A study on code switching techniques used in translating english terms and vietnamese equivalents in electronics
Bạn đang xem bản rút gọn của tài liệu. Xem và tải ngay bản đầy đủ của tài liệu tại đây (241.99 KB, 38 trang )
1. Rationale
Nowadays codeswitching has become a common phenomenon occurring in periodicals,
advertisements, or reports on TVs and daily newspapers in multimedia, etc. For students of
technology, this phenomenon has popularly applied for their conversations when they discuss
a topic relevant to functions, features or the operation of an electronic device. Codeswitching
refers to the alternate use of two or more than two languages in the same utterance or a
conversation, (Gumper, 1982). The exchange of information with CS terms has become
favourite, because it is a two- way process of thinking directly used in the utterances to
express the contents quickly, and accurately. Moreover, almost all-electronic terms
codeswitched into Vietnamese utterances are English terms. These characteristics have a
remarkable effect on the students’ attitude towards learning English for electronics with
language skills, even in the oral translation skill. Observations from my collected data in
teaching materials and in lessons of English for electronics have shown that CS is explored
by students in various aspects because of three main reasons as follows. Firstly, the tendency
of using CS terms in the daily utterances in multimedia encourages them to insert English
terms into Vietnamese. Secondly, most of the second-year students of electronics at the level
of pre- inter of English want to express their knowledge of English for electronics and
professional knowledge by using directly CS terms in their utterances to explain a definition
or functions of an electronic device. Thirdly, most of them are bilingual students and know
how to practise computing instructions in English everywhere and every time they meet.
Accordingly, inserting CS terms in Vietnamese utterances becomes a habit and does not
make them misunderstand the content of electronic terms in a particular context. From these
reasons, students of electronics apply CS to develop their language learning activities through
language skills i.e. speaking and presentation. This habit of using CS even occurs in the oral
translation tasks because applying directly knowledge of English and of electronics in
Vietnamese versions in a short time requires students to have an in-time reaction in thought
when producing equivalents adequately. Donal (2004) shows that CS in translations takes
place at a syntactic or semantic level with the use of inserting points to represent electronic
concepts familiar to the participant. For many, translation is an art, which is only done by
exceptionally skilled people who are professionals at it. However, in this thesis, my
investigation is only seen translation as the fifth language skill in language learning activities
and practiced by untrained people who are bilingual students of electronics. Thus, CS is
studied to understand why electronic students, who are competent in two languages, alternate
languages in particular translation tasks. Most of the early researches on translations of
English terms for electronics only focus on analyzing forms of equivalents and ways of
conveying semantic meanings into the target language or even looking at them as borrowed
words. These studies do not describe how students apply CS to extent their communicative
competence for achieving conversations goals during translation. This thesis will concentrate
on this phenomenon “CS in the oral translation”. However, it must be stressed that this thesis
neither is an analysis of electronic terms applying CS techniques for professional translators
nor guides for ESP teachers how to teach CS techniques in translation. It is only a reference
for teachers who wish to use translation as a language learning activity for the language
learning practice and improvement. The major concern of this thesis is to give the answer to
the question: “Why do CS techniques become useful strategies used in oral translating
tasks of electronic terms in the electronic textbook “Basic English for electronics and
telecommunication”? As a result, some suggestions are also given to show the availability,
implications of using CS techniques in the oral translation of electronic terms. For all of
these, it is hoped that this study contributes some efforts to ESP teaching when applying CS
techniques in the oral translation to help students develop their fifth language skill much
more effectively.
2. Aims of the study
Within the framework of a minor thesis, this study is aimed at:
• Presenting fundamental factors affecting the inserting process of CS terms in oral
translation of electronic terminology
• Finding out the translation strategies adequate to CS techniques applied for
inserting CS terms in the oral translation tasks
• Spotting problems while applying CS techniques for electronic terms, thus giving
some suggestions for such problematic translations that can gain benefit for ESP
teaching and learning process
3. Scope of the study
Within the limited time and references, the study mainly focuses on analyzing how CS
techniques are applied for inserting English terms in the oral translating tasks in the course
book “Basic English for Electronics and Telecommunications”, compiled by teachers of ESP,
VNUH, which have been used as a main course book of COTECH, VNUH. Its major subjects
are bilingual students of English at the level of pre-intermediate at the electronic department at
COTECH, who are learning English as a compulsory subject and using the translation skill as
a language learning activity. Narrowly, my investigation focuses on what CS techniques are
applied to codeswitch single terms of electronics in the form of CS nouns and CS verbs when
inserted into Vietnamese versions.
4. Methods of the study
The strategic methods used in this descriptive study are the quantitative and qualitative ones.
By virtue of quantitative research, a number of single terms of electronics in the form of nouns
and verbs from the textbook Basic English for Electronics and Telecommunications” and its
materials are collected to observe and analyze. Again, a questionnaire is carried out to find out
the teacher’s opinions on roles of CS terms in developing the fifth skill in oral translation
process. To study the effectiveness of these CS techniques, the following steps are
implemented:
• Collecting single terms of electronics in the CS forms in the textbook and its
supplementary materials
• Classifying collected English terms inserted in the oral translation according to CS
techniques
• Analyzing specific terms of electronics in the form of English nouns and verbs to
find out the convenience of applying CS techniques in oral translating tasks
5. The research question
To achieve the aims within the scope the research question below is addressed: “Why do CS
techniques become useful strategies used in the oral translation of electronic terms in the
electronic textbook Basic English for electronics and telecommunication?”
6. Design of the study
This thesis is divided into three parts, references and appendices.
The first part “introduction” gives the rationale, the scope and aims of the study, and the
design of the study.
The second part “development” consists of three chapters. Chapter I “theoretical
background” provides an overview on theories of translations, codeswitching and other
relevant definitions, strategies, as well as roles of CS techniques in inserting electronic terms
in Vietnamese versions. Chapter II “Classifications of electronic terminologies according to
CS parser” discusses linguistic features of CS together with translation techniques when
shifting English substitutions in Vietnamese utterances. At the same time, my collected data
and statistic figures of electronic terms is particularly analyzed to show effectiveness of
linguistic patterns of CS while inserting single terms in the CS form into Vietnamese
utterances. Problems of selecting terms in the oral translation while applying CS techniques
are also recommended with practical situations to find out some appropriate solutions to
teaching and learning oral translation practice. The third part “conclusion” is to bring about a
more insightful look into doing tasks of translation patterns with the choice of CS techniques
in conveying electronic terminologies in particular situations.
