. Thus. to communicate or to interact‖. as the basic form of communication among people. language is said to be ―an arbitrary system‖ (Carrol 1953. articulate. Supporting these ideas. and Wardaugh 1976) because. In other words. Parallel with this. Wardaugh (1976) in Sugestiningrum (2002: 6) states that. to ask questions. Finnochiaro 1974. which allow speakers to talk about themselves. language is also the most developed means through the civilization of human beings. 7 . Raghunathan (2004) proposes that. Ramelan (1992: 10) also proposes more elements about the characteristics of human language: ―systematic‖. Also. ―language is a system of arbitrary vocal symbols that permit all people in a given culture. we do communicate through some non-verbal forms like the visual arts . which allows speaker(s) in spoken language and writer(s) in written language to deliver their ideas.

it will more likely be English). they prefer to engage at least two or more languages alternately within their conversations. and although people can communicate through some non-verbal forms.wikipedia. the two or more languages are always in contact. sometimes with one or more foreign languages in addition (with the older generation. the foreign language is often Dutch. have the ability to use elements of both languages when conversing with another bilingual‖ (http://en.2. Ramelan 1992. Based on Wikipedia. as cited by Nababan (1979: 10-11): It is clear. with the people speaking one vernacular or local language (one‘s first language or ‗mother tongue‘) and Indonesian. we can draw a conclusion that ―human language‖ Ramelan 1992: 10) is ―an arbitrary system‖ (Carrol 1953. In many cases. with younger people. ―all remarks of bilingualism apply as well as to multilingualism that is the practice of alternately using three or more languages‖. while Indonesian is used for ―inter-group communication‖ (Nababan 1979: 12). 2.Based on these statements. and Wardaugh 1976). Moreover. ―bilinguals. who can speak at least two languages. 8 . Finnochiaro 1974.2 Code-Switching in a Bilingual or Multilingual Community Context It can be assumed that in a bilingual or even in a multilingual situation. It means that bilingual even multilingual people cannot always stick to only one language. It is clear enough that bilinguals have the ability to use at least two languages within their conversation. people speak three Indonesian language.org/wiki/Communication). that practically everybody is a bilingual in the cities and towns of Indonesia. The bilingualism or multilingualism situation also has appeared in Indonesia. however. From the statement above. and in every human society in the world. but language still becomes the most efficient and acceptable means to communicate between human beings. Weinrich (1968) in Surati (2003: 8) cites that. the free encyclopedia. the vernaculars are used by Indonesian people for ―intra-group purposes‖.

From these statements. Based on these statements. as McArthur (1998: 1) defines that. it is a common phenomenon in a bilingual even multilingual community. ―English is the designated language for wider communication for the country [Indonesia]‖. This condition can emerge an interesting study of sociolinguistics which is called code switching. ―code- 9 . ―Indonesian is to some extent also used for international communication. besides its functions as ―the only official language in Indonesia‖. Mixing and switching probably occur to some extent in the speech of all bilinguals …‖ Based on McArthur (1998). Then. we also can analyze code-switching based on its terms. within conversations in a bilingual even multilingual community. ―code-switching (CS). Based on Marasigan (1983: 1). code-mixing and code-switching are quite different in its emphasis. Thus. has long existed as a result of language contact and occurs commonly in bilingual settings‖. Nababan (1979) explains that. a common linguistic phenomenon in a bilingual or multilingual society: it is impossible for a bilingual or multilingual speaker to use one language only and is not interfered by other language(s) which he or she has mastered. codeswitching can be used as the alternation of two or more languages. ―a CODE may be a language or a variety or style of a language. Malaysia. code-switching also can be seen as code-choice.Furthermore. and Brunei‖. Nababan (1979) also proposes that. Further. the term CODEMIXING emphasizes hybridization. ―codeswitching or code-choice … refers to the use of two languages … in the same sentence or discourse‖. and the term CODE-SWITCHING emphasizes movement from one language to another. that if they use more than one language in their daily conversations. Ng and He (2004: 29) also argue that. that is. Parallel with this. the alternation between two (or more) languages in conversations. among Indonesia. as for Indonesian people. although Sudar (2004: 2-3) gives another definition.

as explained by Li (2005). Code-switching also can be seen as a changing of language varieties. or sentences in a whole conversation or communication event. Thus. Li (2005: 40) also cites that. variety of language. or sometimes even in the middle of a sentence‖. so there is no difference in defining of code-switching and code mixing. ―code-switching is the alternation between two codes (languages and/or dialects). Based on these statements. Sudar 2004. the term codeswitching in this study refers to moving from one language. Skiba 1997. 10 . Moreover. between people who share those particular codes‖. The switch may be a word. ―code-switching means a change by a speaker (or writer) from one language variety to another one‖. Marasigan 1983. dialect or speech style: generally called code. Sudar 2004. the term ―code‖ (Li 2005. McArthur 1998. Furthermore. ―it [code-switching] can take place in a different language. Wardhaugh (2000) in Li (2005: 40) also states that. McArthur 1998. and Wardhaugh 2000) means switching between languages. they also decide to switch from one code to another or to mix codes even within sometimes every utterance and thereby create a new code‖. Ng and He 2004. In addition about the characteristics of code-switching. in the conversation among bilingual or even multilingual society. clause within a single sentence or utterance. Hence. and Wardhaugh 2000) implicitly includes language in its meaning. a person may start speaking one language and then change to another on in the middle of their speech. phrase. Marasigan 1983.switching or code-mixing is just what seems to be the act of switching between codes (languages) in a discourse‖. ―code-switching‖ (Li 2005. ―people are usually required to select a particular code whenever they choose to speak. Skiba 1997. If we deal with Sudar (2004). there are some definitions about code-switching that are given by scientists: Skiba (1997: 2) proposes that.

3 The Types of Code-Switching There are so many types of code-switching which are given by scientists. Marasigan 1983. (3) ―intersentential‖. the word ―e-mail‖ is borrowed from English. Sudar. McArthur 1998. (2) ―calque‖. the latter: ―metaphorical code switching‖ (Gumperz 1971) is related to the situation. He points out that there are two types of code switching: (1) ―situational code switching‖ and (2) ―metaphorical code switching‖. 2004. and Wardhaugh 2000) used. those classifications can be used in order to notice code-switching‘s occurring. Skiba 1997. This type of code-switching can be seen as an impact of the speaker‘s lack of knowledge in choosing the appropriate ―code‖ (Li 2005. Further. Thus. the type of ―borrowing‖ (Hammink 2000) also can be used as the way to enrich a language vocabulary. Moreover. Li (2005). Furthermore. and (4) ―intrasentential‖. 11 . Hammink (2000) only substitutes the types of ―tag-switching‖ and ―intra-word switching‖ (McArthur 1998) with ―borrowing‖ and ―calque‖.2. The first definition of the types of code-switching is given by Gumperz (1971) in Li (2005: 40). which becomes ―imeilear‖. Hammink (2000) in Harsanti (2005: 10) also divides codeswitching into four types: (1) ―borrowing‖. occurs when the speaker ―used a word from another language which showed morphological/ phonological adaptation to the matrix language‖. The former: ―situational code switching‖ (Gumperz 1971) is related to the speaker‘s experience. Supporting McArthur‘s (1998) theory. Hammink (2000). Hammink (2000) also gives the example of borrowing type: Example : Va a imeilear a su vesino (She is going to e-mail her neighbor) From the model that is given above. this study only focuses on Gumperz (1971). Hammink (2000) explains that the first type of code-switching: ―borrowing‖. and McArthur (1998).2.

12 . or reference to. participants. intrasentential ―switches at the clause. Then the fourth type of code-switching is ―intrasentential‖ (Hammink 2000). from another conversation‖.Whether for the second type of code-switching: ―calque‖. the free encyclopedia: ―superman‖ which is a calque for the German ―Übermensch‖ (http://en. This last type is about the position which codeswitching occurs. Hammink (2000) states that. The other model of calque is represented by Wikipedia. intersentential is ―switching at the sentence level which may serve to emphasize a point made in the other language signal a switch in the conversation. phrase level or at word level if no morphological adaption occurs‖. as Hammink (2000) gives the example: Example: Le voy a Ilamar para tras (I‘m going to call him back) ―Calque‖ (Hammink 2000) just represents as the loan translation from another language. Example: Y luego me dijo ―don‘t worry about it‖ (And then he told me ―don‘t worry about it‖) As the model above. indicate to whom the statement is addressed. or to provide a direct of vote from.org/wiki/Übermensch). it also can be used to ―quote‖ (Marasigan 1983) from another conversation. ―intersential‖ (Hammink 2000) is used to emphasize a point and indicate to whom the statement is addressed. It is an expression introduced into one language by translating it from another language. ―calque is a literal translation of an expression from another language‖.wikipedia. Besides these functions. The third type of code-switching is ―intersentential‖ as cited by Hammink (2000).

he states that. (2) ‗switching between different dialects‘. in order to make an utterance becomes a tag-question. it seems that code-switching occurs at a clause boundary.‖ These three types of code-switching by Li (2005) commonly cover the major types of switching. as McArthur (1998) cites that. The utterance of Yoruba/English bilingual as the example of ―intra-sentential switching‖ (McArthur 1998): WON O ARREST A SINGLE PERSON (WON O they did not). in which tags and certain set phrases in one language are inserted into an utterance otherwise in another‖. (2) ―intra-sentential switching‖. Based on this characteristic of ―tag-switching‖ (McArthur 1998). (3) ―inter-sentential switching‖.Example: Abelardo tieme los movie tickets (Albelardo has the movie‘s tickets) Based on the model that is given. ―according to the definition of code switching. there are four types of switching: (1) ―tagswitching‖. The type of ―intrasentential‖ (Hammink 2000) usually occurs in conversation within bilingual even multilingual community. Moreover. Based on McArthur (1998: 1). Another explanation about the types of code-switching is given by Li (2005). it mainly includes three types: (1) ‗switching between different languages‘. and (3) ‗switching from formal to informal‘. code-switching can occur in tag-position. HANA? (HAI NĀ ISN'T IT). McArthur (1998) explains that the first type: ―tag-switching. 13 . ―intra-sentential switching. The second type is about ―intra-sentential switching‖. in which switches occur within a clause or sentence boundary‖. McArthur (1998) cites the utterance of a Panjabi/English bilingual as the example of ―tag-switching‖: IT'S A NICE DAY. and (4) ―intra-word switching‖.

