Nghiên cứu việc sử dụng chuyển mã ngôn ngữ của các giám khảo trong các chương trình giải trí trên truyền hình việt nam

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

NGUYEN THI NGAN

A STUDY OF JUDGES’ CODE – SWITCHING ON
VIETNAMESE TV GAME SHOWS
(Nghiên cứu việc sử dụng chuyển mã ngôn ngữ của các giám khảo
trong các chương trình giải trí trên truyền hình Việt Nam)

M.A THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 8220201

THAI NGUYEN - 2019


THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

NGUYEN THI NGAN

A STUDY OF JUDGES’ CODE – SWITCHING ON
VIETNAMESE TV GAME SHOWS
(Nghiên cứu việc sử dụng chuyển mã ngôn ngữ của các giám khảo
trong các chương trình giải trí trên truyền hình Việt Nam)

M.A THESIS
(APPLICATION ORIENTATION)

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 8220201
Supervisor: Dr. Nguyen Thi Hang

THAI NGUYEN – 2019


DECLARATION
I hereby warrant and declare that the thesis entitled “A study of judges’ code
– switching on Vietnamese TV game shows” is my own work to the best of my
knowledge and belief. It contains no material previously published or written by
another person (except where explicitly defined in the acknowledgements) and has
not been submitted previously, in whole or in part, for the award of any other
academic degree or diploma.
Signature:
Name: Nguyen Thi Ngan

Supervisor’s signature

Dr. Nguyen Thi Hang

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This is my first experience for doing a thesis. I would like to express my deep
indebtedness to my supervisor, Dr. Nguyen Thi Hang, for her wholehearted
assistance. This thesis would not have finished without her suggestions, corrections
and encouragements.
My special thanks also go to my all colleagues in Centre for Human Resource

Development for Foreign Language Studies – Thai Nguyen University facilitate in
my studying process.
Furthermore, I am grateful to all authors of books listed in the bibliography,
whose ideas are good references for my research to be conducted and developed.
Last but not least, I am indebted to my little family and my best friends,
Phuong and Yen, who always understand, support and motivate me to finish my
thesis.

ii


ABSTRACT
This study examines the code – switching phenomenon practiced by the
judges in the context of Vietnamese TV game shows. A mix of quantitative and
qualitative approach was applied to obtain the research aims, i.e., the frequency,
types and functions of code – switching. My analysis of data shows that factors such
as the time where the game shows took place, the theme of the game shows, the
audiences for each show and the judges’ social background decide the frequency
of the judges’ switching]. Their switching have been classified into three types
namely intra – sentential code – switching, inter – sentential code – switching and
tag – switching. These switches serve two main functions: discourse and social
functions. Sub- functions under each category have also been identified in the
study.

3


TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ........................................................................................................ i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. iii
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................... iv
Chapter 1: Introduction ...........................................................................................1
1.1. Rationale......................................................................................................1
1.2. Objectives ....................................................................................................2
1.3. Research questions ......................................................................................2
1.4. Scope of the research ..................................................................................3
1.5. Research struture ........................................................................................3
Chapter 2: Literature Review ..................................................................................4
2.0. Introduction ................................................................................................4
2.1. Bilingualism ...............................................................................................4
2.2. Code – switching ........................................................................................5
2.2.1. Concepts of code – switching ..................................................................5
2.2.2. Types of code – switching .......................................................................6
2.2.3. Functions of code – switching................................................................10
2.3. Summary ...................................................................................................13
Chapter 3: Research methodology ........................................................................14
3.0. Introduction ..............................................................................................14
3.1. Research methodology .............................................................................14
3.2. Data collection .........................................................................................15
3.3. Data analysis .............................................................................................16
3.4. Summary ...................................................................................................17
Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion......................................................................18
4.0. Introduction ..............................................................................................18
4.1. Frequency of the judges’ code – switching .............................................18
4.2. Code – switching types..............................................................................21
4.2.1. Intra – sentential code – switching (type 1) ...........................................22
4

4.2.2. Inter – sentential code – switching (type2) ............................................24
4.2.3. Tag – switching (type 3).........................................................................26
4.3. Functions of code – switching...................................................................27
4.3.1. Discourse functions ...............................................................................27
4.3.2. Social functions ......................................................................................31
4.4. Summary ...................................................................................................35
Chapter 5: Conclusion ............................................................................................36
5.1. Summary of key findings ..........................................................................36
5.2. Implications, limitations and suggestions for further research .................37
References ................................................................................................................39

List of tables
Table 3.1. Summary of game shows and episodes
5


Table 4.1. Judges’ switching times in each game show
Table 4.2. Types of code – switching
Table 4.3. Judges’ intra – sentential code – switching
Table 4.4. Judges’ inter – sentential code – switching
Table 4.6. Judges’ tag – switching
Table 4.7. Functions of the judges’ code – switching
Table 4.8. A list of words for the judges’ qualification

6


Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1.