In this section, the first part is issues relating to translation theories i.e. concepts of
translations, equivalents, translation techniques, and technical translation; whereas the second
one with general ideas on concepts of codeswitching, codemixing, borrowing etc. will be
presented.
I.1. Theory of translation
I.1.1. Definitions of translation
Translation is a process of thought and afterthought (Duff, 1989:15). Tudor (cited in Duff,
1989: 5) says that translation, as the process of conveying messages across linguistic and
cultural barriers, is an eminently communicative activity, one whose use could well-be
considered in a wider range of teaching situations than may currently be the case. According
to him, all of us have mother tongue that shapes our way of thinking and of applying semantic
meanings of terms into practice. Accordingly, the translating skill helps us apply linguistic
features to create influences of one language on the other. Also, his view expresses specific
remarks on general principles needed to have a good selection. It means that an acceptable
translation must attain three main principles called meaning, form and register to make it
natural and loyal to the SL.
According to Hoang Van Van (2006:9), “Translation has been the subject of interest not only
to linguists, professional and amateur translators, and language teachers, but also to electronic
engineers and mathematicians”. In the long history of translation, concepts of translation have
been mentioned by a great numbers of scholars around the world with different perspectives.
“Translation consists of reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of
the source language message of the source language, first in terms of meaning and secondly in
terms of style” (Nida & Taber 1974: 12, cited in Hoang Van Van 2006: 10). As well, Catford
(1965:20, cited in Hoang Van Van 2006:10) defines “translation as the replacement of textual
material in one language (source language- SL) by the equivalent textual material in another
language (target language- TL)”. Herein, general idea involved translation equivalent can be
clarified. It is regarded as a precondition for the faithful and a proper reproduction of the SL
text. Also, Catford (1965:20) shows the “textual material” and “equivalent” as a closed
attachment requiring translators to have knowledge combining with observations to produce
an equivalent term selectively.
Bell (1991: XIII) proposes that translation is the transformation of a text originally in one
language into an equivalent text in a different language retaining, as far as possible, the
content of the message, formal features and roles of the original text. Herein, a combination of
principles retaining original meanings affirms that translation is a process as well as a product.
In general, translation renders meanings of a text into another language in a way the author
expresses in the text (Newmark 1989:5). In other words, it is a process of problem solving of
lexical and sentential structures levels which requires participants to have a combination of
cognitive activities with adequate vocabulary (Donald 2004. http: CS: 38). Taking concepts of
translation into consideration, this part only collects different definitions from scholars to
show an interactive relation between SL and TL. Thus, translation is not only understood as a
linguistic phenomenon or a process of transcoding between SL and TL, but also a relationship
of equivalence between the two languages (SL & TL) while taking into account various
constraints. This complicated process requires researchers and translators to have a rather
comprehensive knowledge of both linguistic competence and relevant sciences.
I.1.2. Translation equivalence
The concept of equivalence involves both linguistic and text-linguistic approaches that are
much concerned with using methods of translation and techniques while conveying terms.
When translators solve matters relevant to relationships between SL and TL texts in terms of
professional terminology, this means equivalence to be clarified (Newmark 1989). Moreover,
when a target term is expected to be a faithful reproduction of the source text, the equivalence
is defined as identity (of meaning and of form), and created in a sense of equal value or
correspondence (Christina 1998:3). Still, types of equivalents are also presented with different
aspects from scholars. For instance, Nida’s formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence
(Nida 1964); or Koller’s denotative, connotative, text normative, pragmatic and formal-
aesthetic equivalence (Koller 1979:215 cited in Chesterman 1989: 100), or Newmark’s
equivalence response and equivalence effect (Newmark 1995). Arguably, translation needs to
be set apart from other kinds of derived texts as reflection in the opposition of translation and
adaptation (Koller. 1979, cited in Chesterman 1989: 87), semantic translation and
communicative translation (Newmark 1989), or overt and covert translation (House
1977:194). Even in contrast, Baker’s notions of non- equivalence: at word level, above word
level, grammatical equivalence, textual equivalence and pragmatic equivalence (Baker 1992).
Therefore, the researcher as well as untrained translators should consider this concept
intensively before choosing a solution to a particular term in practice.
I.1.3. Translation techniques
According to Newmark (1988), translation techniques are applied for all types of texts in the
translation process. The major issue of translation involved in this theme is that the translator
has to decide what techniques used to convert terms adequately. In theory, fifty techniques
mentioned in Newmark’s book (1988) in which the shift of scale, translation shift,
paraphrase, phonological translation, unfamiliar abbreviation, unfamiliar acronyms,
transcription, equivalent frequency of usage, proper names in communicative translation, etc.
are most popularly used. However, depending on specific purposes of my thesis, the following
techniques are directly applied when inserting CS terms in the oral translation.
I.1.3.1. Transcription
Newmark (1988:155) indicates transcription as a technique concerning loanwords, transferred
words and adopted ones. This technique is used to translate proper nouns, addresses, names of
private firms, national public and private institutions etc. Accordingly, the process of
transferring a SL word into a TL one in the oral translation tasks will use morphemes (stem,
prefix, and suffix) with English phonemes to call out names of electronic products. Things
normally transferred are electronic concepts or devices related to titles of yet translated
literally works, products, names of particular objects, even functions of one tools or
institutions and so on. Most of the CS terms analyzed in this part are in the form of English
phonemes with verbs and nouns occurring in the oral translation tasks in such situations to
dominate the functions of electronic devices. However, it must be stressed that names of
electronic companies and its brand names of electronic devices do not belong to the field of
CS studies.