This type of code-switching: ―intrasentential‖ (Hammink 2000. McArthur (1998) also gives the utterance of a Spanish/English. meaning ‗to‘). Moreover. Based on Hammink (2000) ―intersential‖ is also used to emphasize a point and indicate to whom the statement is addressed. because the speaker wants to emphasize that he or she is also able to speak in Spanish. Moreover. ―certain bound morphemes are known as affixes (reflecting the fact that they must be attached. This type of code-switching occurs at a clause boundary. Ramelan (1992: 58-59) proposes that. McArthur (1998) gives the example of ―intra-word switching‖: SHOPPA (English SHOP with the Panjabi plural ending) or the Swahili prefix ku. the first code of sentence is in English and then switched into Spanish. to other morphemes)‖. the last type of code-switching by McArthur (1998) is ―intra-word switching‖. Further. As the model that is given above. as the example of ―inter-sentential‖: SOMETIMES I'LL START A SENTENCE IN ENGLISH Y TERMINO EN ESPANOL (and finish it in Spanish).Parallel this idea is Hammink (2000). Next. Finally. phrase level or at word level if no morphological adaption occurs‖. KUENJOY (English ENJOY with The model above is the use of code-switching as ―affixes‖: the first is ―suffix‖ and the latter is ―prefix‖ (Ramelan 1992). that intrasentential ―switches at the clause. as he describes that. McArthur (1998) gives an explanation about the third type: ―intersentential switching. McArthur 1998) is usually used by bilingual even multilingual speakers. he also explains that. or ‗affixed‘. ―in which a change occurs within a word boundary‖. where each clause or sentence is in one language or the other‖. ―affixes are referred to as prefixes when they 14 . in which a change of language occurs at a clause or sentence boundary.

for example [in Sundanese: one of Indonesian local languages]. (2) ―participants‖. also have affixes known as ―infixes‖ (Ramelan 1992). From those definitions above. rethink) and as suffixes when they are attached to the end of another morpheme (like the suffix –ize in words such as modernize. (5) ―key‖.wikipedia. (6) ―instrumentalities‖. which are attached ―within another morpheme. and (8) ―genre‖. meaning ‗wood‘. According to Hymes (1969) in Surati (2003: 15-22). rewrite. (3) ―ends‖. The first factor 15 . meaning ‗gathered wood‘. the free encyclopedia: (1) ―intersentential switching‖.‖ The type of ―intra-word switching‖ (McArthur 1998) then deals with its function as ―affixes‖ (Ramelan 1992).are attached to the beginning of another morpheme (like the prefix re. taking the word kayu. further. Marasigan (1983).in words such as redo.2. and Skiba (1997). (2) ―intra-sentential switching‖. (7) ―norm‖. and (4) ―intra-word switching‖ (http://en. it seems that Gumperz (1971) and Li (2005) only focus on macroforms of switching rather than to analyze the occurring of switching from its positions. 2.4 The Possible Factors Causing Code-Switching There are a number of reasons to switch from one language to another. (4) ―art-sequence‖. Certain language. the types of code-switching are also given by Wikipedia. Parallel with McArthur‘s (1998) theory. equalize. but not English: as Indonesian. one can insert the infix –in– immediately after the first consonant k to form the word kinayu. this study only refers to the possible factors causing code-switching by Hymes (1969). (3) ―tag-switching‖.org/wiki/Code-switching). the possible factors causing codeswitching can be classified into several points: (1) ―situation‖. as Hammink (2000) and McArthur (1998) do. centralize)‖.

Thus. Skiba 1997. participants deal with ―the people in the communicative event. Hymes (1969) 16 . Hymes (1969) also explains that. addressor-addressee. ends are related to ―the language function and the purpose of conversation‖. Based on the sample that is given. Marasigan 1983. the term of ―setting‖ is about ―the ‗physical circumstance‘ of the communicative event. and a telephone conversation [mailbox] involves a sender and a receiver‖. McArthur 1998. is different to the speaking in a library where there are many people reading or studying‖. and ―scene‖ refers to ―the abstract ‗psychological setting‘: what kind of speech event is taking place according to cultural and psychological definition‖. it can be concluded that the ―code‖ (Li 2005. a political speech involves and addressor and addresses (the audience). including the time and place‖.causing code-switching: ―situation‖. ―the different time. The second factor causing code-switching: ―participants‖ (Hymes 1969). ―participants‖ (Hymes 1969) become the most important element of a conversation which will decide the kind of conversation and how the conversation will be. According to Hymes (1969). In more detail. Hymes (1969) describes that. and Wardhaugh 2000) used by the participants is relied on the ―situation‖ (Hymes 1969) of conversation. ―the end of speech event can be divided into outcomes (the purpose of the event from the cultural point of view) and goals (the purpose of the individual participants)‖. Sudar 2004. including various combination of speakerlistener. For illustration. Furthermore. place and situation can result a different use of language‖. or sender-receiver‖. The third factor causing code-switching: ―ends‖ (Hymes 1969). ―situation is composed of the ‗setting‘ and ‗scene‘. Hymes (1969) gives the example about ―participant‖: ―A two person conversation involves speaker and listener whose roles can change.‖ Moreover. The example of ―situation‖ is also given by Hymes (1969): ―Speaking in a stadium where the football game is taking place and in a noisy situation.

while ―content means what is said. pedantic. it seems that ends are depend on the purpose of event: ―outcomes‖ (Hymes 1969) which is then followed by the purpose of individual participants: ―goals‖ (Hymes 1969). The sixth factor causing code-switching: ―instrumentalities‖ (Hymes 1969) which include: ―channel and form of speech‖. As the example that is given by Hymes (1969): ―A lecturer. the goal of the seller. of course. with different kind of languages and things talked about‖. ―message form deals with the price word used. as Hymes (1969) gives the example: ―When a person is speaking while pointing his finger to the interlocutors. a casual conversation and a barbeque party chatter are all different form of speaking. manner or spirit in which particular message is conveyed: light-hearted. The forth factor causing code-switching: ―act-sequence‖ (Hymes 1969) refers to ―message form and content‖. mocking. the overall outcome is to be the orderly exchange something of value from one person to the other.gives the example of ―ends‖: ―In a bargaining event. ―channel is the way a message travels from one person to another‖. what topic is talked about in the communication event‖. The ―key‖ may also be marked ―non-verbally‖. varieties and registers chosen in communication‖. codes. it can show impoliteness‖. Hymes (1969) explains that. In a real communication. While. sarcastic or others‖. serious. The fifth factor causing code-switching: ―key‖ (Hymes 1969) refers to ―the tone. is to maximize the price. dialect. Moreover. Based on Hymes (1969). From the model that is given. Thus. how they are used and the relationship of what is said with the actual topic‖. while ―form of speech includes language and their subdivisions. ―message form and content‖ (Hymes 1969) may always change because many reasons and they also can influence the change of language used. Hymes (1969) 17 . the buyer wants to minimize it‖. the ―key‖ (Hymes 1969) can also be seen as styles which affect the degree of conversation. casual.

