Introduction : Code-Switching has been broadly recognized by scholars,researchers and teachers as one of the most challenging aspects that determinethe level of students achievements in learning EFL.
Code-Switching has becomequite popular in the process of learning English as a foreign language. It isnot only students who code-switch their speech during English lessons and theirdaily life conversations, but also teachers do that for some reasons. First,when they find that students unable to understand something in English, theyfind themselves in a need to code-switch their speech to explain it to themusing their L1.
Second, the teacher himself might be unable to explain themeaning of a word or a sentence in English, so he also explain it by using L1.Furthermore, teacher might code-switch their speech unintentionally for thatthey are used to speak using their L1 during their daily lives. It’s undeniablethat code-switching especially when explaining the instruction has positiveimpacts on students’ understanding for that they will be able to know what theyhave to do or how they will go through the tasks, activities, or even projects,but it also has negative impacts for that students will get used to receivethose instructions in L1 which will affect their progress in learning English. Research questions : 1- Doesthe use of L1 have negative effects on SS learning?2- Dowe need to prevent or welcome the use of L1 in EFL classes? Literature review :Code-switchingis a popular phenomenon in bilingualspeeches, and for that it is not something unexpected that a great deal ofresearches on bilingualism investigate in this field. Most researchers, whohave emerged to investigate the term code-switching, are interested in both thediscourse functions and sociological interpretation, for instance, the socio-pragmaticconcept of code-switching. As a result, linguists who are not in the field of bilingualismoften mix the idea that research in code-switching are totally related tosociolinguistic research. It is as of interest point to investigate that whenand why a speaker chooses one linguistic variety rather than another: it can bedemonstrate by stylistic or metaphorical motivation, where factors such as theinterlocutor, social role, domain, topic, venue, medium, and type ofinteraction play an important role.
In this case, language alternation can alsoserve as a conversational cue, expressing attitudes towards language or markinglinguistic identity (cf. TabouretKeller 1995, Auer (ed.) 1998). For the point that multilingualism has beentaken place since antiquity, it is still just in the past two decades thatscholars, researchers and also investigators have concerned more with thesignificance of the multi-lingual’s succession throughout languages. A hugenumber of those researches have been interested in the term ” sociolinguisticparameters of code-switching ” , by demonstrating in details thecircumstances in which each language has been taken. (vide e.
g. Rubin, 1962;Ervin-Tripp, 1964; Gumperez, 1964; 1970; Blom & Gumperz, 1972; Gumperz-Chavez, 1972; Hymes, 1972). Looking at the earliest studieswhich attend to consider some basics such as setting, topic, and participantswhich were improbable to change within the term “turn of speech”, much less asentence, the grammatical parameters of code-switching were largely ignored.Consequently as late as 1975 we find in the-literature such a statement as: Thevariety found in these sixteen citations suggests that there are perhaps nosyntactic restrictions on where switching can occur ..
.(Lance,1J75: 143). Nowadays, concomitant with theinterest in stylistic functions of code-switching (vide e.g. Gumperz, 1970;Blom & Gumperz, 1972; Gumperz & Hernandez-Chavez, 1972; McClure , 1975; Wentz, 1976) which may allow the intrasentential of code-switching(vide e.g. Annamalai, 1971; Gumperz & Hernandez-Chavez, 1972; Gingras,1974; Kachru, 1975; Wentz s McClure, 1976a; Wentz, 1976; Pfaff, 1976; Sridhar,1978). consequently a fundamental data base is improving on both the nominaland practical concepts of code-switching.
Furthermore, a gap is still there.Unfortunately a few were written about code-switching among young students.This action research is also investigating this topic. Both linguistic andsociolinguistic parameters of code-switching will be considered.
Data analysiswill be based on tape recordings of students ranging from the age 10 to age 17.Complete verbal transcripts of ninety hours of tape were situationallyannotated and divided into conversations and turns of speaking. Thosecontaining code switches were examined for communicative intent and grammaticalstructure. The Plan for ActionMethodology Participants : the study will beperformed with an 8th , 9th , and 10th students andtheir teachers, as the main focus. During this study 80 randomly chosenstudents and also 40 teachers will beinvolved in the study. This study is planned to take 5 weeks of the 2018-2019school year.Setting : this study will be taken place only in school, during school hours.
Assessments ( materials ) :data will be collected by making interviews with both teachers and students atthe end of each week. At the end of each week, they’ll be asked to give theirreflection on the previous week to see if the method used was helpful or not,and if it’s not, then what makes it unhelpful for them. Another method will betaken into account is observation throughout using a tape recording. Procedures/Data Collection Process :80 students and 40 teachers will be involved in this study. Classeswill be divided into two groups; the first group -which consist of 40 studentsand 20 teachers- will be allowed to code-switch their speech during EFLclasses, so that it will help us to decide if it’s beneficial for learning ornot. The second group –which consist of 40 students and 20 teachers- will bevery limited to code-switch their speech for that we will be able to see theimpact of following such a method. Both groups will also be divided into 5group; each group consists of 8 students and 4 teacher. At the end of eachweek, an interview with students and teachers will be done.