Newmark (1988:157) guides an unfamiliar abbreviation as a technique to help a translator
examine abbreviated terms in a particular context before consulting meanings from a
professional dictionary. As well, a translator can approach acronyms in two ways i.e. by
searching abbreviations in dictionaries or by considering them in a particular context. This
refers to conventionally recognized terms or a combination of Vietnamese single terms and
English phonemes in the form of CS acronyms and eponyms. For instance,
!"# !"$%&'()*
+!,RAM so on.
I.1.4. Technical translation
Technical translation is related to specific knowledge of a field with specific terms. In terms of
English for IT, technical translation involves the language of science and technology with its
own characteristic vocabulary. Newmark (1995:151) defines “technical translation as one part
of specialized translation, and primarily distinguished from other forms of translation by
terminology, although terminology usually only makes up about 5-10% of a text”. Whereas,
Sofer (1999) gives another view on technical terms in comparison with a literal translation as a
remarkable division in translation field called literary and technical translation. In addition,
one way of defining technical translation is by asking the question: does the subject being
translated require a specialized vocabulary, or a language of non- specialized? If the text being
translated includes specialized terms in a given field, then the translation is technical”.
Furthermore, Newmark suggests some useful steps for translation as well as gives ten
categories handled by different types such as old words with non-sense; derived words;
acronyms; collocations; abbreviations; eponyms; phrasal words; transferred words etc. In
English for electronics, this process particularly involves translation of electronic objects for
many reasons i.e. an object is newly imported and not yet has a name. A descriptive term is
being used as a familiar alternative to avoid repetition; or to make a contrast with another one
etc. In technical styles, terms for electronics have fallen into four aspects of technical
languages as scientific; workshop level; everyday usage level; and publicity and sales
(Newmark 1995:152). Accordingly, English terms for electronics are analyzed in the oral
translation tasks in English classes in are analyzed. This is an overview on concepts of
translation used to analyze techniques for translating electronic terminologies in Vietnamese
utterances.
I.2. Theory of code switching
I.2.1. Definitions of CS
It is the fact that English becomes a “salad bowl” of all languages in general and in
Vietnamese utterances in particular. It can often be heard and seen everywhere: on TV reports,
-
on a radio, in films, in periodical journals, or in advertisements etc. This language contact at
some point allows English to be mixed in both spoken and written form in the TL.
Accordingly, it becomes a students’ favor when combining two languages of different
grammar systems in a same speech. This phenomenon is codeswitching, a by-product of
bilingualism. Thus, what is so called CS? Is it a mixing of language free of grammatical
structures and syntax? According to Nguyen Van Khang (1999:224), CS is the usage of two or
more than two variants of linguistics in a conversation. Besides that, a numbers of CS
definitions from different scholars also show various aspects of this CS phenomenon. At the
grammatical level, CS is analyzed with its constituents and inserted at unconscious points in a
sentence without having effect on grammatical structures as well as natural fluency in the
utterance. Poplack (1980: 583) considers CS as the alternate use of two language codes in a
fully grammatical way, within a single discourse, the same sentence or constituent; whereas
Woolford (1983) views code-switched sentences as resulting from a mixture of phrase
structure rules extracted from the two languages. Also, Chana (1984) describes codeswitching
as the juxtaposition within the same speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two
different grammatical systems or subsystems. In terms of linguistic competence, applying CS
phenomenon in an utterance shows the degree of developing students’ linguistic competence
in their learning two languages that users use CS to attain two things i.e. filling lexical gaps
and creating other multiple communicative targets (Gysels 1992). Accordingly, Luisa Duran
(cited in Valdes- Fallis 1997) defines CS as the use of two languages simultaneously or
interchangeably. As well, Gumperz (1982) describes codeswitching as discourse exchanges,
which form a single unitary interaction while Sridhar (1980) assumes that there is a basic
language in a bilingual discourse and proposes the terminology of guest and host languages to
describe code-switched utterances. In fact, CS usually occurs unconsciously in the utterances
and bilingual students are unaware of what is happening to their new mixed speech. This
explains why CS is a discursive issue in the linguistic forum. Also, major types of CS
including inter-sentential, intra -sentential (Poplack 1980) decide ways to insert items in target
utterances. If intra-sentential refers to codeswitching between constituents within a sentence,
then inter- sentential CS is switching between sentences. Below are illustrations for these two
main CS types in Vietnamese
.!/$+!/!/+
0
!"#$
%&'()*+,-./01230/
Inter-sentential:
“What is needed in this program? 4 5 6 "7 89 what is important?”
(Recorded from group 50V1, 2007/ March 2
nd
/ room 302)
Thus, in CS utterances, the foreign language (English) has to adapt to the host language
(Vietnamese) morphologically and syntactically. Within the limited time and reference, my
research paper only focuses on analyzing one type of CS with intra-sentential features in
translation. Besides, some other concepts i.e. codemixing, matrix language and embedded one
are also mentioned to make features of CS techniques clearer during translating process.
I.2.2. Codeswitching vs. borrowing
In a multilingual environment, CS and borrowing are results of interacting between two or
more than two kinds of languages. Scotton (2002:234) describes borrowing as an adoption of a
linguistic feature previously used in another. In other words, borrowing has another name
called loanword. This term is defined as a word that is transferred from a donor language to a
recipient language. In general, borrowed words often show some or complete phonological
integrations with the recipient language while using CS forms to retain their embedded
language phonology (Scotton, 2002: 42). The adapted phonology is a feature that operates
borrowing from codeswitching. For instance, cultural- specific names such as “CD, video,
radio, phones, TV” are borrowed into Vietnamese with phonological adaptation. Therefore,
they are borrowed words, not codeswitching when used. As in Vietnamese, the same names
are translated into Vietnamese as “12+3415673)18941:3$+1941;!/<=3
><9!+!4)9/7?!@'3@'AEven though they are in Vietnamese written forms since they
are semantically translated into Vietnamese, they remain borrowed words. In other words,
they become common names occurring in daily conversation and they are understood by
monolingual people. That is the reason why they are borrowed words. Another different
between CS and borrowing is that not all speakers who use borrowed forms are fluent in the
donor language whereas CS occurs most often when the speakers are fluent in both languages
(Scotton, 2002:42). In other words, borrowed forms are usually used in donor language by
monolingual people whereas CS forms are applied by bilingual ones (Nguyen Van Khang
1999:232). Moreover, if borrowing is a “stable phenomenon and repetitively used in a
recipient language”, then CS will be only a “linguistic application” Nguyen Van Khang
(1999:229). In addition, the pronunciation of a borrowed word should adapt to the Vietnamese
pronunciation. It should be spelt according to Vietnamese spelling (e.g. video - vi-189B. If a
foreign word fulfill these requirements, it can be called a borrowed word. Examples as follows
illustrate this distinction between CS and borrowing. A student of IT announced that “C":7
+/<:7@<D!<%E!!8!F<G!"/+F<7H!"I/<:!<"I!<J3A
So terms “:;( +! " ( are CS terms inserted in Vietnamese utterance
whereas the following terms in the below example i.e. AM, FM and radio are loanwords
because of their popular usage by monolingual peoples. “AM v FM :<+=/5!KL!"