In other words. (4) ―domain‖. these norms vary between social groups. riddles. Marasigan (1983: 39) also mentions the social factors of language variation: (1) ―role relationships between speakers and addressee‖. Moreover. [role relationships] may be characterized by the dimensions of status and solidarity‖. Marasigan (1983) also proposes that. the way a message: ―channel‖ (Hymes 1969) travels. will give an impact to the form of speech. Sudar 2004. it involves trying to understand what is being conveyed beyond what are the actual words used‖. etc. Hymes (1969) explains that. ―interpretation norm is more or less what is meant by expression ‗reading between the lines‘. Marasigan 1983. The seventh factor causing code-switching: ―norms‖ (Hymes 1969) which include: ―interaction and interpretation norms‖. Skiba 1997. Thus. proverbs. ―the norm of interaction and interpretation cannot be separated the culture. lectures. such as poems. ―as social identity. ―status may be 18 . ―interaction norm deals with what is permitted to do in communication and what is not‖. Further. The eight factor causing code-switching: ―genre‖ (Hymes 1969) which refers to ―clearly demarcated types of utterance. Supporting Goodenough (1963). (3) ―situation‖. and (5) ―setting‖. as explained by Goodenough (1963) in Marasigan (1983: 39). prayers. Hymes (1969) argues that. It means that the difference in ―genre‖ (Hymes 1969) also will differ the use of language or ―code‖ (Li 2005. (2) ―topics‖. and Wardhaugh 2000).‖ Hymes (1969) describes that. McArthur 1998. The first type of language variation: ―role relationships between speakers and addressee‖ (Marasigan 1983). belief and situation of the society‖.gives the example of the channel which determines the form of speech: ―The language used in telephoning will be different to the language in face-to-face interaction‖. Further. ―the language of speech will be different to the language of telling stories or having a chat‖. In this case.

Marasigan 1983. there is more than one topic within a conversation which makes the ―participants‖ (Hymes 1969) switch their ―code‖ (Li 2005. place and roles‖. Ervin and Tripp (1964) in Marasigan (1983: 40) also propose that. Sudar 2004. (2) ―place‖ and (3) ―roles‖ (Bock 1964) come together in a regular way. ―topic may be construed – it may include not only categories such as subject matter but also propositional content of utterances‖. and Wardhaugh 2000) used within conversation. (2) ―place‖ and (3) ―roles‖ (Bock 1964) in order to make code-switching occurs. the two of social aspects: ―status‖ and ―solidarity‖ (Goodenough 1963. He also gives the example: ―one type of cultural situational might be a class. as cited by Fishman (1965) in Marasigan (1983: 40). relative caste or class.defined by relative sex. Usually. Marasigan 1983) also give an important influence in choosing the ―code‖ (Li 2005. When those three variables: (1) ―time‖. ―situation‖ (Marasigan 1983) needs these three variables: (1) ―time‖. Marasigan 1983. Skiba 1997. in role relationships between speakers and addressee. The forth type of language variation: ―domain‖ (Marasigan 1983). The third type of language variation: ―situation‖ (Marasigan 1983). ―… the topic under discussion may be a determinant of linguistic behavior‖. McArthur 1998. Sudar 2004. ―they may be reflected in certain language usage norms‖. Bock (1964) in Marasigan (1983: 40) argues about a dimension situation which ―combines three variables: time. McArthur 1998. as stated by Marasigan (1983: 40) that. and Wardhaugh 2000). which usually takes place during class time in a school with roles of teacher and pupil‖. So. further Fishman (1965) in Marasigan (1983: 40) sees domain as ―a cluster of social situations which are typically 19 . while solidarity may be defined according to the relative intimacy between the speaker and the addressee‖. The second type of language variation: ―topics‖. Skiba 1997. Thus. Moreover. relative professional ranking and relative age.

(2) ―switching commonly occurs when an individual wishes to express solidarity with a particular social group‖. code-switching becomes the way to compensate for the speakers‘ deficiency. ―the speaker may be triggered into speaking in the other language for a while‖. Thus. Parallel with Crystal (1987). Based on this statement. ―setting includes both the time and the place of interaction‖. and (3) ―the alteration that occurs when the speaker wishes to convey his or her attitude to the listener‖. McArthur 1998. a social group or community may contribute the use of codeswitching among of members. as proposed by Skiba (1997). tired or distracted in some manner‖. as cited by Marasigan (1983). Where code switching is used due to an inability of expression. the first type of the possible factors causing code-switching: ―the notion that a speaker may not be able to express him or herself in one language‖ (Skiba 1997). in this type. further. Skiba (1997: 2) also gives his theory for the possible factors causing codeswitching: (1) ―the notion that a speaker may not be able to express him or herself in one language‖. Marasigan 1983. in this case. Sudar 2004. The fifth type of language variation: ―setting‖. Thus.constrained by a common set of behavioral rules‖ and ―which in any community is associated with particular variety‖. Based on these statements. shows that 20 . ―this type of code switching [―the notion that a speaker may not be able to express him or herself in one language‖ (Skiba 1997)] tends to occur when the speaker is upset. he also cites that. Skiba (1997) also deals that. ―code switching is not a language interference on the basis that it supplements speech‖. Skiba 1997. For the first possible factor causing code-switching: ―the notion that a speaker may not be able to express him or herself in one language‖ (Skiba 1997). Crystal (1987) in Skiba (1997: 1-2) argues that. and Wardhaugh 2000) used within conversation. ―code switching provides a continuity in speech rather than presenting an interference in language‖. time and place also cause switch the ―code‖ (Li 2005.

but a means which ―provides a continuity in speech‖ (Skiba 1997). ―the sociolinguistic benefits have also been identified as a means of communicating solidarity. bilingual even multilingual speakers can convey the same by code switching. Further. in order to make a communication becomes acceptable within a social community of bilingual or multilingual. or affiliation to a particular social group. Crystal (1987) in Skiba (1997: 2) also proposes that. the third possible factor causing code-switching: ―the alteration that occurs when the speaker wishes to convey his or her attitude to the listener‖ (Skiba 1997). Although. ―code switching allows a speaker to convey attitude and other emotives using a method available to those who are bilingual and again 21 . It means that codeswitching allows bilingual even multilingual speakers to convey their attitude to listeners. he states that. Others in the elevator who do not speak the same language would be excluded from the conversation and a degree of comfort would exist amongst the speakers in the knowledge that not all those present in the elevator are listening to their conversation‖. whereby code switching should be viewed from the perspective of providing a linguistic advantage rather than an obstruction to communication‖. this is like where monolingual speakers can communicate these attitudes by means of variation in the level of formality in their speech. Crystal (1987) gives the example of such a situation: ―… two people in an elevator in a language other than English. as Skiba (1997) tries to describe that. Thus. code-switching serves a device to fulfill these needs. The second possible factor causing code-switching: ―to express solidarity with a particular social group‖ (Skiba 1997). ―this type of switching [―to express solidarity with a particular social group‖ (Skiba 1997)] may also be used to exclude others from a conversation who do not speak the second language‖. parallel with these statements. in the other hands.code-switching is not a deficit of speaker‘s knowledge. further. Moreover.

It seems that code-switching is not a deficit of speaker‘s knowledge. The first definitions of the functions of code-switching are given by Grosjean (1982) in Harsanti (2005: 19): (1) ―Speaker prefers to use the most available word than to find similar expression in proper language‖ (Grosjean 1982). Skiba (1997) explains that by ―utilising the second language. code-switching is the appropriate choice for a bilingual even multilingual speaker to convey these attitudes or emotives. Marasigan (1983). and Scotton (1979). then. Marasigan 1983. Supporting this idea is Marasigan (1983) with ―facility of expression‖. Thus. Moreover. 2. much like bolding or underlining in a text document to emphasise points‖. a speaker can also emphasize his or her meanings to listeners by using codeswitching. but a means which ―provides a continuity in speech‖ (Skiba 1997). and Skiba 1997) of bilingual even multilingual communities that influence the speaker. Here are some functions of code-switching that presented by some scientists: Grosjean (1982). code-switching also ―provides a continuity in speech rather than presenting an interference in language‖ (Skiba 1997). 22 . allows speakers to increase the impact of their speech and use it in an effective manner‖. code-switching occurs because of the social factors (Hymes 1969. ―people may employ different kinds of code switching for different purposes‖.2.5 The Functions of Code-Switching Basically.serves to advantage the speaker. Parallel with this. people communicate in order to deliver their ―ideas and wishes to other people such as when he needs their help‖ (Ramelan 1992). based on Li (2005: 40). as a writer does by bolding or underlining in his or her text document to emphasize points. From those discussions above.