Rationale

“No nation in the world is completely monolingual” (Miriam, 2006). Vietnam,
a multi-ethnic nation with over 50 ethnic groups, is not an exception. Besides,
many foreign languages, i.e., English, Chinese and Japanese, are utilized in
Vietnam. Among these foreign languages, English is the most popular one which is
used in both educational and non – educational settings. The inserting of
English

to Vietnamese conversations between people, who share their first

language, has been known as the phenomenon of code – switching. This practice
seems to be appropriately popular in social and educational, formal and informal
situations.
Vietnam is in the most brilliant stage of game show development. Every year,
hundreds of entertainment programs or TV game shows are screened. According to
Vietnam Television Audience Measurement (Vietnam – TAM) statistic figure, there
are over 140 game shows published in Vietnam in 2016 (Vietnam-TAM, 2016).
Some well-known programs are The voice; Sing my song; The face Vietnam;
Vietnam next top model; The remix new generation. They seem to be the one that
most Vietnamese audience watch and follow. It is rather common to find
Vietnamese people speaking both Vietnamese and English as illustrated in the
following example:
Example 1.1:
Tôi rất thích đoạn
(I really like the

chorus

của bài hát của bạn.

chorus

part in your song)
(Sing my song 2016, episode 1, 45:56)

Studies on the practice of code – switching in Vietnam are mainly found in the
language teaching and learning context. Examples of these studies are English –
Vietnamese code – switching in tertiary educational context in Vietnam (Nguyen,

1


2012); Vietnamese university EFL teacher’s code – switching in classroom
instruction (Nguyen, 2013); Code – switching in English Language Education:
Voices from Vietnam (Nguyen, 2016). However, little has been known so far

2


concerning this practice on game shows. It is observed that both judges and
participants involved code – switching between Vietnamese and English rather
frequently in interactions in their shows.
Vietnamese authors tend to examine code – switching in fields such as
education, social network, and so on, in both written and spoken language.
However, very few of them are interested in the code – switching on Vietnamese
television. This study, therefore, expects to grasp understanding of judges’ code –
switching on Vietnamese TV game shows – a little part of language code –
switching between English and Vietnamese.

1.2.

Objectives

As mentioned, this study aims to gain better understanding of code –
switching employed by judges in game shows, the specific objectives are as follow.
- To obtain the frequency of code – switching used by judges on some popular
Vietnamese TV game shows.
- To identify their kinds of code – switching
- To determine the functions of their switches.
1.3. Research questions
The overarching research question has been formulated to achieve the
objectives:
How do judges code – switch between Vietnamese and English in
interactions on Vietnamese TV game shows?
Sub-questions are:
(1) How frequently is code – switching taken by judges on Vietnamese TV
game shows?
(2) What kinds of code – switching are used by the judges on Vietnamese TV
game shows?
(3) What functions do their switches take?

3


1.4. Scope of the research
This study focuses on the phenomenon of code-switching employed by judges
in Vietnamese game shows, especially oversea licensed programs in which the
young are interested. In this research, 71 videos will be used and collect from some
famous game shows which are The face Vietnam (2016), Sing my song (2016),

Vietnam’s next top model (2015, 2016,), Master chef Vietnam (2015), Miss
Universe Vietnam (2017).
1.5. Research structure
The research consists of five chapters, as follow:
-

Chapter 1: Introduction

-

Chapter 2: Literature review

-

Chapter 3: Research methodology

-

Chapter 4: Findings and discussion

-

Chapter 5: Conclusion

4


Chapter 2: Literature review
2.0. Introduction
This chapter reviews the phenomenon of code – switching, a main feature of

bilingualism. The first section provides an overview of the notion of bilingualism.
It continues with an in-depth discussion and synthesis in regard to aspects of code
– switching: the concept of code – switching, its types and functions, from different
scholars’ point of views. The chapter ends in a summary of all points presented.
2.1. Bilingualism
The notion of bilingualism in sociolinguistics has been accepted at least from
three main perspectives. The first group of scholars such as Mackey (1970),
Romaine (1995) views bilingualism as any bilinguals who master two languages
equally. In other words, this concept focuses on the balance of the languages
involved, or on fully – fluent bilinguals. With an emphasis on the equal ability of a
bilingual to speak two languages, Romaine (1995) asserts that bilinguals are those
who have native – like control of two languages.
The second group, in contrast, hold the idea that an individual’s ability to
speak both languages despite having low proficiency in either of them can be seen
as sufficient for him/her to be considered a bilingual. According to Haugen’s (1953)
view, bilinguals are individuals with proficiency in one language but with “the
ability to produce complete meaningful utterances in the other language” (p.7).
This approach has been accepted by other authors such as Hamers and Blanc (2000)
and Myers-Scotton (2006), who claim that rarely are speakers equally fluent in two
languages.
The third group of authors do not seem to approve of the two above opinions,
not seeing the ability of bilinguals in two languages, ranging from a maximal
proficiency to a minimal proficiency in a second language. They, therefore, defined
bilinguals without mentioning the speakers’ level of proficiency in either language,
as speakers using two or more languages alternately (Baetens Beardsmore, 1982;
Edwards, 2004; Mackey, 2000; Romaine, 1995).
5


Code – switching, one of the three main features of bilingualism, and also the

topic of the study, is reviewed below.
2.2. Code – switching
As “a complex research topic” in Bell’s (2014) view, code – switching has
been approached differently in the literature. This section deals with this
phenomenon with respect to its concept, classification and functions.
2.2.1.