><M%?!1NOFPQ!"R';/!+3
I.2.3. Code- switching techniques in translation as a research topic
In general, this study describes CS techniques applied for electronic terms in the CS forms as
inserting points in Vietnamese utterances to convey objective meanings of electronics.
Herein, Vietnamese - English CS focus on spoken data in the oral translation tasks of
electronics in the textbook BE. Observations from my teaching materials and experience have
shown that bilingual students of electronics at the pre-intermediate level make acquaintance to
CS techniques in the oral translation tasks naturally because of the three reasons as follows
Firstly, their amount of English terms for electronics is still limited. When they meet new
terms, they hesitate to convey into Vietnamese. It does not mean that they do not know
equivalent meanings of SL terms in the TL ones. They want to confirm meaning of equivalent
term in Vietnamese by producing a CS term in the oral translation practice as a way to check
its equivalent from their teacher and classmates for their latter use.
Secondly, a dominant feature in the oral translation task is that this task is usually practised in
a short time of a language learning activity in an English class and requires students
immediately to show their understanding on matter of electronics with a remarkable amount of
new terms they have updated in the previous part of the lesson. Actually, at the level of pre-
intermediate, it is difficult for students to remember all meanings of new concepts of
electronic at once to convey in the oral translation tasks. In addition, CS can help them be
accessible and acceptable by other classmates.
Last but not least, CS techniques applied in English classes for electronics at COTECH are
inter-sentential, intra-sentential, and intra- word. CS becomes a common phenomenon in the
utterances of students of electronics. However, within the limited time and references, this part
focuses on analyzing one type of CS techniques called intra- sentential applied in the oral
translation. Particularly, it is studied to show ways applied to insert English terms into
Vietnamese version and to find out reasons why they become effectively and popularly use in
the oral translation tasks. Based on features of “equivalents constraints”, the next part will
show CS as a translation technique applied in situations to indicate an interactive relationship
between two languages. For all of these reasons, a study on CS technique is selected to
effectiveness of CS in conveying electronic terms in daily utterances.
I.2.4. Motivations for applying codeswitching techniques in translation
There are numbers of possible reasons applying CS techniques in the oral translating tasks
from English to Vietnamese in English for electronics. Crystal (1987) lists three main reasons
i.e. filling lexical gaps, showing students’ attitudes towards language groups and gaining time
benefit. Accordingly, applying CS in the oral translation of electronic terms is based on these
reasons. In terms of filling lexical gaps, at first, when a translator may not express meanings of
terms in Vietnamese, he/she switches in English to compensate the deficiency. As a result, the
translator triggers a CS term by inserting English phonemes into Vietnamese. However,
applying this type of CS tends to make hearers tired and the participants are ambiguous in
receiving equivalent meanings and become distracted. However, in a positive side, this is a
way to help untrained translators fill a lack of confidence during practicing oral translating
tasks in front of a group of classmates as well as indirectly show receptive meanings and
structures of CS terms. Besides, expressing solidarity with other partners to attract other
students’ attend the text. Finally, CS behavior helps them gain time benefit, particularly in
functions of specific computing programs or electronic circuits. By using CS, it takes them
less time to encode and decode from SL to TL and vise versa without learning necessity
directly influence on their learning strategies.
II.1. An introduction to the textbook
The book “Basic English for Electronics and telecommunication” (BE) consisting of three
episodes were compiled by teachers of ESP, CFL, VNU, Hanoi. It reflects general ideas on
English for electronics and telecommunication through authentic materials and topic- based
exercises during the last three terms at intermediate level of COTECH electronic students both
English language in general and job- oriented. The first episode focuses on general parts
intensively used for the second- year students including fourteen units with topics on
fundamental of electricity, electronics and electronic components and telecommunication. The
second deals with electronic devices and systems like TVs, computers, and radar systems etc,
and provides students with fundamental concepts of the latest technology i.e. nanotechnology.
The last is a comprehensive one guiding students with a lot of available and authentic
materials related to electronics and telecommunications and steps to help students to develop
their critical and analytical ways of thinking and using knowledge of English in their learning
process in other technical occupational situations in their real life.
Intuitively, each unit begins with one particular topic closely attached to a thematic title.
Major headings and topic boundary continue to be numbered following systematic exercises.
Also, each part of the unit in every episode is followed by a case study that highlights
characteristics of electronic equipments with respective terminologies and review of electronic
concepts as well as exercises pertinent to a specific unit. In other words, pedagogical activities
in each unit including learning key terms, topic-oriented comprehension questions, questions
for reviewing, for understanding of electronic terms and concepts. This three- episode
textbook offers a comprehensive package of materials guiding teachers and students as
untrained translators to have an overview on electronics and telecommunication in general
and to find out necessary steps to strengthen knowledge of both English and electronic
terminologies during reciprocal learning and teaching process. For all reasons above, this book
is my selected material used to investigate how frequently CS techniques are applied to
convey electronic meanings of terms in the oral translation as the fifth skill in language
learning practice in two groups 50V2 and 50V1 at VNU, COTECH Hanoi.