―code-switching is used when speaker wants to exclude someone within a conversation‖. or if the location of the interaction changes‖ (Grosjean 1982). Sudar 2004. (4) ―Speaker quotes someone‘s saying‖ (Grosjean 1982). it is used to emphasize an important point within conversation. Marasigan 1983. Of course. McArthur 1998. McArthur 1998. This function deals with Crystal (1987) in Skiba (1997: 2). quotations serve a proof that what the speaker‘s saying are facts so that the addressees have to believe him or her. 23 . and Wardhaugh 2000) that used. because he or she consciously chooses the ―code‖ (Li 2005. or when a third person enters the room.(2) ―Speaker will keep using the new code since it will trigger him thus the continuation of sentence may stay in the new code‖ (Grosjean 1982). this function is depend on the characteristic of each individual. Sudar 2004. that switching commonly occurs when an individual wishes ―to express solidarity with a particular social group‖. 1983. This function deals with Skiba (1997). and Wardhaugh 2000) which includes as a humor or not. Marasigan (1983) also deals this function with ―quotations‖. This second function of code-switching happens consciously by the speaker. there is no pattern in qualifying ―code‖ (Li 2005. again this is a conscious act of the speaker that he or she wants to show his or her ability in mastering some languages. For this last function. (3) ―Speaker has something to emphasize by mentioning certain words into certain intonation and showing facial expression‖ (Grosjean 1982). (6) ―Speaker has a sense of humor‖ (Grosjean 1982). (5) ―Speaker marks and shows his group identity‖ (Grosjean 1982). Marasigan. (8) ―Speaker wants to show the audience that he is able to use or speak in other languages‖ (Grosjean 1982). (7) ―Speaker excludes someone. Parallel with this is Marasigan (1983) with ―interjection‖. Skiba 1997. Skiba 1997.

because of an ambiguity of language he or she used. (6) ―personalization and objectification‖ and (7) ―facility of expression‖. ―… the subjects switched codes to preserve the originality of the message‖. Quoting also persuades the addressees that what the speaker said is a fact. ―to avoid any distortion in the meaning of the message.‖ Actually. Interjection is used much like bolding or underlining in a text document to emphasise points. Moreover. The first function of codeswitching: ―quotations‖ which according to Marasigan (1983: 73). By quoting. ―a quotation served as a proof that what they were saying were facts and that the addressees had to believe them‖. rather than only to provide a persuasion. perhaps the addressees will believe what the speaker said. (2) ―interjection‖. Marasigan (1983) proposes that. Marasigan (1983: 76) gives the example of the situation where the Filipino speaker expressed his idea of a good student by ―quotation‖: Sabi nga e (as they say). (3) ―repetition‖. but perhaps he felt that the message. ―subjects quoted themselves and others directly or indirectly to sound more credible to the addressees‖. as explained by Marasigan (1983) that. The second function of code-switching: ―interjection‖ (Marasigan 1983: 81). (4) ―addressee specification‖.Another functions of code-switching are also proposed by Marasigan (1983: 120): (1) ―quotation‖. The function of interjection based on Marasigan (1983) is ―to express strong feelings or emotions‖. 24 . Marasigan (1983: 75) also states that. which was originally said in English. quoting is the most appropriate way to avoid the ambiguity. the Filipino speaker could have restated the quotation in Pilipino to convey the same message. Sometimes the speaker is hard to deliver his or her ideas. would not have the same impact on the addressees if he had been translated to Pilipino. the speakers decide to use the language in which the message was originally stated‖. (5) ―message qualification‖. ―Honesty is the best policy. Quoting is also used to preserve the originality of the message.

Nevertheless. Marasigan (1983: 82) gives the situation of ―interjection‖. schooldays na naman. from my kinder up to 5th grade. So. you stretch your legs. allowences and miscellaneous ang iniintindi ko (it‘s schooldays again and I have to attend to many things like matriculation fees. ‗school supplies‘ etc. shared with the readers his problems – financial problem: (1) I don‘t know kung paano pa ang gagawin kung pagkayod (how hard I still have to work). or mark a joke‖. as she mentions that.Marasigan (1983) also notices that. hand. also expressions describe Indonesian emotions very well rather than any foreign languages. The third function of code-switching: ―repetition‖ Marasigan (1983: 79).) (4) Laki talaga ng gastos nyagon ng schooling (school expenses have indeed increased). the use of repetition actually is depend on the context itself. etc. Indonesian or native languages. ‗matriculation‘. oh heaven! Marasigan (1983: 82) also explains that. ―You stretch your leg. the complaints were in Pilipino …‖ As Indonesian comments of football match.) (3) My wife helps me also in budgeting. matriculation.‖ B : Ano (what)? 25 . ―Pilipino expressions describe Filipino emotions very well … and the feelings could have been insipidly expressed in English‖. where the subject: as a Filipino father. for Filipinos – as the example. B : Ano (what)? A : I said. ―repetition may serve to clarify what is said. can be better understood in English than in Indonesian. where the first speaker (A) felt uncomfortable in the car because of the position of the second speaker‘s (B‘s) legs: A : Ate Christy. can be better expressed and understood in English than in Pilipino. The conversation below is the example of ―repetition‖ that is given by Marasigan (1983). ―concepts such as ‗fifth grade‘. because it can express strong feelings or emotions of Indonesian. but parang palaging kulang (but the money we earn does not seem enough for our expenses. the terms such: offside. daily allowance for my children and many other ‗miscellaneous‘ expenses. amplify or emphasize a message. Parallel with this. (2) You see. while the comments are in Indonesian. sliding.

C : (Laughing) Sabi ko (I said).C : Darling. I told her to stretch her legs). Marasigan (1983) also explains that in quotations. ―the original message has been uttered by the speakers a long time ago and they are just recalling them aloud‖. The forth function of code-switching: ―addressee specification‖. From the model above we can see that the first speaker (A) repeated the same message when he thought that the second speaker (B) did not understand him and failed to follow his instruction. there no need for her to repeat what she said in the other ―code‖ (Li 2005. Marasigan (1983) argues that. as cited by (Marasigan 1983: 76). Ate Christy does not understand English. It means that codeswitching is used to personalize the message to be delivered. Moreover she explains that it is because ―the span of time between the original and the repeated message was very short … both the original and the repeated message were contained in the text‖. he thought that the second speaker could not hear very well and so get intention in repeating his message was to heard rather than to be understood. sabi ko naman i–stretch nya ang legs nya. In the second repetition. Sudar 2004. magtagalog ka (Darling. and Wardhaugh 2000). ―this type of switching [addressee specification] recognizes not only the interacting members of the speech events but it also recognizes that their language behavior may be more 26 . Marasigan 1983. The conversation above was considered by Marasigan (1983) as ―a form of repetition rather than quotation although the speakers (A and C) practically quoted themselves‖. i–stretch mo ang legs mo. Skiba 1997. the first speaker (A) presumed that the second speaker (B) could understand English and therefore. speak Tagalog). Maybe in this case. ―… the switch serves to direct the message to a specific person‖. McArthur 1998. A : Ah! Ate Christy. ―You speak in Tagalong‖ Tagalong bay an (Is that Tagalog)? A : Oo. Moreover. ah (Yes.

as cited by Marasigan (1983: 84). From the model that is given above. The aim of switching under this category served mainly. He used the same code to answer the question of the teacher. Most of schools in Indonesia only use Indonesian as the daily-official language between teachers and students. Miss. He switched to Mix-mix (a Pilipino based sentence with only one English word substitution) when he talked to his classmate E‖. too!) Marasigan (1983) also explains that. but also a matter of role relations‖. seatmates pa naman! (yes. Marasigan (1983) tries to analyze the conversation above. C : Oo. maybe only few of schools in Indonesia that apply English as the language of daily communication. and they are seatmates. ―addressee specification‖ (Marasigan 1983) also indicates a matter of role relations within conversation. The use of English does not only indicate the difference between their roles but it also encourages the students to speak the language they learn in school‖. but it also indicates a matter of role relations within conversation. D : (Teacher): Sinong nag-aaway (Who are quarrelling)? C : The two. Marasigan (1983: 77) gives the conversation of a Filipino student who reported to his teacher that two of his classmates were quarrelling – as the example of ―addressee specification‖: C : Miss. ―the boy (C) used English when he reported to his teacher that two of his classmates were quarrelling. fighting again the two. Further. Unfortunately. The fifth function of code-switching: ―message qualification‖ (Marasigan 1983: 83). we can conclude that ―addressee specification‖ (Marasigan 1983) is not only as an individual preference of facility. ―in some schools in the Philippines the language of communication between teachers and students is English.than merely a matter of individual preference or facility. this case is not found in Indonesia. o. Furthermore. Besides its function as an individual preference of facility. is ―to 27 . E : Away ng away (always quarrelling).

Marasigan (1983: 84) tries to give explanation of the conversation above. Further. ―the addressee B failed to understand the message of the speaker A which was said in English‖. felt the necessity to switch to Pilipino. Moreover. then. the switched passages [switches as message qualification] were meant to amplify or emphasize a message‖. the speaker (as the director of the school play) seemed unwilling to take the risk of being misunderstood again.‖ In the model which is given. Message qualification can be used in order to evaluate whether the addresses understand or do not with the message that is given. she explains that. B : I will appear … ah … three … A : Pero maganda (but it‘s beautiful). why can‘t you understand me?‖ Then code-switching: as ―message qualification‖ (Marasigan 1983). the play director (A) was distributing the scripts to the participants of a coming school play: A : So this is your role. it not only can be used in order to evaluate but also to emphasize a message. ―in other cases. B : Bakit naman ekstra (Why did you give me a very unimportant role). Marasigan (1983: 65) gives the example of ―message qualification‖. moreover. However. ―the speaker [A]. Marasigan (1983: 85) also gives a composition of a Filipino grade six girl about her friends as the example of this second function of message qualification. Marasigan (1983) notices that.qualify a previous message which the speaker believed would be better understood in the other code‖. Kung gaano kahaba (how long it will be). For the second function of ―message qualification‖ (Marasigan 1983). It‘s simple. ―the impatience in his [the speaker A‘s] tone when he said kung gaano kahaba (how long your role will be) could be paraphrased as ―This is what I mean by role. A : What I mean the role. as a means ―to amplify or emphasize a message‖: 28 . so he switched to Pilipino to explain what he meant by ‗role‘. can be used to check the understanding of the message that is given. Marasigan (1983: 85) also mentions that.

