47
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLICATION
This chapter presents conclusions, recommendations and implication of the research results. The conclusion was drawn after conducting a series of discussions in
the previous chapter. The conclusion was also the answer of problem formulation which was the types of code-mixing. The recommendations are intended for ELESP
students and future researcher.
A. Conclusions
Based on the data and discussion which are presented in chapter 4, the researcher found some evidences as follows. Firstly, although there are three types of
code-mixing according to Muysken 2000, only two of them were found in the presidential candidate debate. Those types were insertion and alternation. From the
two types of code- mixing which is found in participants’ utterances, they made more
insertion code-mixing rather that alternation. All of the cases of code-mixing on the debate had Bahasa Indonesia as the matric language.
Based on the data that the researcher collected from the observations, it was finally found that the participants made 156 utterances of code-mixing. 156 cases of
code-mixing were divided into two groups based on the types which were found in the debates. Insertion got 119 utterances and alternation got 37 utterances.
48 156 cases of insertion were divided based on the debates. In the first debate
on the 9th of June 2014, there were 14 cases of utterances which are made by the participants. From 14 cases of insertion, JW and HR made five insertion utterances.
Then, the second debate which was conducted on the 15th of June 2014 got 14 cases of insertion which is made by the participants. Moreover the third debate got 29 cases
of insertion. Then, the fourth debate which was conducted on 29
th
of June 2014 and the participants were HR dan JK got 35 cases of insertion. This debate got the highest
number of insertion. Moreover, HR made insertion more often rather than JK. On the last debate which was conducted on 5
th
of July 2014, there were 29 cases of insertion. Insertion got the higher number rather than alternation since participants often
inserted English noun on their speech and they mixed their language. The second type is alternation, according to Muysken 2000 alternation is
code-mixing where two groups of words in different language occur in one sentence. Furthermore, it was found that there were 37 cases of alternation code-mixing. Those
37 cases of alternation were also divided based on the debates. In the first debate which was conducted on the 9
th
of June 2014, there were three cases of alternation. All of the cases of alternation on the first debate were made by PS. Next, in the
second debate there were only two cases of alternation. This is the least number of cases for alternation. Then, in the third debate which was conducted on 22
nd
of June 2014, there were five cases of alternation. In this debate, all of alternations were also
made by PS. Moreover, in the fourth debate which is conducted on the 29th of June
49 2014, there were three cases of alternation. The last debate which was conducted on
5
th
July 2014 got three cases of alternation.
B. Recommendations
Kategori