II.2. Classification of electronic terminology according to CS structures
According to the collected data in the textbook as well as its supplementary, 532 electronic
terms including 131 verbs and 401 nouns are selected to analyze in which, 151 terms are in the
CS forms with 111 CS nouns and 40 CS verbs found in the data. These figures are background
data used to classify CS parsers in intra-sentential form. Below are mechanism used to handle
CS items in Vietnamese CS
II.2.1. In terms of CS parsing
* Noun substitution
In theory, a noun occurs as a subject or object of one verb or the object of a preposition. More
specifically, in electronics, nouns refer to components, functional names, equipment process
and so on. In terms of CS parsing, noun substitutions are handled as equivalence with relations
between Vietnamese and English words that establish particular functions to make lexical
meanings much clearer and more adequately. Intuitively, noun substitutions in electronics are
mentioned as either English semi - technical or technical terms that do not express one noun in
normal meaning of general English but specific meanings of electronics. By inserting CS
nouns in Vietnamese utterances, they become noun substitutions. For instance, with a term
“monitor”, the normal meaning is a leader of one group who supervises or controls one action
or something related to an ability of organizing a group action. Meanwhile, in converting
electronic terms, its specific meaning is the main output device used to display the output from
a computer on a screen, “:!<S!<”. In Vietnamese, code switching within a sentence tends to
occur more often at points where syntaxes of the two languages align. Therefore, noun
substitutions combining with a single Vietnamese word such as “F6F<?F3creates a noun in
the form of CS 4F6!/$!:7$F<?F!/$!:73A@<type of CS usually occurs in the
utterances of bilingual students of electronics as a normal phenomenon in the conversation.
Bellows are some more examples of electronic nouns applied CS techniques in conveying
meanings of terms and inserted into Vietnamese.
Key:[ki:] Driver: [‘ drai-v] Plate:[pleit] Browser:[ bruz] Terminal:[‘t:minl]
Actually, users of these electronic terms in the form of CS nouns have used special meanings
according to technical field. Let’s look at the usage of technical terms in the form of CS nouns
through the example as follows
Excerpt from BE E2-U2 (2007)
“ 8< = > ? @ A)BCD "E 8F :GCD
*=> 7"5@E. 8<HI@EJE KL
M )BCD 8 7 I & 89 E * # "I @ E
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN(
“ the last link in the process is that the BIOS looks in the CMOS storage to find the
chosen boot device. Normally, it has to boot from one of the hard disks, and the BIOS thus has
to read the contents of the master boot record ”
From the example above, it is easy to recognize CS nouns in the oral translation process in the
Vietnamese version. This English single noun “link” in the CS form combining with a single
Vietnamese word “1NI!"” are inserted into Vietnamese utterances without interruption in
Vietnamese. At the level of CS structures, the inserting point of this term occurring becomes
intra-word codeswitched item because of the random position in an utterance. At the level of
equivalent constraints, its position is not affected by grammatical elements and the natural
fluency in the Vietnamese utterance. It is not surprising that this CS noun is inserted into
Vietnamese language without violating grammatical structures of either language. Therefore,
its meanings expressed according to English concepts are attained to show the convenience for
applying CS techniques in the oral translating process.
* Verb substitution
In theory, verb simply in English is a word, which occurs as a part of the predicate of a
sentence, and carries markers of grammatical categories such as tense, aspect, person number
and mood or even mentions an action or state of one man or thing (Oxford dictionary: 2002).
In terms of CS items, a Vietnamese verb can be replaced by an English root plus with a
Vietnamese operator and its morphological variants. For instance, the sentence
Excerpt from BE (2004:25)
“ Khi O 89?7 PQE8E"ER8
S*TOEUNNN(
“ When an external voltage is applied, the n-p junction acts as a rectifier, permitting
current to flow in one direction ”
In the above example, one Vietnamese verb “1NOF "6!):3 F+!be replaced by CS term
“1NOF+>>73!T<F<the head verb “apply” replaces a Vietnamese word “"6!):3+!/+U
! +! +/!+ %F+/"$7 /< English root verb “applied”. Herein, the English verb
“applied” in Vietnamese utterance is converted into the basis and the inflection “ed” can be
replaced by another single word in Vietnamese “1NOF3A
Excerpt from BE, U13 (2004)
46!<6!":&/=!"!V!"NO!"FL/<H1N9%RF6F!"78!/PAAAAW<!"X!1NOF
apply6?&/NO!"F6FF/$!/$8!&/><?!Q/YFZF[F\+]F^AAAAAAA3
4V,,"*"NNNNNNAs power is applied, a certain
number of electrons on one plate will be attracted to the positive side of the battery ”
Through the examples above, CS verbs such as “release, attract, or apply” are inserted into the
Vietnamese translation as a common term to express the action of one electronic process and
its inflection “ed” in English are replaced by Vietnamese ones to make the utterance like
Vietnamese version easier to comprehend. This contact of language with mixing phenomenon
makes it possible for students to create what is the most appropriate for them to master the
communicative act. Also, this inserting process with CS verbs will create awareness of the
structure and lexis of the two languages. Thus, students of electronics can distinguish two
things during language switching strategy namely social factors and language ones.
II.2.2. In terms of CS constraints
According to Scotton (2002:154), constraints on CS have been a subject of discussion with
grammatical properties of code mixed varieties since 1970s. In her observation, two main
types of constraints i.e. free morpheme constraints, equivalents are mainly analyzed; However,
due to the limited time and adequate features of analyzing terms in documents, in this part of
the thesis, my study only focuses on the latter “equivalent constraints” used to code switch
electronic terminologies during practicing translation. Theoretically, with equivalent
constraint, CS can occur at points in discourse when juxtaposition of L1 and L2 elements does
not violate syntactic rules of either language (Scotton 2002:155). In practising CS terms in
electronics, this happens similarly without violating either English or Vietnamese. Let’s look
at CS terms in the following example
Excerpt from Oxford for Electronics (2000: 204)
NNN*E*=KW89J** NNNN(
NNN* is a component which converts energy from one form to another ”
Clearly, the term “component” occurs in a Vietnamese utterance as a normal noun and seems
to have no violation in syntactic rules of either language. In fact, in Vietnamese, this CS term
has an equivalent meaning as 4!< U;!3, but it is usually used in English by its phonetic
translation. Moreover, students tend to use its English phonemes in practice because of the
dominating meanings in electronic usage. Equivalent constraints are gradually used to clarify
features of these CS terms even in oral translational tasks from English into Vietnamese. Also,
this type is chosen as one of the best choices in the process of oral translation because of its
aspects of syntactic structures applied in Vietnamese data. For all of these reasons, English
terms can be embedded into Vietnamese to help students feel more confident when translating
definitions with equivalents in electronics without hesitation.