The aim of thisinterviews is to ask them some questions in order to collect the requiredinformation, so that it’s going to able to elicit the negative impacts of code-switchingin EFL classrooms.1th week : 8 students and 4 teachers (the first group ofthe first group) will be asked to give their impressions about code-switching duringEnglish classes. They will also be asked to tell the negative sides of it, andwhy it’s helpful or unhelpful from their perspective.2th week : 8 students and 4 teachers : (the second group of the first group)3th week : 8 students and 4 teachers : (the third group of the first group)4th week : 8 students and 4 teachers : (the fourth group of the second group) will also be asked to givetheir opinion about code-switching during English classes. They will be askedto tell whether if it’s helpful for them not to code-switch their speech duringthe learning process or not.5th week : 8 students and 4 teachers : (the fifth group of the second group)Allof the other groups will be asked the same questions as the first group and thesecond group. During those five weeks all classes will be video recorded, sothat they will be observed after finishing up each class.
Data analysis· Forthe analysis of the data have been collected throughout the interviews and theobservation of the tape records: Qualitative data will be analyzed by following this steps : First,organizing the data (Hyper Transcribe software), translating the data(Systran), cleaning the data, and labeling the data collected. Second, identifyinga framework which means coding plane. Third, sorting data into a framework.Finally, using the framework in descriptive analysis.References :- Aranoff, M.
AndRees-Miller. J, The handbook of Linguistics. Blackwell publisher: Oxford. 2003.- Auer, Peter (ed.)(1998): Code-switching in Conversation. Language, Interaction and Identity.
London/New York: Routledge.- Auer, Peter (1998):”Introduction: Bilingual Conversation revisited”. In: Auer (ed.), 1-24.- Annamalai, E. 1971.
Lexical insertion in a mixed language. In: Papers from the seventh regionalmeeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago, Chicago Linguistic Society.- Blom, J.
P. and 4.Gumperz.
1972. Social meaning in linguistic structures:code-switching inNorway. In: Directions in sociolinguistics. Edited by J. Gumperz and Hymes. NewYork, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.- Ervin-Tripp, S.
1964. Ananalysis of the interaction of language, topic and listener. In: Theethnography of communication. Edited by J. Gumperz and D. Hymes.
AmericanAnthropologist 66.6 (II) 86-102.- Gingras, R. 1974.Problems in the description of Spanish-English intrasentential code-switching.In: Southwest areal linguistics. Edited by G.
Bills. San Diego, Institute forCultural Pluralism.- Gumperz, J. 1964. Linguisticand social interaction in two communities. In: The ethnography ofcommunication.
Edited by J. Gumperz and D. Hymes.
American Anthropologist 66.6(II). 137-154.- HARMER, J. (2001).
Thepractice of English language teaching. Essex, England, Longman.- Hymes, D. 1972. Modelsof the interaction of language and social life. In: Directions inSociolinguistics.
Edited by J. Gumperz and D. Hymes, New York, Holt, Rinehart,and Winston.- Kachru, B. 1975.
Towardstructuring the form and function of code mixing: an Indian perspective.Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 5.1. Department of Linguistics, Universityof Illinois at Urbana.
– Lance, D. 1975.Spanish-English code-switching. In: El lenguaje de los Chicanos.
Edited by E.Herngndez-Chavez, A. Cohen and A. Beltramo.
Arlington, Virginia, Center forApplied Linguistics.- McClure, E. and J.Wentz. 1975. Functions of code-switching among Mexican-American children.
In:Papers from the parasession on functionalism. Chicago, Chicago LinguisticSociety.- McClure, E. and M.McClure.
1975. Code-Switching among Mexican American children. In: From meaningto sound. Edited by H. Sharifi. Lincoln, Nebraska, University of Nebraska.- Pfaff, 1976.
Functionaland structural constraints on syntactic variation in code-switching. In: Papersfrom the parasession on diachronic syntax. Chicago, Chicago Linguistic Society.- Rubin, J.
1962.Bilingualism in Paraguay. Anthropological Linguistics 4 (1): 52-58.- Sridhar, S. 1978. On thefunctions of code-mixing in Kannada.
To appear in IJSL.- Tabouret-Keller, Andrée(1995): “Conclusion: code-switching research as a theoretical challenge”. In:Milroy/Muysken (eds.
), 344-355.- Wentz, J. 1976.Considerations in the development of a syntactic des cription ofcode-switching. University of Illinois Ph.D.
dis sertation – first draft.