From the model that is given. even if they are friends. Marasigan (1983: 86) cites about the coming basketball game between two of the Philippines‘ most popular basketball team – Crispa and Toyota. Marasigan (1983: 86) explains that. Marasigan (1983) explains that. He was expressing his involvement in it. But in the model that is given. This was what the writer wanted to point out when she switched to English. whether it refers to specific instances. that their group was different. Here the subject was not only stating a message. schoolmates. Thus. ―the subject used English to express what to him were objective facts. Moreover. He switched to Pilipino to express a personal wish. it 29 . normally enjoy each other‘s company only in the school campus among the subject‘s friends‖. ―the code contrast here seems to relate to such things as: the degree of speaker involvement in. as she states that. The sixth function of code-switching: ―personalization and objectivization‖ (Marasigan 1983: 85). Further. so she described it in another language. ―in Philippines.Sila’y laging magkakasama (They always together) anywhere they go. Sana manalo sila (I hope they win). whether a statement reflects personal opinion. but also outside the school campus. it can be seen that they were always together not only in. the functions of ―personalization and objectivization‖ (Marasigan 1983) are divided into: ―objective marks that the speaker gives about the fact‖ and ―subjective argument from the speaker as personalize marks‖. or whether it has the status of generally known fact‖. He would want his favorite team to win and would certainly be disappointed if it did not‖. as the example of ―personalization and objectivization‖: It‘s a Crispa-Toyota deal. I‘m one of the Crispa die-hard fans. feeling or knowledge. a message or an addressee. or distance form.

Moreover. ―code-switching provides a continuity in speech‖ (Skiba 1997). We always together. ―not all instances of code alternation convey meaning‖. sometimes nagkakaroon kami ng misunderstanding at madalas kaming magaway (we sometimes misunderstand each other and we quarrel often) … In addition. This first function deals with Grosjean (1982) that. Parallel with this. Moreover. 30 . in this case is Pilipino. is used when the speaker want to argue something. in general. in the other hands. Marasigan (1983: 91) gives the composition written by a grade six girl as the example of switching for ―facility of expression‖: My barkada‘s are Andrea. This function of code-switching is used due to an inability of expression. Maricris and Lora (My friends are…) They are minsan pikon and minsan good (They are sometimes unable to take jokes and sometimes good).seems that English is only used when the speaker wants to deliver the fact. Based on Gumperz and Hernandez (1971) in Marasigan (1983: 80). The seventh function of code-switching: ―facility of expression‖ (Marasigan 1983: 90). ―speaker prefers to use the most available word than to find similar expression in proper language‖ and Marasigan (1983) with ―facility of expression‖. the first language. most of Indonesian people also use code-switching in order to facility their lack of knowledge. ―Filipinos. Marasigan (1983: 90) proposes that facility of expression is a function ―where the shift … can only be interpreted as difficulty in finding the right words at the time of speaking or writing or merely as a sign of the subject‘s lack of familiarity with the style he is using‖. switch code for facility of expression (in addition to the six functions previously discussed)‖. there are also four main reasons for the use of code-switching: (1) ―Lack of knowledge of one language or lack of facility in that language or certain subject‖ (Scotton 1979). according to Scotton (1979) in Surati (2003: 13-14). Shin and Chanseawrassamee (2007: 23) state that. Furthermore. Marasigan (1983: 92) also explains that.

or if the location of the interaction changes‖. ―speaker excludes someone. elaborate. (2) ―To exclude certain person present from the portion of the conversation‖ (Scotton 1979). Grosjean (1982) also argues that.―contrary to the assumption that code-switching is evidence of linguistic deficit in bilingual speakers. ―… CS [codeswitching] may serve to translate. Also in this path. 31 . Grosjean (1982) also proposes that. Based on these statements. Moreover. the sequential analysis suggests that code-switching is used as an additional resource to achieve particular conversational goals in interactions with other bilingual speakers‖. sometimes code-switching is used when the speaker wants to eliminate someone from the conversation. Supporting this idea. clarify. this third function of code-switching by Scotton (1979) can be seen as a means to emphasize or signal an important point within conversation. Parallel with this is Marasigan (1983) with ―interjection‖. Ng and He (2004: 29) who try to explain that. this function happens as means to facility the speaker‘s lack of knowledge. it is used to emphasize an important point within conversation. ―speaker has something to emphasize by mentioning certain words into certain intonation and showing facial expression‖. Again. Thus. ―code-switching may also be used to exclude others from a conversation who do not speak the second language‖. or when a third person enters the room. or emphasize a message that has been previously expressed in another language‖. Further. This statement deals with Crystal (1987) in Skiba (1997: 2) who also states that. (4) ―As an attempt to impress another with his virtuosity in several languages or at least one prestige language‖ (Scotton 1979). (3) ―As a stylistic device to indicate a change in the ‗tone‘ of conversation at a certain point or to signal the introduction of a subject more or less formal than what had been under discussion‖ (Scotton 1979). Grosjean (1982) also argues that.

Marasigan (1983).6. and Scotton (1979) have the same definitions in classifying the functions of code-switching. Marasigan 1983). ―quotation‖ or ―speaker quotes someone‘s saying‖ (Grosjean 1982. Scotton 1979). Marasigan 1983. 2. there is ―a distinction between people who study English as a foreign language and those who study it as a second language or other language‖. as cited by Harmer (2007: 12).―speaker wants to show the audience that he is able to use or speak in other languages‖. Paul (2003: 1) also proposes that. Marasigan 1983. Scotton 1979). Based on Paul (2003: 1). Henceforth. ―interjection‖ or ―speaker has something to emphasize‖ (Grosjean 1982. this last function is used to show the speaker‘s ability in mastering several languages. the term of ESL refers to ―the learning of English by immigrants to a country where English is the native language‖. ―to exclude certain person present from the portion of the conversation‖ (Grosjean 1982. and ―as an attempt to impress another with his virtuosity in several languages‖ (Grosjean 1982. they are: ―facility of expression‖ or ―lack of knowledge of one language‖ (Grosjean 1982. ―one of the most important distinctions to be aware of is that between ESL and EFL‖. and (2) ―English as a Second Language learners‖ (Harmer 2007. Thus. Thus it can be concluded that if code-switching styles served as functioning communicative systems. From those statements. Scotton 1979). Different Contexts for Learning In the different contexts for learning. Grosjean (1982). Thus. Parallel with Harmer (2007).2. in order to make these distinctions become easier to be studied. as he gives the example of ESL: ―A Korean child who has moved to Australia with her family is an ESL learner in her English 32 . Paul 2003). this study divides the different contexts for learning into two particular groups: (1) ―English as a Foreign Language learners‖. Scotton 1979). Paul 2003). they are called with ―EFL learners‖ and ―ESL learners‖ (Harmer 2007.

Thus. Harmer (2007: 12) suggests that. who also speak English‖. ―EFL learners often do not have a particular reason for going to English classes. such as while playing with their friends. they are more likely to deeply understand the importance of English and feel it is natural and necessary to learn it‖. shopping. ―EFL as the learning of English by students in a country where English is not the native language‖. further. It is true that ―ESL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. Paul 2003) have a lot of chances to practice their English effectively because they live in a ―target-language community‖ (Harmer 2007). the condition of EFL is like in Indonesia. In general. ―ESL learners generally have more chances to use English naturally outside class. Whether for ―ESL learners‖. [ESL learners] are usually living in the target-language community‖. Paul (2003: 1) also argues that. such as when watching TV or just hearing conversations around them. the situation of ―general English‖ (Harmer 2007) is also parallel with Indonesian learners. the group of EFL is usually called as ―general English‖ (Harmer 2007). but simply wish to learn to speak (and read and write) the language effectively for wherever and whenever this might be useful for them‖ (Harmer 2007). Moreover. From the model that is 33 . ―EFL learners tend to be learning so that they can use English when travelling or to communicate with other people. that is because ―EFL learners‖ only study English in order to be able to communicate with others who also speak English. from whatever country. Parallel with Paul (2003).class‖. Paul (2003) argues that. although not all of them do. while for EFL. or surviving in daily life‖. In studying English. Harmer (2007) states. where learners study English as the foreign language rather than as the second language. Moreover. Paul (2003) gives the example of the situation of ESL: ―They [ESL learners] are also likely to have much more exposure to English. Moreover. ―on the other hand.