II.3. Translation of electronic terms according CS techniques
II.3.1. Translation of electronic terms by unfamiliar abbreviations
Findings from the textbook and its supplementary materials provides documentary proofs to
distinguish loan words with CS terms in electronic terms when practising CS terms with
abbreviations in translating process. More specifically, this part concerns how to distinguish
loan words occurring to name concepts and CS terms used to call electronic items in particular
situations. In classification, this matter will fall into two categories:
Category 1. Electronic acronyms
Acronyms appear at a high frequency in the textbook English for BE and widely used in TL
in daily utterances of electronic field. They are about designated electronic products, devices,
operating process, configuration, and international institutions and so on, (cited by Vu Bich
Thuy 2005: 37). Bilingual students approach English acronyms to explain names of electronic
products by inserting English phonemes with beginning letters of abbreviations into
Vietnamese. These abbreviations become loanwords only when they are frequently used by
monolingual users. For instance, abbreviations i.e. MP3, CD, FM or AM at first are
codeswitched terms with the form of English phonemes respectively [em- pi:, si:-di:, ef-em or
ei- em]. Intuitively, these terms have letters similar to those in the Vietnamese alphabet. The
difference is that with the same letters, phonemes used to call out electronic terms are
imported from English. At the beginning, these terms are regarded as CS terms in Vietnamese
utterances, then they become common and use in everyday conversation, especially practised
by monolingual people, they become loanwords. Thus, the distinction between loan word and
CS term is that though their appearances seem to be in the same letters, their pronunciations
decide a term whether a loan word or CS one. If they are used and understood by people from
all walks of life, they become loanwords. If they are only used by bilingual persons, they will
be CS terms (Scotton cited in Nguyen Van Khang 1999:229). Therefore, terms such as “CD,
MP3, AM, FM obviously becomes loanwords because the frequency of these terms occurring
in public conversation related to telecommunications and used by monolingual people.
Another example with acronyms “LCD” /el-si-di/ in English phonemes also uses with English
phonemes instead of Vietnamese to show ways of mixing English into Vietnamese. Besides
that, this abbreviation “LCD” with English phonemes is more frequently used than its full
form “liquid crystal display” like in the following example.
Excerpt from BE (2004:79)
4AAA_H/=&/%=!F5!FL<+`!<Ua!<><[!FZFAAAA3
“ to create an LCD, you take two pieces of polarized glass ”.
Obviously, English term “LCD” can be called with two systems of phonemes, English and
Vietnamese. In Vietnamese phonetic system, it can be pronounced as I818%/in the
English classes, bilingual students usually apply English phonemes as [el- si:-di:] to read it. In
a broad sense, 68,4% (63/92) students in a survey part indicates that they feel much more
confident when inserting English phonemes in Vietnamese versions though they are following
oral translation tasks. Furthermore, their English pronunciation does not have negative affect
on oral translation because they are bilingual students and mostly practise English. Again,
English terms in the form of English phonetic acronyms occur in Vietnamese utterances
according to styles of the matrix language not of the embedded one. Herein, matrix language
is Vietnamese whereas embedded language is English. Therefore, acronyms i.e. CAD, VLED,
CMOS, ADC, or DAC, that are codemixed with English phonemes become CS terms not
loanwords.
English terms Vietnamese equivalents English terms Vietnamese
equivalents
CRT CRT CAD CAD
-
LCD LCD EMF EMF
MD MD HDTV HDTV
DAC DAC USB USB
Interestingly, in a class of English, these abbreviations can be used as CS items because
bilingual students frequently apply English phonetic systems to pronounce acronyms more
frequently than applying Vietnamese phonetic ones. Moreover, students of electronics tend to
use both forms of English and Vietnamese phonetic system to call the abbreviations. Let’s
look at again with acronyms above by studying the following example.
Excerpt from BE (2004:48)
“ to create an LCD, you take two pieces of polarized glass ”
XEPP*6"$HIYZ[NNNN(
XE<PP6"$HIYZ[NNNN(
From the two systems of phonemes used in the example above, it is recognized that acronyms
are interactively applied in Vietnamese utterances when pronounced. However, it is not easy
to determine if these CS items are loanwords or CS. If they are used according to Vietnamese
phonemes, they become normal terms used with alphabetical letters. In contrast, if they are
pronounced according to English sounds, they become CS items. Also, these acronyms are
frequently used by bilingual students who have enough knowledge of electronic components
as well as equivalent meanings but prefer using English phonemes to express themselves. In
such situations, it is likely that applying CS acronyms in conveying electronic terminologies
into Vietnamese utterances seems to be more convenient for electronic students in both
Vietnamese utterances and oral translational tasks. It is not only a way to help students express
their language competence, but also a good choice for them to consolidate and memorize
English terms while implementing the translating skill. Herein, the conveyance of literal
meanings of electronic terms depends on the way to approach acronyms by considering
context and probability. Students as translators have to observe various situations with
different concepts in the original text to produce an equivalent term with English phonemes to
show other bilingual students in the same class their ability of absorbing contents of
equivalents while inserting terms into Vietnamese. This becomes one of the most common
habits often occurring in electronic classes and applied by bilingual students in COTECH.
