29
CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter will discuss the findings of the research. The findings will be discussed to solve the problem formulations. Since there are two questions, so it is
divided into two main sections. The first is about the types of code-mixing made by the participants. Then the second is about the functions of code-mixing, which
is also made by the participants of the presidential debate 2014. The researcher uses the theories from chapter II to reveal the answer to the problem.
A. Findings
In this part, the researcher would like to present the findings of the research which were gathered from the checklist sheet. Previously, the researcher
will explain about the consideration of the meaning of code-mixing. The researcher refers to Singh
‟s theory 1985 which is cited by Romaine 1995 that code-mixing is an intra-sentential code-switching. According to Holmes 1992,
intra-sentential switching here means switching that occurs within one sentence. Moreover, McCormick 1995 suggests that code-switching involves the
alternation of elements longer than one word while code-mixing involves shorter elements, often just a single word. In addition, Alabi 2007 states that the code-
mixing is often unconscious illocutionary act in naturally occurring conversation as cited in Oladosu, 2011. Therefore, the researcher concludes that the code-
mixing is a case where the elements of two or more languages are found in single
30 utterances. It can occur in short utterances like one word and it is often a
spontaneous or unconscious illocutionary act in a conversation. In order to understand more about code-mixing, which is made by the
participants, the researcher collected the data by using the checklist sheet. Checklist sheet here is a part of the instruments from the content analysis method.
In order to dig deeper about the types of code-mixing, the researcher uses the manifest content of a communication. Fraenekel and Wallen 2008 say that it
analyzes the surface of the words, pictures, and images which is accessible to the naked eye or ear. The researcher uses it because it is very clear that the
participants did code-mixing while they are debating. This research focused on the code-mixing utterances which are made by
the deba te‟s participants. Then, the code-mixing is only focused on English –
Bahasa Indonesia utterances. The participants of the debate were: PS, HR, JW
and JK. The researcher took five videos because every video has little examples of code-mixing. The total cases of the code-mixing, which is made by the each
participant in the first debate would be presented in table 4.1.
Table 4.1 Total of code-mixing cases in the first debate
No Name of Participants
Total Utterances Total Code-
mixing Percentage
1 PS
136 4
2.94 2
HR 56
5 8.92
3 JW
103 5
4.85 4
JK 111
3 2.70
From the table above, it can be concluded that the cases of code-mixing from the first debate is too little to be taken as examples in this research. Therefore, the
researcher took five videos of presidential candidate debate. The total quantity of
31 code-mixing cases from the second debate up to fifth debate will be presented in
table 4.2.
Table 4.2 Total and Percentage of code-mixing cases in the second up to fifth debate
No Name of Participants Total Utterances
Total Code-
mixing Percentage
Second Debate 1
PS 200
6 3
2 JW
191 13
6.8 Third Debate
1 PS
169 23
13.6 2
JW 156
16 10.25
Fourth Debate 1
HR 207
40 19.3
2 JK
230 8
3.4 Fifth Debate
1 PS
140 2
1.4 2
HR 139
19 13.6
3 JW
167 9
5.3 4
JK 75
3 4
Total 139
There were 139 cases of code mixing from the second debate up to the fifth debate. Then, there are 156 cases of code-mixing in total from the first debate
up to the last debate which would be divided into two types of code-mixing. In this research, the researcher used the theory from Pieter Muysken 2000 to
explain about the types of code-mixing. The last type of code-mixing is congruent lexicalization. This type is
different with two other types. In this type, the two languages share the grammar structure in one sentence. Unfortunately the last type of code-mixing called as
congruent lexicalization cannot be found in this research since there were no grammatical shares between English and Bahasa Indonesia.
32
B. Discussion of the Types of Code-mixing
Kategori