Paul 2003) also gives the bigger persuasion to learners‘ emotion about the important of studying English. There may also be times when an English teacher needs to use the students‘ native language to help introduce activities. do not use the alphabet in their own language. will find a difficulty to practice their English in their real life. As ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. Paul (2003: 1-2) also tries to give a description about EFL learners. Furthermore. the environment of ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007.given. an English teacher should use English for classroom interaction with ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. but if possible he or she should try to use English accompanied by 34 . Paul 2003). but unless they are in an environment where there is a lot of English around them. or peers. in English class. Paul 2003) is quite different with ESL learners‘. Paul 2003). and may not deeply understand why they are learning English in the first place. rarely feel it is either natural or necessary to learn English‖. we can see that ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. The environment of ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. on the other hand. Moreover. From these statements. Moreover. ―EFL learners. who do not have a particular reason to study English. the first year students of Junior High School in Indonesia also study English that is felt very different from their own: Indonesian or their mother tongue. rather than the impulse that is given by their parents. teachers. ―adults may have told them [EFL learners] English is important. The ―general English‖ (Harmer 2007): the group of EFL learners. If an English teacher wants them to adopt a positive and active approach to learning with a clear sense of direction. Paul 2003) easily study and practice their English effectively in their daily life because their environment: the ―target-language community‖ (Harmer 2007) which always supports them to do it. Paul (2003) cites that. they are unlikely to feel a deep emotional need for the language‖. he or she must success in giving an effective approach to them.

Although based on Harmer (2007). Classes are sometimes critised because there is too much TTT (Teacher Talking Time) and not enough STT (Student Talking Time)‖. and reading. ―what is important is that the children are given clear guidelines on when they are expected to use English and when their first language is permissible‖. as Harmer (2007: 38) also suggests that. Teaching ―EFL learners‖ is quite different from teaching ―ESL learners‖. 35 . 2. ―there is a continuing debate about the amount of time teachers should spend talking in class. a lesson plan which manages times when ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007.7 Speaking Activities in English Class Speaking activities in English class is quite important. because ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. As proposed by Phillips (1993). it would be counter-productive to expect them to use their limited knowledge of English‖. writing. Paul 2003) are expected to use English and when their native language is allowed. is the best solution in teaching English for EFL. ―the way that teachers talk to students – the manner in which they interact with them – is one of the crucial teacher skills. As cited by Phillips (1993: 6). From those discussions above. besides listening.2.mime and gesture. it will make a teaching learning process becomes ―counter-productive‖ if an English teacher still forces his or her students: ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. Paul 2003) to use only English in whole English class time. speaking is still the most important way in teaching language. Thus. especially in learning English. but it does not demand technical expertise‖. especially for High School students. Paul 2003) sometimes need the use of their native language besides English. Based on Harmer (2007: 37). Moreover. ―in a feedback session … where the aim is for the children to express their feeling and attitudes. Further Phillips (1993) proposes that.

speaking does not demand technical expertise from an English teacher.1 Teacher Talk In classroom context. Furthermore. besides as the educators. this concept makes a teacher plays multifunction. (2) as ―the directive or management function‖. Thus. but it can also become ―counter-productive‖ (Phillips 1993) if a teacher does not know when the appropriate time for him or her to speak and when the time for his or her students. As the director. and (3) reasons for teaching speaking. At very general level.7. is ―to deliver new information to students‖. ―teacher talk serves many functions‖.2. (2) students talk. Holmes (1986) also argues that this function appears because ―teachers are generally older and knowledgeable than their pupils and more statusful by virtue of their role as educators and instructors‖. the second function of teacher talk: as ―the directive or management function‖ (Holmes 1986) is ―for potential directive intent‖. The last function of teacher talk: as ―the questioning or eliciting function‖ (Holmes 1986) is ―to evaluate the materials which 36 . as mentioned before by Holmes (1986): ―the informing function‖. 2. a teacher should direct or manage his or her students and all that related to learning activities. of course. Then. This is all at once as the basic function of a teacher him or herself that is to teach or to deliver new ideas or concepts as the knowledge for his or her students. there are some factors which have influences in speaking activities in English class: (1) teacher talk. and (3) as ―the questioning or eliciting function‖ (Holmes 1986). The relation between a teacher and students are marked by the role: a teacher as the educator and students as the learners. in order to make an effective and efficiency teaching learning process. Further. The first function of teacher talk. moreover. he explains more about these three broad functions: (1) as ―the informing function‖. as proposed by Holmes (1986: 19). a teacher also has to play the role as the director in classroom context.

Moreover. and the result from this one-way communication is that students cannot develop their skills in mastering English. For these reasons. Flanders (1970). it means more less the time which available for students to practice their English in the classroom. Further. and Stubs (1983) in Holmes (1986: 19-20). In this case. too. so there is no feedback. Finally after giving explanations about the materials which are given or after managing all that related to teaching learning process. do pupils understand or do not‖. not their teachers. ―a good teacher maximizes STT [Students Talking Time] and minimise TTT‖. as cited by Delamont (1976). ―if a teacher talks and talks. because a teacher only will find 37 . This function is to check whether students understand the materials which are given or do not. the students will have less time for other things. ―all over the world in all types of classrooms. teachers dominate the available talking time‖. Parallel with this. including traditional and open-plan. not the teacher‖. students actually who need more time to practice their English. In this case. Khoo (1986). Harmer (2007: 38) states that. the less chance there is for the students to practice their own speaking – and it is the students who need the practice. ―overuse of TTT [Teacher Talking Time] is inappropriate because the more a teacher talks. such as reading and writing‖ (Harmer 2007). they have no time to practice their English in the outside but in the classroom. now a teacher plays the role as the evaluator. As previous discussions about learning English in this study. We can imagine about the situation where a teacher only talks and talks without thinks about chances for his or her students to speak. for Indonesian students who are categorized as ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. he also explains that.are given. Paul 2003). a problem occurs about the time of teacher talk. when an English teacher dominates the talking time. Overuse of ―TTT‖ or ―Teacher Talking Time‖ (Harmer 2007) only will give no benefit for both teachers and students. again Harmer (2007) proposes that.

Of course.2. Thus. but also should consider about ―STT‖ or ―Students Talking Time‖ (Harmer 2007). which can engage students to take a role of speech within a teaching learning process. whereas teachers who engage students with their stories and interaction.8 The Use of Code-Switching in English Class When ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007.him or herself in one-way communication so that students also have no time to practice their English in the classroom effectively and efficiently. using language which is not especially useful or appropriate. students may easily lapse into speaking their native language if the activities are not clear or too difficult. ―TTQ‖ or ―Teacher Talking Quality‖ (Harmer 2007) offers a solution in giving students chances to practice their English. ―in other words. using appropriate comprehensible input will be helping them to understand and acquire the language‖. Perhaps. The solution from this case. are not offering students the right kind of talking. But then. so this is a job for an English teacher to make sure that the activities he or 38 . because a teacher engages them with such as some kind of stories in English. but also consider ―TTQ (Teacher Talking Quality)‖ (Harmer 2007). we should not talk simply about the difference between STT and TTT. as explained by Harmer (2007: 38). as an English teacher definitely wants them to only speak English. 2. they should enter a world of English. therefore. Paul 2003) enter English class. which can stimulate them to speak up using their English. in order to give students chances to speak in English. teachers who just go on and on. a good English teacher should not only maximize his or her ―TTT‖ or ―Teacher Talking Time‖ (Harmer 2007) within a teaching learning process. a teacher also can apply ―TTQ‖ or ―Teacher Talking Quality‖ (Harmer 2007).

and as the consequence. 2.8. depending on the situation and the context in which it occurs‖. Moreover. ―code-switching can be both beneficial and a possible language interference. an English teacher should consider two elements of the use of codeswitching in English class: (1) whether code-switching as a language interference in classroom context or not. since most of them are ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007.1 Code-Switching as a Language Interference in Classroom Context The previous discussions conclude that an English teacher is suggested to use the students‘ L1 within a teaching learning process. Paul 2003). and (2) using students‘ L1. a teaching learning process will be far from the aim of learning English itself. Skiba (1997: 15) states that.2. where students frequently in using their L1. and would be comfortable switching languages in every day normal conversation‖. Code switching can be seen ―as a language interference in the classroom‖ (Skiba 1997) when ―students may see code-switching as an acceptable form of communication in society. The second question.she introduces are clear enough and within the students‘ capabilities. Paul 2003) to use their L1 or native language frequently within leaning process. For the first question. of course only will make the amount of English that they use in class may become less and less over time. When the situation which is mentioned above 39 . it is used as the last method when all the methods are failed. The questions then arise: whether code-switching is as a language interference in classroom context or not. and is it appropriate or not for an English teacher if he or she allows ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. as the notice. in teaching English in Indonesia. It seems that code-switching can become a language interference in the classroom when students prefer to switch their English to other languages because they think that this is a normal situation as in every day conversation.