Moreover, these acronyms often imply their hidden meanings since each letter stands for a
meaningful word. For instance, CRT stands for Cathode Ray Tube (K!"/+F+/K/); EMF stands
0
for electromotive force (sbF1;!1&!") and so on. Intuitively, English acronyms are treated as
single terms whereas their explanations or full forms are regarded as compound terms. Thus,
applying unfamiliar acronyms to translate CS electronic terms will help students save time to
produce suitable equivalents instead of lengthy explanation already understood by other
bilingual students in the electronic class. For English abbreviations similar to Vietnamese
which are codemixed with English phonemes instead of explaining or paraphrasing them in
full forms in Vietnamese, their acronyms are acknowledged with meaningful units and copied
completely forms instead of indicating by paraphrasing abbreviations as a compound terms in
Vietnamese. Below are some particular illustrations
English terms Vietnamese equivalents CS terms
CRT (Cathode Ray Tube) CRT () [si-a:-ti:]
CPU (Central Processing Unit) CPU ("E+\]Z) [ si:- pi:- ju:]
VHF (Very High Frequency) VHF ($) [ vi:- eits- ef]
UHF (Ultra High Frequency) UHF ($) [ju:- eitS ef]
Category 2. Electronic Eponyms
Newmark (1995:198) defines eponym as any word that is identical with or deprived from a
proper name, which gives it a related sense. Eponym is only remarkably considered with
electronic terms as concrete object besides persons and geographical names. In other words,
they are acronyms or abbreviations enclosing with classifiers in which the formers are English
stem and the latter are classifiers Vu Bich Thuy (2005:43). In such situations, bilingual
students of electronics need to be aware of full forms of English abbreviations, understand
concepts through letters relevant to specific knowledge of electronics to produce appropriate
classifiers as Vietnamese single words. In terms of morphosyntax, an acronym usually
consists of two parts namely copied part and a native one, in which, English stem is the copied
part whereas Vietnamese classifier is a native one. Below is the table of abbreviations with
illustrations and their equivalents used to clarify the effectiveness of CS techniques applied for
oral translation of electronic terminologies
English terms Vietnamese equivalents CS terms
IC (Integrated Circuit) IC [ai-si:]
NAND (no- and) cK NAN K[ nœn]
HDTV( High Definition Television) "E^_` "E[eits-di:-ti:-vi:]
CU (Control Unit) "ECU bE[si:-ju:]
DC (Direct Current) *TEUDC *T[di:-si:]
AC (Alternating Current) *T+U AC dTaPa
LAN (Local Area Network) Vbc æa
Illustrations from the table above show that electronic terms in the forms of eponyms are also
denoting objects, instruments, or names of products or process of electronic function. In terms
of CS, these terms are inserted into Vietnamese by mixing English stems with Vietnamese
classifiers. Herein, Vietnamese classifiers are single words standing at the beginning of an
electronic term or before an English stem to express the overall meaning of an electronic
component. Literally, each letter in an eponym stands for a meaningful explanation such as
“LED” is the abbreviation of “Light Emitting Diode” or “@$R^+!"3$4_K/><6/^+!"$
3 ! '/!+ 43+ 4$F/ $$!/3 $ *T _: 3Ac/< +>+$ T$
F!/!" of one in English and the other in Vietnamese, these CS eponyms will be a
phenomenon in language mixing. In the abbreviation itself, it is not a translation because there
are same letters in alphabetical systems with no intention to convey information between
languages, but perhaps it is a preliminary exercise for oral translation used transcoding tactics.
In this model, bilingual students of electronics who have completely understood a context will
practice translating exercises by decoding the surface of word-strings into semantic structures
with meaningful explanations, interpreting the linguistics structures of words to select a
Vietnamese classifier adequate to corresponding acronyms and then code-mix items into
Vietnamese versions. This double comprehension process is a good choice for students to
consolidate both English language and professional knowledge because of its semantic
meanings and convenience. In short, electronic eponyms as a technique of abbreviations
applied to help students feel more confident when producing an equivalent term of electronics
and understood by almost every bilingual student. Therefore, this principle in translation
becomes one good choice for them to perform both duties i.e practising exercises for
translation and learning English new terms simultaneously.
II.3.2. Translation of CS terms by isolated lexical substitutions
In theory, one of the most common features of intra- sentential codeswitching is called
isolated lexical substitution applying for code switching electronic terms in Vietnamese
utterances According to Michael (1989), translation tactics with CS techniques are applied in
the second language acquisition in learning and teaching process as a way to insert
phonological translation of electronic items in Vietnamese. These features help students make
a comparison between structures and meanings while selecting a suitable definition for
particular purposes (Brian 1989:373). Substitutions of equivalents are also applied in
conveying equivalents of technical terms in Vietnamese. In terms of CS structures, an isolated
lexical substitution is an inserting point of a single word in a Vietnamese sentence, (Poplack
1989, cited in Michael 1999). Accordingly, electronic terms in the form of CS items
containing one word are applied to bridge concepts of electronic equipments interactively. The
purpose of this tactics partly introduces how effectively bilingual students of electronics
choose equivalents for a specific electronic term to use in TL (Nida. 1989). In particular,
results from my collected data of reading materials and surveyed parts of my observations and
introspection from teachers and students investigate a proper technique used to render
equivalents with a concrete and concise step in the oral translation. This process shows a
useful convenience of the double process including encoding and decoding in TL (Nida:
1989). Observations from the collected data in the textbook “Basic English for electronics and
telecommunication - BE” show that isolated lexical substitutions in the form of CS words
approximately take an account of one third of total investigated words in comparison with
single terms. For instance, on page 19 (E2), the number of one- word terms is 9.5% with 24 of
252 words, of which 7 single words are codeswitched proportional to 29.1% (CS: 7/24).
Similarly, this figure is nearly 7.2% (22/306) single terms equal to 40.9% (CS: 9/22) on page
20; 9.6% (29/302) single terms to nearly 48.2% (CS: 14/29) on page 33 and 8.1% (19/324) to
42 % (CS: 8/19) on page 34. In the four pages above, two pages, i.e. page 19 and page 20,
appear single terms of electronics whereas the others have single terms of computing.
