8
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter consists of two parts, the first is the theoretical description and the second is the theoretical framework. Theoretical description presents the
detailed discussions about code-mixing, types of code-mixing, reasons of code- mixing, presidential candidate debate, and biography of a presidential candidate.
The theoretical framework presents the synthesis of important concepts which is used in this research.
A. Theoretical Description
In this part, the researcher discusses the theories that underline the research. There are some theories and information which have relation to this
research. The theory which is used is code-mixing -- it includes the definition of code-mixing, types of code-mixing, and reasons of code-mixing. Furthermore, the
information is about presidential candidate debate -- it includes the biography of a presidential candidate.
1. Sociolinguistics
According to Van Herk 2012, sociolinguistics is the scientific study of the relationships between language and society. It means that the language has
relation with society since language is must be used in society. Hudson 1969 as cited by Wardaugh 2000 also adds that sociolinguistics is the study of language
in relation to society, whereas the sociology of language is the study of society in
9 relation to language. Sometimes people can find two or more languages that are
used in one society. The society which has two languages is called as bilingualism. Then the society which has more than two languages is called as
multilingualism. Such condition causes a phenomenon called code-switching or code-mixing. Thus, code-switching or code-mixing is included in a
sociolinguistics study.
2. Code-mixing
According to Wardaugh 2010 a code is a language, a variety of language. It is used since the term code is neutral rather than the terms such as dialect,
vernacular, style, standard language, pidgin, and creole. Code can be used to refer to any kind of communication. Oladosu 2011 says that in communications, a
code is a rule for converting a piece of information into another form or representation, not necessarily of the same sort. When people produce language, it
means people produce code. People can choose whether to use a single code or more than one code. People in multilingualism or bilingualism, who use more
than one codes tend to mix or switch their first code or another code. Wardaugh 2010 says that most of the multilingualism or bilingualism speakers command
several varieties of any language they speak. Wardaugh also adds that people are usually required to select particular code whenever they speak and they may also
decide to switch or to mix from one code to another within sometimes very short utterances, this process is called as code-switching or code-mixing.
Code-mixing which is also called as intra-sentential code-switching or intra-sentential code-alteration occurs when speakers use two or more languages
10 below clause within one social situation. Singh 1985, as quoted by Romaine
1995 says that the term code-mixing is used for intra-sentential switching. Intra- sentential switching means, switching that occurs within one sentence Holmes,
1992. Code-mixing is the use of one language in another language, the mixing of two or more languages or language varieties in a speech. Hamers and Blanc
2000 define code-mixing as a type of insertion code-switching, where a constituent of language A is embedded in an utterance in Language B and the
language B is clearly the dominant language. In addition, 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. Therefore, code-mixing is the use of two languages in one sentence where the
language A is embedded in language B which is dominant. In conclusion, code-mixing is a part of code-switching which categorized
as intra-sentential code-switching. Code-mixing can occur only in short utterances like one word, on the other hand, code-switching often occurs in more than one
word. In this thesis, the researcher used the term code-mixing rather than code- switching since the data of the research are categorized as intra-sentential code-
switching.
a. Typology of Code-mixing
Code-mixing is related to grammatical theory. Pieter Muysken 2000 proposes three models of code-mixing since there is no such a model provided by
grammatical theory and language processing. Pieter Muysken 2000 also proposes three patterns of intra-sentential code-switching or people called it as
11 code-mixing. They are; insertion, alternation, and congruent lexicalization. They
are described as below:
1 Insertion
For this type, Muysken 2000 explains that one way in which languages may be combined within the syntactic unit is such that language A is dominant
and language B is inserted into the grammatical frame defined by language A. According to Myers-Scotton 2002 as cited by Auer and Muhamedova, linguists
call the dominant language as Matrix Language ML and inserted language as Embedded Language EL. The insertion itself can be only single lexical items
such a word. Cantone 2007 adds insertion is given when elements from one language are mixed or inserted into another language.
Based on Muyske n‟s account, Cantone 2007 says that inserting an
element comes close to lexical borrowing, but whereas borrowing only covers the insertion of lexical items, insertion can imply larger structures, such as whole
phrases. Cantone 2007 also gives an example of insertion code-mixing, this example involving English and German „I go to the movie with my fratello’. The
word fratello means friend in English, and it is clear that fratello is inserted into English grammatical structure in a sentence. The explanation will be explained by
figure 2.1.
12
A B
A
…a…. ...b…
…a…
Figure: 2.1 Insertion Bilingual Speech: Typology of Code-mixing, Muysken, 2000.
In this study A
: represents Bahasa Indonesia
a : shows grammatical structure of Bahasa Indonesia
B : represents English
b : shows words in English which are inserted in an Indonesian sentence.
From the figure 2.1, it can be seen that language A is a Matrix Language ML in the sentence and the language B which is an Embedded Language EL in
the sentence. Furthermore, it shows that a word in English ML is inserted in a sentence in Bahasa Indonesia EL. Therefore, it can be concluded that an
insertion is a code-mixing, which happens in a sentence by adding a word in another language that is different from the dominant language.