not a sign of linguistic deficit‖. ―where it is used due to an inability of expression. it is best for an English teacher to 40 . Skiba (1997: 2) also proposes that. Skiba (1997: 2) explains that. then code-switching is no more a language interference in classroom context. or at least this situation will disturb other ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. code-switching provides a continuity in speech rather than presenting an interference in language‖. are ―depend on the situation and context in which it occurs‖ (Skiba 1997: 6). ―it supplements speech‖ (Skiba 1997). because they are not be able to communicative effectively‖. although ―code-switching is not a language interference‖ (Milroy and Muysken 1995. In other cases. When code-switching is used to maintain the students‘ communication to run smoothly.occurs within a teaching learning process. as far as it supplements speech: Milroy and Muysken (1995) in Shin and Chanseawrassamee (2007: 24) emphasize that code-switching is not a sign of communicative deficit. Parallel with Skiba (1997). there are some scientists who argue that code-switching is not as a language interference in classroom. Moreover. Thus. Shin and Chanseawrassamee 2007. Furthermore. it is clear enough that codeswitching may be viewed as an extension to language for bilingual speakers rather than an interference and from other perspectives it may be viewed as interference. but results from complex bilingual skills‖. ―…code-switching is a helpful strategy. Paul 2003) who want to practice their English within English class. is depend on the situation and the context in which it occurs. ―codeswitching does not usually indicate lack of competence on the part of the speaker in any of the languages concerned. further. In general. Shin and Chanseawrassamee (2007: 24) argue that. ―this would put those who are no bilingual at a disadvantage. Dealing with Skiba (1997) that codeswitching is ―as a language interference in classroom‖ or ―not a language interference‖. ―code-switching is not a language interference on the basis that it supplements speech‖. and Skiba 1997). Skiba (1997: 15) argues that.

furthermore. 41 . and then relax the rule for special situations such as asking some questions. there are times when the use of English is counterproductive‖. ―all learners of English. Based on Phillips (1993). ―it is often more economical and less frustrating for all concerned if you give instructions for a complicated activity in the children‘s mother tongue. come to the classroom with at least one other language. or check the instructions you have given by asking the children to repeat them in their own language‖. or by dividing a class into teams and giving minus points when one of the teams speaks in their native language. as Phillip (1993: 6) suggested that. it is suggested for an English teacher to do not too force ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. Harmer (2007: 38) argues that. About the times when the use of English in a teaching learning process is ―counterproductive‖ (Phillips 1993).2.8. Paul 2003) to only use a full-time English which is like native speakers do. Parallel with this idea.2 Using Students’ L1 In teaching English as a foreign language. but rather to be more flexible in allowing them to use their mother tongue. whatever their situation. In point of fact. 2. Phillips (1993) explains that.establish the rule that only English is allowed. a teacher also can use ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) either to give instructions for a complicated activity or to check the instruction he or she has given. the students‘ ―mother tongue‖ or ―L1‖ (Harmer 2007) is the students‘ first language that they acquired in long time before they learn English. ―…while it is essential to use as much English as possible in class. their mother tongue (often called their L1)‖. Thus an English teacher can use ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) to facility the communication within a teaching learning process.

there should be an English 42 . the use of ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) is only as the last way if other method which is given by a teacher has failed. ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) serves this function. descriptions. It can be draw a conclusion that deals with Paul (2007: 38-39). as long as it is used when the situation needs a complicated explanation. Gardner (2000: 8) also gives the example of using ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007): ―an activity may be too complicated to explain clearly in English. since a teacher is also as the ―evaluator‖ (Holmes 1986) within a teaching learning process. or you may have a problem in your classroom which cannot be handled using the language presented [English]…‖ This is the time where a teacher needs a language that can help him or her to handle the situation. and only use translation if these don‘t work‖. ―an English language classroom should have English in it. However. An English teacher can use pictures. and so on. as Gardner (2000: 8) says. as one of the method for example. as Gardner (2000) explains. ―you [an English teacher] will need to use your own language when the situation in your classroom requires more complicated language…‖ Again. actions. ―but we strongly advice using translation only when every other method has failed‖. Actually there are a lot of methods that can be applied to make students think in English. Another sample is also given by Gardner (2000): ―… you may sometimes need to check that your learners have understood your instructions in English‖. Checking the students‘ understanding by using ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) is the solution. so you should try using pictures. in order to make students think what the appropriate meaning of English words that are given. and as far as possible.The use of ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) within a teaching learning process is suggested. ―it is important to make the learners think. as cited by Gardner (2000: 9). the use of ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) is allowed as long as the situation becomes complicated.

and not to spend a long time talking in the students‘ L1‖. as suggested by Paul (2007: 39). (2) ―affective functions‖. and (3) ―repetitive functions‖. The key to use ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) is by making a lesson plan. actions. Since teaching English as a foreign language in Indonesia is assigned for students who almost all of them are ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. although sometimes a teacher is permitted to use ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) to handle the complicated situation during leaning process of ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. either conscious or not. Nevertheless. where English is heard and used as much of the time as possible‖. Paul 2003) or to evaluate the students‘ understanding about materials which are given. as cited by Gardner (2000) the aim is ―to plan when you [an English teacher] will use English and when you will use your own language‖. The functions of the teachers‘ codeswitching in classroom context as mentioned by Sert (2005: 5-8) are: (1) ―topic switch‖. It means that a teacher has to manage when the time to use ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) or not at all. for these reasons. Therefore.2. and so on‖ (Gardner 2000). Thus. descriptions. in some cases it may be regarded as an automatic and unconscious behavior. ―it is advisable for teachers to use English as often as possible. because actually there are a lot of methods besides it that can be applied to make students think. In the first function of the teachers‘ code- 43 .environment in the room.9 The Functions of Teachers’ Code-Switching The teachers‘ use of code-switching within classroom context is not always performed consciously. Paul 2003) and are from different cultures. such as: ―using pictures. it necessarily serves some basic functions which may be beneficial in a teaching learning process. it is needed the lesson plan which manages about the time in using ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007). which means that teachers are not always aware of the functions and the outcomes of the code-switching process. 2.

switching: ―topic switch‖. and building a relationship between the teacher and the student‖. an English teacher uses code-switching ―to clarify the meaning of a word. So this first function of the teachers‘ code-switching can be used as ―a bridge‖ (Sert 2005) to transfer English and meaning from an English teacher to his or her students clearly. In this respect. ―the teacher alters his or her language according to the topic being taught‖. As mentioned before. In this sense. teachers switch to ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) in order to clarify meaning. At this point. ―affective functions are important in the expression of emotions. although in these cases. as suggested by (Sert 2005) that. that an English teacher usually shifts their language to ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) in dealing with particular grammar points which are taught at that moment. and in this way stress the importance on the foreign language content for efficient comprehension. ―a bridge from known [in this case is the students‘ L1] to unknown [in this case is English] is constructed in order to transfer the new content and meaning is made clear in this way‖. an English teacher may use code-switching for creating a supportive language environment in the classroom. the students‘ attention is directed to the new knowledge by making use of code-switching and accordingly making use of native tongue. as described by Sert (2005: 5-8) that. This is a common situation in grammar instruction. codeswitching is used by teachers in order to build solidarity and intimate relations with their students. this is also not always a conscious process on the part of teachers. and stresses importance on the foreign language content for better comprehension‖ (Sert 2005: 5-8). moreover (Sert 2005) states that. However. the tendency to repeat the instruction in 44 . In addition to the function of code-switching named as ―topic switch‖. Following the instruction in target language: English. the phenomenon also carries ―affective functions‖. The last function of the teachers‘ code-switching is ―repetitive function‖ (Sert 2005). In this case.

However. again. C. as he or she is exposed to foreign language discourse limitedly. Paul 2003) is the lesson plan which manages about the time in using ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007). as when a student who is sure that the instruction which is given in English will be followed by ―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) translation. the most important for an English teacher who teaches ―EFL learners‖ (Harmer 2007. Conceptual Framework 45 .―the students‘ L1‖ (Harmer 2007) may lead to some undesired characters to the students‘ behavior. Thus. he or she may lose interest in listening to the former instruction which will have negative academic consequences. for the notice. as cited by Gardner (2000: 9) that ―an English teacher is allowed to use the students‘ L1 when other method which is given to students has failed‖.

Teaching and Learning Process Classroom Talk Teacher Talk Code Switching Calque Intersentential Fig.1. Conceptual Framework 46 .

Code switching is the concurrent use of more than one language. code-switching is 47 . Thus. in conversation. improving and writing the theory. 2006). Operational Definitions The followings are the key-terms used in this research: 1. a process or a belief. B. such as environment. et al. 2. Qualitative research is the collection. integrating categories and their properties. Multilinguals—people who speak more than one language—sometimes use elements of multiple languages in conversing with each other. the teacher talk. 1991). or language variety.CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A. and interpretation of comprehensive narrative and visual data in order to gain insights into a particular phenomenon of interest (Gay. The aim of the qualitative research is encouraging a deep understanding of a specific phenomenon. Grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss in Dawson. and follows the procedures from comparing incidents applicable from each category. particularly in giving instruction. 1991) but also as a means for controlling student behavior (Allwright & Bailey. Teacher talk is central in the language class not only for classroom organization and for the process of acquisition (Nunan. By using the design the researcher collected. 2002) is an inductive method. The researcher used a grounded theory in analyzing the data. analysis.. Research Design The design of this research is qualitative. analyzed and interpreted the data to see the teacher talk in the classroom.

