LANGUAGE CHOICE IN

MULTILINGUAL
COMMUNITIES

Presented by:
Yenni Desnia Waluyo
Annisa Kumara Dewi
Citra Amiliani Abdul Gani
 Choosing variety or code
1. Linguistic repertoire
2. Domains of language use
3. Modelling variety or code choice
4. Other social factors affecting code
choice
 Linguistic repertoire

‘the set of language varieties used in the speaking and

writing practices of a speech community’ (Finegan 2004,
glossary)
 Domains of language use

Based on Fishman (1972:20) as cited in Marjohan A. (1988), “domain is a

sociocultural construct abstracted from topics of communication, relationship

between communicators, and locales of communication, in accord with their

stitution, of a society and the area of activity of speech community in such a way

that individual behavior and social patterns can be distinguished from each other

and yet related to each other”

 Modelling variety or code choice

Modeling Code Choice?

Speakers model their code choice depending of the

different factors (Domain, Addressee or Setting)
Other social factors affecting code choice

Social Distance

Status Relationship

Formality

Function
DIGLOSSIA

A situation in which two varieties of the same

language are used under different conditions
within a community, often by the same
speakers.
THREE CRUCIAL FEATURES OF
DIGLOSSIA
 Two distinct varieties of the same language are used in the community,
with one regarded as a high (or H) variety and the other a low (or L) variety.
 Each variety is used for quite distinct functions; H and L complement each
other.
 No one uses the H variety in everyday conversation
 Two distinct
varieties of the
same language in
a speech
community

High (H) variety Low (L) variety

H=High prestige
• H variety is not used in daily
conversation

L=Low prestige
• H and L are used in
complementary situations.
Areas in which H and L differ

 Function – H and L different purposes, native speakers would find it odd if anyone used H in an
L domain or L in an H domain

 Prestige – H more highly valued

 Literary heritage – literature normally in H variety, no written uses of L
 Acquisition – L variety learned first, H acquired through schooling
 Standardisation – H strictly standardised, L rarely standardised
 Stability – diglossias generally stable
 Grammar – H more complex than L
 Lexicon – often shared, but differentiations in vocabulary
 Phonology – two kinds of systems – H and L share same phonological elements but H has
more complicated morphophenomics, or where H has contrasts that L lacks but may borrow
Example: the standard classical Arabic
language is the high variety in Arab countries,
and it is used for writing and for formal functions,
but vernacular (colloquial) Arabic is the low
variety used for informal speech situations.
 EXAMPLE:

Latin Arabic German

H=Classic H=Classical H=high

Latin Arabic German

L=Vulgar L=Colloquial L=low

Latin Arabic German
 Attitudes to H vs. L

H variety L variety

•Norm •Below average

•respect •Not very respected
•Prestigious •Non-prestigious
 Polyglossia
 Situations where two or more distinct codes or varieties are used for clearly
distinct purposes.
 It involves two contrasting varieties (high and low) but in general it refers to
communities that regularly use more than two languages.
 In speech community there are two H varieties and a number of L varieties
in a complex relationship.
 It is a useful term for describing situations where more than two distinct
codes are used for clearly distinct purpose.

 A Chinese Singaporean speaks

 English
 Chinese
Mandarin Chinese
Cantonese
Hokkien
Code switching or code mixing

The use of more than one codes (language),

variety, or style by a speaker within an utterance
or discourse, or between different interlocutors
or situations (Romaine, 1992:110)
Types of code switching

 Intra sentential switching: switches that occur within the

sentence.
 Inter sentential switching: switches that occur at
sentence boundaries.
 Emblematic or tag switching: an interjection or a
linguistic tag in the other language which serves as an
ethnic identity marker.
Functions of code switching

Situational Metaphorical

•When people •Skillful switching

switch for reasons operates like
which can be metaphor to
clearly identified enrich
communication
To indicate a change in the social situation
and take positive account of the presence
of a new participant
To signal and actively construct the
speaker’s ethnic identity and solidarity with
the addressee
To signal the status relations between
people or the formality of their interaction
 To distance a speaker from
those they are talking to
 In one conversation, two young
women and a young man are
discussing local music. While the
women use Pamaka, their local
community language, the young
man deliberately switches to
Sranan Tongo (the language of
Suriname urban centres) and
avoids Pamaka.
to discuss a particular topic
(certain referential contents)
 Chinese students from
Guangzhou who are
flatting together in an
English-speaking country
tend to use Cantonese
with each other, except
to discuss their studies
when they switch to
English.
Referentially oriented code-switch
 to quote a person

 to quote a proverb or a well-known saying in another language

Switching for affective functions
 To express affective rather than referential meaning

 To make amusement or dramatic effect

A language switch in the opposite direction, from
the L to the H variety, is often used to express
disapproval
Metaphorical switching

 Mr. rupa is code-switching for rhetorical reasons, drawing on the associations of both
codes.
 The speaker draws on his two languages to express his ambivalent feelings about the
topic he is discussing.
Lexical borrowing

 People may also borrow words from another language to

express a concept or describe an object for which there
is no obvious word available in the language they are
using.
 Borrowing of this kind generally involves single words –
mainly nouns – and it is motivated by lexical need. It is
very different from switching where speakers have a
genuine choice about which words or phrases they will
use in which language.
Attitudes to code-switching

 Reactions to code-switching styles are negative in many communities,

despite the fact that proficiency in intra-sentential code-switching requires
good control of both codes.
 In places such as PNG and East Africa, where multilingualism is the norm,
attitudes to proficient code-switching are much more positive. The PNG
bigman’s status is undoubtedly enhanced by his ability to manipulate two or
more codes proficiently.
THANK YOU
Discussion I
Cahyo: What is the attitude of high and low
variety in diglossia (in grammar book and
dictionary)? Which one is low?
Syifaul: when students replace and mix English
words to Indonesia?
Tia: when we are gossiping someone. And we
switch when he comes. can it categorized as
pragmatic?
DISCUSSION II

Istiqomah: are they different between code

switching and code mixing?
aku mau ngegym. Is it code switching?
Dian: when we change our language in order
our addressee understand. It is code switching?