2 Alternation
This type is a little bit different from the previous type, insertion. Insertion is dealing with how one word of one language is inserted into another
language pattern. On the other hand, alternation does not only insert some words of a language into another language pattern, but also involves the grammar pattern
of the language. Muysken 2000 says that “In the case of alternation, there is a
13 true switch from one language to another language, involving both grammar and
lexicon.” According to Poplack 1980, as cited by Cantone 2007, alternation means code-switching under equivalences and involves and analysis of the
structural compatibility of two languages, in the sense of equivalence between them at a given switching point. Thus, alternation is a mixing of two languages
which is not only one word inserted into another language, but also involves the grammar pattern.
Since alternation is not only just inserted an element of a language to another language, but also involve both grammar and lexicon. It is ending up in a
true switching from one language to another language Muysken, 2000. Cantone 2007 gives an example English-
German alternation as follows: “She went to quel ristorante all’angolo,” which means “She went to that restaurant at the
corner.” From the example, it can be seen that the switching happens between clauses. Figure 2.2 is the representation of the explanation.
A B
…a… …b…
Figure: 2.2 Alternation Bilingual Speech: A Typology of Code-mixing, Muysken, 2000.
In this study A
: represents Bahasa Indonesia
a : shows words in Bahasa Indonesia with its own sentence structure
B : represents English
b : shows English words with English grammatical structure.
14 From the figure 2.2, it can be seen a group of words from language A
with language A‟s grammatical structure is followed by group of words from language B with
language B‟s grammatical structure Muysken, 2000. Therefore, it is possible for any bilingual or multilingual speaker to start speaking
one language and finish in another language. Muysken 2000 adds that from the sociolinguistics point of view, altern
ation should be found in „stable bilingual communities with a tradition of language separation‟.
3 Congruent Lexicalization
In describing this type, Muysken 2000 says that congruent lexicalization appears where there is a largely shared structure, lexicalization by
elements from either language. Moreover, Cantone 2007 adds that congruent lexicalization is the type of mixing, which calls for social-linguistic constraint. It
involves material from different lexicons in a grammatical structure which is said to be shared.
To be more understandable, Cantone 2007 takes example of English and German mixing as follows: “Her Grandma is a typical familienmensch.” In
English, this utterances means “Her Grandma is a typical family person.” This case belongs to congruent lexicalization since there is shared structure of English
and German in the word ”familiennmensch.” Cantone 2007 adds that this
example involving two languages, English and German which are basically similar with respect to grammatical structures. Thus, congruent lexicalization can
be found in the languages which basically have similar grammatical structures.
15 Cantone 2007 says “Congruent lexicalization is said to be found
among bilinguals with related languages as dialectstandard or post-creole. ”
Muysken 2000 says that the term congruent lexicalization refers to a situation where the two languages share a grammatical structure which can be filled
lexically with elements from either language. The explanation is represented in figure 2.3 below.
AB
…a… …b…
…a… …b…
Figure: 2.3 Congruent Lexicalization Bilingual Speech: A Typology of Code-mixing, Muysken, 2000.
In this study A
: represents Bahasa Indonesia
a : shows words in Bahasa Indonesia
B : represents English
b : shows English words
In conclusion, the researcher believes that code-mixing is a case where two elements of two languages are found in one utterance or a sentence. Based on
the previous explanation, it can be said that people can mix their language in one utterance, but people cannot obey that code-mixing related to the grammatical
structure of a language. The researcher concludes that insertion is code-mixing between words, alternation is code-mixing between clause, and congruent
lexicalization is code-mixing which share grammatical structure in one sentence. Code-mixing has been described as the sociolinguistics phenomenon as observed
16 in the speech of adults as observed in this study. Therefore, code-mixing is
possible to be found in adults‟ speech such as debates.
3. Debate
As stated by Freely 1969, debate is ubiquitous in our society at decision-making level. Moreover, the debate is a method of rational decision-
making and debate consists of arguments for against to a given proportion. Freely 1969 also states that a debate will help us to make rational decisions and to
secure rational decisions from others. According to Freely 1969, there are two kinds of debate; substantive
debate and educational debate. Substantive debate is conducted on propositions in which the advocates have a special interest. The purpose of this debate is to
establish a fact, value or a policy. Besides, educational debate is conducted on propositions in which the advocates usually have an academic interest. The
purpose of this debate is to provide educational opportunities for the participants. Freely 1969 adds there are four kinds of debates inside the substantive
debate; special debate, judicial debate, parliamentary debate, and non-formal debate. Special debate is a debate which is conducted under special rules and
drafted for a specific occasion. Judicial debate is a debate which is conducted in the law court or before quasi-judicial bodies. Parliamentary debate is a debate
which is conducted under the rules of parliamentary procedure. Then, non-formal debate is a debate which is conducted without the formal rules.
17
4. Presidential Debate
Kategori