ABSTRACT http://www.soa.ilstu.edu/anthropology/theses/cerqua/Mingling%20Tong... ABSTRACT Mingling Tongues: Code switching/mixing Practices of North American Bilinguals By: Stephanie Cerqua, Anthropology/Illinois State University Faculty Advisors: Dr. Stanlaw, Dr. Alstrum, and Dr. G. Bessa What motivates North American bilinguals to use both English and Spanish in their daily discourse while studying abroad in Mexico? There are many driving forces that influence linguistic choice; language proficiency is only one of the many forces. Group identity, solidarity and ethnicity are the social forces emphasized here. This paper analyzes the English/Spanish linguistic perspective of this language and culture contact situation. Through participant observation I document how North American bilinguals use both of their linguistic repertoires during immersion programs in two different locals: Cuernavaca and Taxco, Mexico. This paper focuses on code switching/code mixing practices of North American bilingual college students, and the formation of identity as influenced by language usage. My intent is to bring attention to the need for research of the English/Spanish linguistic and cultural interchange from both the Hispanic American and North American perspective. This study demonstrates that many of the sociolinguistic variables involved in a contact situation are in a constant state of flux: a negotiation between speakers holding a variety of identities, norms, and rules. INTRODUCTION I walked into the courtyard of the school, Universal and I was surrounded by members of my peer group, North American bilingual college students. I thought making friends would be easy. I walked up to a group of students (Group #1) and introduced myself. ¿Qué pasa? Me llamo Stephanie. I was greeted with smiling faces but the smiles slowly faded away when I continued speaking in Spanish. As an anthropologist in the field for the first time, I quickly became aware of what it felt like to be an outsider. Initially, I was excluded from this group as a consequence of speaking exclusively in Spanish. I later learned that (Group #1) preferred using English or a combination of English and Spanish. According to Myer-Scotton (1993: 475), social forces of specific groups decide what linguistic codes are accepted and deemed appropriate in certain situations. I propose to examine the usage and patterns of code switching/code mixing used by North American bilingual college students by conducting a comparative analysis between two different immersion programs in Mexico. These two immersion programs are also located in two different cities. Universal is the language institute in Cuernavaca and the Center of Teaching Foreigners (CEPE) (Centro de ensenanza para extranjeros) is located 1 of 26 11/13/2007 7:54 AM ABSTRACT http://www.soa.ilstu.edu/anthropology/theses/cerqua/Mingling%20Tong... in Taxco. It is my hypothesis that language usage of these bilinguals varies in the two locations. The bilingual students from both locations practiced variations of code switching, but code mixing was only practiced in Taxco. The usage of code switched words and phrases from American slang were used at both locations, but only by male participants. In addition to the usage of American slang within their Spanish three male participants in Taxco also created a list of code mixed words. Overall English was spoken more than Spanish. English or combinations of English/Spanish were the preferred language codes. The code switched phrases by participants in Cuernavaca contained almost complete sentences in English with very few Spanish words inserted into them. This type of code switching also occurred in Taxco and also phrases almost entirely in Spanish with very few English words inserted. This observation was reached after conducting an eight week ethnography in Mexico (June-August 2002), which entailed participant observation inside and outside the second language classroom setting, and the tape recording of natural language usage. At both locations North American college students studying Spanish as their second language were the main focus in this study. In addition to the tape recording of natural language usage, each student participated in a semi-structured interview. These interviews along with my field notes establish their social motivations to code switch or code mix. “Code switching is defined as changing from the use of one language to that of another with in a single speech event. Code switching involves the movement, whether psychologically or sociologically motivated, from one discrete code (language or dialect) to another within a communicative event” (Fishman 1989:181). For example, “Wow I am really tired porque I haven’t slept nada all night.” Code mixing on the other hand means, “the blending of two separate linguistic systems into one linguistic system” (Field 1994:87). An example of code mixing is: Ripoffear- Ripoff/ear Ripoff-English slang ear- Spanish suffix and common verb ending Meaning was attributed by group members within Group #2 (See page #7) - To take advantage of someone financially Literature Review 2 of 26 11/13/2007 7:54 AM ABSTRACT http://www.soa.ilstu.edu/anthropology/theses/cerqua/Mingling%20Tong... Figure #1 (Adapted version from Torras, Maria-Carme and Joseph Gafaranga 2002: 530) A very helpful analogy to clarify the differences between code switching and code mixing comes from chemistry. Code switching is similar to the phenomena of suspension where the material is mixed into a suspended medium wherein the parts eventually separate and settle out of the mixture. Code mixing is comparable to the phenomena of a solution where a type of bonding occurs that prevents the mixed elements from separating (Field 1989: 87). Upon the completion of my study, the tape-recorded conversations were transcribed and analyzed to determine overall patterns of code switching code mixing. In the analysis of these tapes and the feedback provided by the participants, this study demonstrates that the social forces that influenced language interchange were group solidarity, acceptance and identity. The main motivations to switch or mix are: to joke, means of expression, lack of language knowledge, change in members and to maintain a sense of comfort. This study builds upon the present literature, which uses code switching as a set of static parameters and shows that many of these sociolinguistic variables are actually in a constant state of flux: a negotiation of identity between speakers holding a variety of identities, norms, and rules. Over the last three decades there has been extensive research done on language and culture contact or interchange. Myers-Scotton, Auer, Stacks, Gumperz, and Poplack are just some of the scholars that have made great contributions to the literature. Although there is a vast literature on this topic, there are no uniform definitions of the concepts that explain these situations. Some scholars use a very general definition for language interaction and label it just as “code switching” or “code mixing” whereas other scholars breakdown these concepts even further and distinguish what constitutes a mix or a switch. For the purpose of my study I distinguish between these two concepts since there is such a drastic variation of linguistic interaction within my data set. Throughout this paper code switching is referred to as CS and code mixing as CM. Throughout this paper the terms switching and mixing are used to refer to the general interchange between languages. There are two distinct fields of approach applied to the study of bilingual language use; the grammatical perspective and the socio-functional perspective. The grammatical perspective analyzes structural components within utterances whereas the socio-functional perspective analyzes the social 3 of 26 11/13/2007 7:54 AM ABSTRACT http://www.soa.ilstu.edu/anthropology/theses/cerqua/Mingling%20Tong... implications demonstrated in a language interchange situation. My study entails the examination of the sociolinguistic perspective. “Traditionally, the sociolinguists examine key social variables such as the identity of the speaker (gender, age, occupation, etc.), his or her relations with the other participants in a conversation (e.g., whether they are friends or distant acquaintances), or the formality of the context” (Wei 2002:162). I explore these elements within in my study, but they do not form the main components within the analysis of the data. The examination of the sociolinguistic perspective is then subdivided into two main methodical approaches: organizational explanation and the identity related explanation. Auer introduced the organizational explanation in 1984. This approach employs the technique of conversational analysis. “Conversational analysts aim to reveal the evidence of social reality and to pinpoint the origin of social meaning- how meaning is generated from face-to-face interaction. For those who adapt the CA approach to code switching, the meaning is not given through the inculcation of values and norms, or any structural form that pre-exist or underlie individual actions and utterances. Instead it resides in conversational interaction itself” (Wei 2002:173). “As qualitative approaches, conversational analysis and ethnography share several important characteristics; insistence on staying close to the raw data, returning again and again to original notes and recordings on which the analyses are based; commitment to deriving categories directly from the data instead of