Method of Data Analysis

34 FM Semarang, and Yasu chan, the Japanese student at Bahasa Indonesia department of UGM Yogyakarta are supported the translation.

3.3.4 Categorizing

I engage categorization of the data on the basis of some categories such as the categories of code – switching. Carney, Joiner and Helen 1997 concern that while categorization is not an arbitrary process, neither is it necessary to have a finite, unchanging list of categories or codes into which must be stuffed all the bits of data in this project. I follow Marasigan 1983: 73-98 categorization that code switching falls into seven functions; quotation, addressee specification, repetition, interjection, message qualification, personalization and objectivization, and facility of expression.

3.3.5 Reducing

After categorizing the functions, it is discovered in the end that not all of them could be used for the purpose of the study. The data which has similar characteristic are needed to be reduced for effective finding.

3.4 Method of Data Analysis

Using the framework by Marasigan in 1983, the theoretical framework utilized in this study only used for code switching and further into conversational functions of code switching and socio-cultural and individual factors that influence code switching. The following conversational functions of code switching among participants in Uncle JC Happy Hour are used in this study: quotation, addressee specification, interjection, repetition, message qualification and personalization versus objectification and facility 35 of expression. Through the categorizations, I analyze the data and find the conversational function, factors and foreign languages used in switching codes during the program. The analysis of language in terms of its functions is taken to mean how language is used; trying to find out what purposes language serves for its speaker, and how its speaker are able to achieve these purposes through speaking and listening. Furthermore, I apply to the qualitative data by transcribing the oral data into written data together with the interpretation, identifying, and categorizing the code switching occur on it based on Marasigan’s. Millan, James and Schmiche 1989: 414 suggest that the process of systematic process of selecting, categorizing, synthesizing and interpreting were necessary to provide explanations of single phenomenon of interest. “The data analysis has come together really nicely, and we’ve got good descriptive information about the major patterns of activity in the program, our problem is that we haven’t found a theory to pull it all together yet” Patton, 1980: 275. I follow the procedure of analyzing the data with the written data transcription to see the descriptive information as Patton means. However, I supposed need more theory to pull it. This research is different to other researches. Different people manage their creativity, intellectual endeavors and hard work also in different ways. Patton 1980: 299 states that as the analysis of qualitative data is a creative process and intellectual rigor process and a great deal of hard work, there is no right way to go about organizing, analyzing and interpreting qualitative data. As an interaction analysis, the research type is interpretive and the unit of analysis is both linguistics and 36 non – linguistics. This study can broaden it with sociolinguistic as there is a phenomena that participants are multilingual society. Furthermore, Jazuli 2001: 13 assumes that inductive method is based on the thinking process above observation or data collection and generalization to summary. Meanwhile, Bogdan and Bikle consider that data analysis is the field to find theory, method, category and any explanation from description and data reflection. After doing all the research method discussed above, there will be a summary in the last chapter as the result of the study. 37

CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION