It is agreed that language is a primary means ofcommunication that people use in daily life.
In the Algerian workplace, likeeverywhere else, communication is an essential tool to interact with others.Algerian workers ensure that their messages are properly interpreted and thatis why they try to make their communication as simple as possible. Observingtheir communication, it is noticed that sometimes they use more than onelanguage in an expression or a statement. Thisresearch is chosen to know more about Algerian workers’ code switching. Therefrom, our motivation in choosing a company is the use of code switching in anormal situation. The investigation is going to be carried out from asociolinguistic point of view which will focus on statements or expressionsused by workers when they interact with others. Algerianshave a great tendency to mix two languages; they speak Arabic, suddenly, theyshift to French and, then, back to Arabic again.
Code switching is a linguisticphenomenon which is widespread among ordinary people in the Algerian society.The problem investigated in this research is that Algerians, especially workershave a great tendency to code switch. So, the questions posed here are§ whythey code switch? and § whatis their preferable language? Tryingto answer this questions we put forward the hypothesis that § Algerianworkers code switch depending on the context and the interlocutor and,§ Theirpreferable language remains the Algerian Arabic. Forthis research, we have worked with the company of Algérie Télécom MobileMobilis in Sidi Bel Abbes.
Mobilis, or ATM Mobilis a subsidiary of AlgérieTélécom which became independent in August 2003, is one of the three majormobile operators in Algeria. According to the last statistics, Mobilis is theleader in Algeria with 20 million subscriber. Choosingcode switching as a target subject in this research, both quantitative andqualitative methods are used in this study. But we emphasize more on thequalitative one. The research will be led through a questionnaire which will befilled out by Mobilis workers and some recordings.
Codeswitching, among other dual language phenomena, is a common linguistic behaviorof Algerians. There might be reasons for this shift between languages.Sometimes, there are no similar words in the other language or maybe thespeaker did not know the word he/she were looking for or simply, the shift isdone just to fill the gap in speaking. Some speakers find it easier to speak iny the native language.
Thisdissertation consists of an introduction and three chapters, each chapter contains an introduction and aconclusion. Chapter one describes the code switching and its types andfunctions. Chapter two is devoted to the methodology used, as mentioned abovethe tools are questionnaire, recording and observation. In the third chapterdata collected are analyzed and interpreted. Chapter One CodeSwitching 1-1 Introduction This chapter aims at exploring some of thesociolinguistic patterns of language use. It also aims at showing the waysociolinguistic patterns work among individuals and state the factors whichdetermine the variability of language use. Within this scope, it is necessaryto shed some light on some important notions as: bilingualism, and code switching,the main concern of the present work. 1-2 Bilingualism 1-3 Code Switching1.
3.1. Definition Theterm Code Switching is used to refer to the switching between two or more differentlanguages in a single conversation. This occurs when the bilingual speaker usesboth languages in order to communicate with other person (hearer/speaker).
Ithappens consciously as well as sub-consciously. Inother words, “Code Switching is the use of a first or third language within astream of speech in the second language” Brown (2007:139). It, often, occursbetween advanced learners subconsciously in a conversation with the use offirst –common- language. At the stage of acquisition, learners –usually- codeswitch with some words from their native language because they feel that knowledgeis missing whether the addressee knows their native language or not. In suchcase, the learner might “slip” with few words (one or two words) in order toget the “gist” by the learner about what is communicated ,Brown (2007: 139). However,the term Code Switching is used too to refer to switching through the differentvarieties/ or dialects of the same language within the same conversation.Hudson (1996: 51) defines Code-Switching as the consequence of, generally,multilingualism.
The language chosen by the speaker –who speaks more than onelanguage- depends on the circumstances and this language is what the hearerunderstand. If the members of the multilingual community speak the same rangeof the example of the Italian Situation where a speaker uses German withinfamily, Saurian –Italian dialect- within the village, and Standard Italian informal settings as schools, church, and work (Ibid.: 52).
Codeswitching has been differently defined. For Myers-Scotton (1993: 1), code switchingis “the alternation of linguistic varieties within the same conversation.” ForSavill-Troike (1976: 42-3), “code switching is the responses to the differentsocial relations that languages signals”.
For Haugen (1956), code switching isthe variation between different languages (two or more), integration of usingwords from one language instead of another one used by a bilingual speaker. Whereas,for Jacobson (1990:1), code switching is the alternative between language isnot considered in one way but it is examined in different ways by investigatorswho avoid the possibility to define Code Switching. For Gumperz (1982: 59),Code Switching is when speakers alternate between two or more varieties of thesame language within the same speech exchange of a given passage from thespeech interaction. 1.
3.2. Typesof code switching Several researchers have attempted to provide atypological framework that accounts for the phenomenon of Code Switching.
Poplack(1980) proposed a well known framework that identifies three different types ofswitching which are tag-switching, inter-sentential and intra-sentential. 1.3.
2.1. Tag-Switching Tag-switching involvesinserting a tag or short phrase in one language into an utterance that is otherwiseentirely in another language. This type of Code Switching occurs the mosteasily for the reason being that tags typically contain minimal syntacticrestrictions; thus, they do not break syntactic rules when inserted into asentence that is given in the L1(Hamers & Blanc, 2000).
Tags include interjections,fillers and idiomatic expressions. Examples of common tags used by Algeriancommunity “bon! (well!)”, “Saha (right)” and “ma3lich (don’t worry)”. 18.104.22.168 Inter-Sentential Switching Inter-sentential Code Switchinginvolves switching at sentential boundaries where one clause or sentence is in onelanguage and the next clause or sentence is in the other.
Eldin (2014) andMacSwan (1999) state that since inter-sentential Code Switching takes placewithin the same sentence or between speaker turns, it entails fluency in bothlanguages such that a speaker is able to follow the rules of the two languages.An example of inter-sentential Code Switching between Algerian Arabic and Frenchis provided below: nt?ma?endk?m zhar, ce travail est trop demandé Translation:You have the chance, this work is required. 22.214.171.124 Intra-Sentential Switching Intra-sentential Code Switching,according to Poplack (1980), is possibly the most complex type among the three,as it can occur at clausal, sentential or even word level.
A good example tocite here might be the one given by Poplack as the title of one of her papers: e.g.Sometimes I’ll Start a Sentence in English Y termino en espanol. Translation:Sometimes I’ll Start a Sentence in English and finish it in Spanish(Cakrawarti, 2011). The three types of Code Switching illustrated above willbe considered in the analysis conducted in this study aiming to identify whichone of these is more frequent and also to look for plausible interpretations oflow and high frequencies of Code Switching types as used in the speech ofMobilis workers. 1.3.3.
Functionsof code switching 1-4 Conclusion Chapter Two Materials and Methods 1. 2. 3. 2-1 Introduction 2-2 The population The study targets workers in MobilisSidi Bel Abbes who are working in the technical field of network maintenanceand supervision. thirty worker participated in the questionnaire. The subjectshold various qualifications . All the workers responded to the questionnaireand agreed to have their linguistic behaviour observed but only three of them acceptedto have their voices recorded. 2-3 Methodology2.
3.1 Questionnaire The questionnaire was designed to beas short and brief as possible. The questionnaire starts with personalquestions that provide the researcher with information about the subjects.
The secondsection is concerned with identifying Mobilis workers’ perception of languageuse. The third section identifies language situation of the subjects. Thefourth section spots the switch between languages. The questionnaire normallytakes 5-10 minutes to be answered. 2.
3.2 Taperecording and Direct ObservationThis researchemphasizes on short duration of tape-recordings in Mobilis Sidi Bel Abbes.Moreover, many hours of observations were also conducted to record the workers’linguistic behaviour during their working hours. 2-4 Conclusion Chapter Three Field Investigation 3-1 Introduction This work is done after leading aninterview with Mobilis workers.
An interview isa conversation where questions are asked and answers aregiven. In common parlance, the word “interview” refers to a one-on-oneconversation with one person acting in the role of the interviewer andthe other in the role of the interviewee. The interviewer asksquestions, the interviewee responds, with participants taking turns talking. Interviewsusually involve a transfer of information from interviewee to interviewer,which is usually the primary purpose of the interview, although information transferscan happen in both directions simultaneously. One can contrast an interview whichinvolves bi-directional communication with a one-way flow ofinformation, such as a speech or oration.3-2 Data collectionThe duration ofthe interviews ..
. the location: Sidi Bel abbes, gender:…. time:.
.3-3 Data Analysisnot available 3-4 Conclusion GeneralConclusion Thistopic was about workplace code switching which its major aim was to prove thehypothesis and the results shown that it is true to find Algerian workers, whoknow more than one language, code switch depending on the context and the interlocutor while maintaining their native languageas their preferable one. Theresearch was divided into two parts: Theory and practice to facilitate the workand give it a good picture in order to understand.The first part consists of identifications of thedifferent elements of code-switching as an outcome of bilingualism, givingtheir different explanations from different authors.
Thepractical part contains a questionnaire that was filled out by Mobilis’ workersand interviews with workers who were recorded to discuss their experience in work.The data were analyzed in a sociolinguistic way to draw the final result andcompare it with the hypothesis which became true.