Intuitively, the proportion of IT terms of in CS forms used in Vietnamese translation texts is
more dominant than the one used in electronics. What CS single terms are analyzed here is
either insertions into a Vietnamese translation or ways of applying CS techniques with CS
parsing to produce CS terms adequate to the equivalent in a Vietnamese utterance. Examples
below illustrate a pattern of language switching with almost all major-class words beginning
with English origins, which is quite common in IT communication as well as in electronic
field. English nouns i.e. names of computing instructions “browser, web, web page, world
wide web” or names of buttons of electronic equipments “cell phone, power, key”, etc. are
codeswitched in the form of English phonemes and inserted into Vietnamese utterances in oral
translation tasks. All following illustrations provide with English gloss converted by students
of two groups 50V2 and V1 collected on October, 28
th
2006, and the 13
th
of March, in 2007.
Excerpt BE (2006)
XIU& OJ!*!*!"6"$E8d?$U&
"!N)!E89\*e5 !"N
4To download and read documents from the World Wide Web, you need a software program
called browser. A browser is a program used for displaying web pages”
Excerpt from E2, U3 BE (2006)
"!,**NN,6*6!6,66N
,!!
eE*f "898958,6*6!66
!@E4 MW#E8<89
"gEN
Excerpt from E2, U2, BE (2007)
“ Marking a call by a cell phone, we need to following steps
Press power the phone being turned on or off accidentally, you need hold down the power
key to operate it ”
NNNNNNNNXEE&"g6$ "848
%Y-!"?
XWO?<"5,,6"$FY!g*?
E# (N
In the first excerpt above, CS terms with English phonemes are also isolated lexical
substitutions i.e.“browser”, “program”. In Vietnamese meanings, “browser” means “/$S!<
7;/3+!4>$"$+34F<Nd!"/$S!<3efT)$students of electronics hesitate to translate
names of electronic equipments or computing programs when asked for oral translation tasks.
They shorten these terms, especially in oral utterances by using directly in Vietnamese
version. A comparison of oral translation in the first two illustrations above reveals that
utterances using CS items i.e. “program, browser, screen, files, view, font, mail, and so on” are
lexical assimilated to Vietnamese. In an English class, bilingual students unconsciously insert
these terms into Vietnamese translation because they prefer using English words and feel
confident enough to assimilate technical terms according to Vietnamese phonemes. The
difference is located in a way to pronounce English phonemes following Vietnamese
morphemes. In terms of shifting, English phonemes are usually unchanged, because bilingual
students use these English terms correctly and fluently without hesitation and interruption.
Students naturally insert English phonemes of CS terms into a Vietnamese when needed to
make the meaning of technical terms dominant and useful for a particular target.
At one aspect, meanings of these technical terms above in Vietnamese can be translated
respectively “chNd!"/$S!<%&/$S!<7;/:!<S!<><9!"F<g/<N1;!/P):><5!<H!/<D
/FA3AfT)$students of electronics have not been inclined to translate or paraphrase these
single terms instead of mixing English words directly into TL. The effectiveness of switching
electronic terms from English to Vietnamese is more convenient by calling names of symbols
or functions of IT equipments or electronic components directly than by waiting for one’ mind
to paraphrase terms or to think of appropriate equivalents in Vietnamese language, then
change into English again. In order to shorten this lengthy way, a progress namely intra-word
switching is used to help students simultaneously call names of electronic equipments or
functions of IT components suitably. In practice, this step especially helps students widen their
knowledge of specific professions and to improve English language skills thanks to the
convenience of CS in Vietnamese translations.
In detail, in the first two illustrations, an IT term “browser, for instance, is a CS name with
English phonemes. This insertion is intentionally emphasized, when the content of an IT
program usually occurs on Webpages. At the morpheme level, a three- morpheme equivalent
in English will be mixed in Vietnamese with the appearance of Vietnamese phonetic structure
in the form of monosyllables. It is convenient for students to switch a term because they can
shift surface meanings of terms directly without paraphrasing them in TL.
Another term appearing in the two examples above namely “program” located at different
positions in a Vietnamese sentence shows that inserting points of switching items in one
utterance is unpredictable. Obviously, the insertion intentionally emphasizes the content of
one specific matter related to a particular computing topic. If a CS term “program” in the first
excerpt is used to indicate a name of a software program and codemixed after verb predicator
in Vietnamese “:3 and an article after a verb predictor “&/3 then inserting point in the
second excerpt is in a noun phrase. Depending on the content and functions of electronic
terms, a student can produce a particular CS application. This process requires students to
choose an appropriate equivalent and to gain double benefits in terms of timesaving and of
giving appropriate steps to consolidate English vocabulary during their learning process.
Further examples for insertion locates in the second and the third excerpts with CS words i.e.
file, edit, view, font, print, power key, etc. applied in conveying single terms. These terms with
morphological integrations in substitutions seem to bear no Vietnamese inflections. CS terms
are not only names of computing instructions but also corresponding respective functions in
one specific program. If paraphrasing equivalents in Vietnamese language i.e.4O6"6
F6%6Yh6N(, electronic students will waste time to change meaning
forms twice from English into Vietnamese and then reconverted to carry out particularly
sequential orders of computing programs within corresponding situations. Surface morphemes
of these CS items guide students to select appropriate CS to help them easily to reach, quickly
to understand and then apply in actual learning process. In short, such instances of CS terms in
the form of isolated lexical substitutions above look natural and convenient for bilingual
students of electronics. In detail, this category can be classified into two smaller parts i.e. the
form of verb substitution and the form of noun one as follows.
In the form of Verb substitution
In my collected data, 40 single verbs in the CS form of isolated lexical substitution present
about 30.5% of the total of 131 electronic verbs investigated in the textbook- BE and its
supplementary materials; However, the proportion of using verbs among units in each episode
as well as among parts of each units are not equal. In addition, a trend of using CS single verbs
in the field of electronics i.e. fundamental features of components, combination of operating
electronics is not as equal as using those relating to computing in the textbook. On average,
the percentage of single verbs of electronics in the CS form of isolated lexical substitution is
about 25% whereas this figure of computing terms is over 35%. For instance, in unit 1 (E1),
25 single terms including 6 CS-words are collected but only two CS terms of which are in the
form of verb accounting for 24% of CS words. This figure in unit 2 (E1) is 22.2% (2/9), and
unit 4 (E1) is 25 % (2/8), and unit 5 is 28.5% (2/7). In comparison with single terms of