48 . the condition of EFL is like in Indonesia. the researcher gathered the data through interview and observation. Mills. EFL as the learning of English by students in a country where English is not the native language‖. Thus. Gay. 3. 4. Research Instrument In conducting the research. 2006). and Airasian stated that the emphasis during the observation was on understanding the natural environment as lived by participant. 5. C. without altering or manipulating it.the use of more than one linguistic variety in a manner consistent with the syntax and phonology of each variety. Calque is an expression introduced into one language by translating it from another language. D. The interview is used to get the additional information from the participant related to language used in the classroom.. et al. Participant The participant in this research is a teacher at training from UNM who is doing her teaching practice in one of the classes in SMA Negeri 11 Makassar. Intersentential takes place between sentences (switch at the sentence) eg: start sentence using Indonesian and end it using English. Interview is a purposeful interaction in which one person is trying to obtain important data or information from another (Gay. And observation is used to get the data in the classroom directly. where learners study English as the foreign language rather than as the second language.

F. 4. the incomplete categories or subcategories recovered. 2. which in turn answered the research questions. 49 . This type of interview is used when the researcher wants to know specific information which can be compared and contrasted with information gained from the observation. To get the desired data. Technique of Collecting Data In interview. 3. Drawing Theoretical Description After finishing exploring the relationship among categories and/or subcategories. Open Coding The data gathered from the interview and the recording are conceptualized and categorized line by line. By doing this. Selective Coding In this part. semi-structured interview was used. the researcher developed a theoretical description. the researcher related one conceptual label to another. Technique of Data Analysis The gathered data were analyzed through the following procedures: 1. the researcher processed the indentifying phenomenon related to the research questions.E. In this step the researcher labeled to any description in the data which relate to the focused points. This kind of detail is called as the subcategory. Axial Coding By axial coding. the researcher took the data by interviewing the participant to get the information needed.

raise your hand… 35 Ok. there are three tenses used. the researcher found two main types of code switching used by the teacher in the classroom. Findings This part deals with the presentation of findings and discussions. 30 Ok. ya? 50 . 29 So I will explain all of these tenses for you. Tenroaji… 42 S: Simple present adalah suatu tenses untuk menjelaskan suatu peristiwa yang telah terjadi sekarang… 43 T: Ok. ya… 27 Generally there are three tenses but mostly used is simple past tense like narrative. 1. 32 Ok. ya… 28 Lebih banyak menggunakan simple past tense tapi ada juga yang menggunakan simple present and past continuous tense. 24 The first is simple present. calque and intersentential. simple past tense and past continuous tense. since the teacher used this type of code switching (CS) in her teaching and learning process (TT). ada yang bisa jelaskan what is simple present tense? Ok.CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS A. I wanna ask you what is simple present tense? 33 Anyone can tell what is a simple present tense according to your lesson in the previous? 34 Ok. Calque The first part the researcher talked about is calque. generally in a spoof text. you can take a note. Nur risky Pratiwi… 36 S: Tenses yang menjelaskan keadaan sekarang… 37 T: Tenses yang menjelaskan keadaan sekarang… 38 Ada yang lain? 39 The purpose of simple present tense? 40 Any else? 41 Ok. ya… 26 Secara umum ada tiga ini. 25 Ok. Extract 1 (the use of calque) 23 T: Ok. the same with Nur Resky Pratiwi. In relation to this part. we move to the next slide… err… 31 The first is simple present tense.

ya…” in turn 26 and in turn 27 switch it into English when she said ―Generally there are three tenses…”. Intersentential In this section. ―I switched the language from English to Indonesian because I wanted the students understand my explanation. matahari terbit disebelah timur. When explaining. ya? 75 Itu adalah salah satu contoh tentang fakta yang betul-betul terjadi in the past. You can read the example: The world is round. the teacher gave her reason why she switched her language from Indonesian to English and from English to Indonesian. the teacher used calque in switching the language for example when she said ―Secara umum ada tiga ini. In the interview. the teacher was explaining a lesson in the class. For example when I said. It can be seen in the following extract: Extract 2 (intersentential) 64 T: Ok. And when I switched the language from Indonesian to English I assumed that the students can follow my explanation better if I switch the language into English again. ‖ (Source: Ayu) 2.In the extract (1) above. if the students didn‘t respond my questions directly than I need to switch the language into Indonesian. ―Anyone can tell what is a simple present tense …‖. now 51 . It is about one rule of grammar. the researcher pointed out the use of intersentential type in the teacher‘s explanation. Artinya? 65 S: Bumi itu bulat… 66 T: Bumi itu bulat… 67 Ada yang bisa kasi contoh lagi satu? 68 To see if you understand what I mean… 69 Ok. ada yang bisa jelaskan …?”. Another example is in turn 33 when she said ―Anyone can tell what is a simple present tense …” and in turn 34 switch the language when she said ―Ok. Eldad? 70 S: The sun is round… 71 T: What? Any else? 72 S: The sun is hot… 73 The sun rises in the east… 74 T: Ok.

1. the use of repetition actually is depend on the context itself. Calque From the findings above. ―repetition may serve to clarify what is said. especially in giving explanation in the classroom. Artinya?” in turn 64. Marasigan (1983) also explains that in quotations. Discussion As its focus. So. They are calque and intersentential. As we know that one of the function of code-switching: ―repetition‖ Marasigan (1983: 79). the researcher found that the teacher used this in order to make her explanation clear for the students to understand. ―the original message has been uttered by the speakers a long time ago and they are just recalling them aloud‖.and in the future. Eldad?” The other explanation from the teacher can be seen in the following: ―I switched the language this time in order to make the students have an opportunity to understand the target language and to make the students respond the explanation in the target language‖. as she mentions that. For example when she said ―The world is round. the researcher found that the teacher used calque type in code switching. Another example is in turn 67 until 69 when she said ―Ada yang bisa kasi contoh lagi satu? To see if you understand what I mean… Ok. or mark a joke‖. In explaining the lesson in this part (extract 2). the discussion of the research findings mainly deals with two main types of code switching in teacher talk. From the interview. the teacher was using intersentential type. If the first speaker (A) repeated 52 . (Source: Ayu) B. amplify or emphasize a message.

Marasigan (1983) argues that. 53 . he thought that the second speaker could not hear very well and so get intention in repeating his message was to heard rather than to be understood. 2.the same message when he thought that the second speaker (B) did not understand him and failed to follow his instruction. (Li 2005. She explained that she used this type in order to make the students accustomed to listen to the target language and respond it. Intersentential In the second findings the researcher found that the teacher used intersntential type in giving her explanation in the classroom. ―… the switch serves to direct the message to a specific person‖. Marasigan 1983. but also a matter of role relations‖. In the second repetition. Sudar 2004. as cited by (Marasigan 1983: 76). Skiba 1997. ―in some schools in the Philippines the language of communication between teachers and students is English. Marasigan (1983) also explains that. McArthur 1998. Besides its function as an individual preference of facility. Moreover. The use of English does not only indicate the difference between their roles but it also encourages the students to speak the language they learn in school‖. This is related to the the forth function of code-switching: ―addressee specification‖. It means that code-switching is used to personalize the message to be delivered. and Wardhaugh 2000). ―this type of switching [addressee specification] recognizes not only the interacting members of the speech events but it also recognizes that their language behavior may be more than merely a matter of individual preference or facility. ―addressee specification‖ (Marasigan 1983) also indicates a matter of role relations within conversation.

the researcher would like to draw the following conclusions: 1. 3. Insentential was used when the teacher required the students‘ understand more about the target language and give them more chance to respond the target language. 2. who are concerned in exploring more about the code switching in the teacher talk. B. especially the reason why they are using it in order to make them presented the lesson well and bring in a good understanding for the students. To other researchers. 2.CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. The teacher used two types of code switching in the classroom. To teachers. may see the research from the students‘ talk. the researcher would like to state some suggestions: 1. namely: calque and intersentential. they should know more about the types of code switching they used in the classroom. Conclusion Based on the findings and discussions above. Suggestion Referring to the research findings in describing the code switching used by the teacher in giving explanation in the classroom. 54 . Calque was used if the teacher wanted to make the explanation clearer and understandable.

Educational Research. Geoffrey E. Rodgers.Bibliography Ariffin. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching A description and analysis· Cambridge: Cambrdige University Press. University of Putra Malaysia. Xiou-Yen. Code-switching as a Communication Device in Conversation. A Thesis. Jack C. The Function of Code-Switching in EFL Classroom Discourse. Deborah. Analysis of Code Switching and Code Mixing in the Teenlit Canting Cantiq by Dyan Nuranindya. 2011. 1998. L. Massachusetts 02148. 1989. Kamissah and Shameem Rafik-Galea. Approaches to Discourse. From the Traditional to the Contemporary in Second Language Teaching and Learning. Yletyinen. Hanna. Halliday. London: Continuum Harmer. Competencies for Analysis and Applications. USA. 1994. China: Chongqing Normal University & Yangtze Normal University.R. David. 2nd ed. Malden. University of Jyvaskyla. Cakrawati. A Thesis. 2004. A thesis. 2006. A Thesis. A. Malaysia. 2002. On Grammar. Semarang University.. Richards and Theodore S. Mills. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. K. Ohio: Merril Prentice Hall. Third edition. Jeremy. and Peter Airasian. 8th Edition. Dias Astuti. 55 . M. Selangor. Cambridge: Longman. Gay. 2012. Ma. Nunan. 2006. Teacher Talk and EFL in University Classrooms. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Scriffin. 1999.