Concept of code – switching

The phenomenon of code – switching has been accepted at least from three
main perspectives in bilingualism. The first group of scholars defined code –
switching only occurred among bilinguals. That was the transfer of words from one
language to another by bilinguals (Weinreich, 1953 – pp.73,74). Code – switching
was identified by Gardner-Chloros (2009) as “the use of several language dialects in
the same conversation or sentence by bilingual people” (p. 4). Dialect here can be
seen as a language code in sociolinguistic.
The second group defined code – switching base on language proficiency of
speaker. It was the result of lexical gaps in both languages (Deuchar and Quay,
2000) or result of lacking the appropriate lexicon (Brice and Anderson, 1999;
Meisel, 1994). Speaker switched when there were two languages in the brain of
certain individuals (Myers-Scotton, 1990) but their language proficiency was
unbalance between the first and second languages.
The most general definition of code – switching is “the alternate use of two
languages or linguistic varieties within the same utterance or during the same
conversation” (Hoffmann, 1991, p. 110). That similar to an alternation of words and
phrases between two languages or dialects in definitions of Myers-Scotton (1990),
Gumperz (1982), and Wardhaugh (2011). Gardner Chloros (2009) defined code –
switching was the use of various languages or dialects within the same sentence or
conversation. Similarity, code – switching is used to refer to the phenomenon when
speaker “switch backwards and forwards between distinct code in their repertoire”

(Bell, 2014 – p.111). With the same perspective, Halmari (2004) called it was “the

5


mixing of two or more languages within the same conversational” (p.115). By
means

6


of juxtaposition, i.e., elements of different languages put next to each other,
Gumperz (1982) defines conversational code-switching as “the juxtaposition within
the same speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different
systems or subsystems” (p. 59).
2.2.2.

Types of code – switching

Numerous scholars around the world classified the types of code – switching
with other point of views. Bloom and Gumperz (1972) differentiated two types of
code – switching, namely situational code – switching and metaphorical code –
switching (or conversational code – switching), on the basis of sociolinguistic
factors. Situational switching refers to circumstances where speakers switch
languages due to a change in the situation, such as a change in participant, topic or
setting. Metaphorical switching takes place in cases “the speaker decides to ignore
the observable external situation and focus instead on less observable characteristics
of code – switching of the people concerned” (Hudson, 1996, p. 53).
In her seminal work, Poplack (1980) analysed the speech of 20 Puerto Rican
residents, whose first language is Spanish, living in the United States of America to

test a hypothesis concerning the degrees of bilinguals’ ability in English. Poplack
(1980) classified the Puerto Rican residents’ code – switching into three types: Intra
– sentential code – switching, inter – sentential code – switching and extra –
sentential code – switching, also known as tag switching.
Intra – sentential code – switching occurs where switches of different types
occur within the clause boundary, including within the word boundary. The shift
was done in the middle of a sentence, with no interruptions, hesitations, or pauses
to indicate a shift. The speaker is usually unaware of the shift. This is the most
complex type of code – switching, in Poplack’s view, mainly because of the high
probability of violation of syntactic rules, as well as the requirement of a great
command of both languages and how they can map onto each other.
Example 2.1 (switching Spanish and English)
Leo un magazine
(I read a magazine)
7


(Poplack, 1980, p. 583)
Inter – sentential code – switching refers to the switches at clause/sentence
boundary, one clause being in one language, the other clause in the other (i.e., one
independent clause/sentence in one language, the other in another language). In
other word, the language switch is done at sentence boundaries – words or phrases
at the beginning or end of a sentence. This type is seen most often in fluent
bilingual
speakers.
Example 2.2
Sometimes I'll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en Espaňol
(Sometimes I'll start a sentence in Spanish and finish it in Spanish)
(Poplack, 1980)
Extra – sentential code – switching (or tag – switching) occurs when the

speakers insert a tag, e.g. “wow”, “yeah”, “you know”, “I mean” from one language
into an utterance which is entirely in another language. This type of code –
switching is very simple and does not require a great knowledge of both languages,
since there is a minimum risk of violation of grammatical rules.
Example 2.3
But I wanted to fight her con los punos, you know.
(But I wanted to fight her with my fists, you know)
(Poplack, 1980, p. 596)
In example 2.3, the tag “you know” was inserted by the speaker at the end of
the sentence in English.
It seems that Poplack’s typology of code – switching has been adopted by a
number of scholars in different contexts among which the language classroom
setting has attracted many researchers.
One of these includes language classrooms in the multilingual context of
Kenya. Merritt et al. (1992) used ethnographic observations of classroom
interaction to

8


explore teachers’ code – switching types. These authors classified the types of
teachers’ code – switching based on the content of the information of the switches in
their instruction, rather the linguistic units or the social aspects, i.e., the situation and

9


the topic. Their inductive analysis suggested four types of code – switching. They
describe their first two types (type I and type II) as switches involving a whole
sentence or interactional move i.e., switching across languages: English, Kiswahili

and speakers’ mother tongue. The third type (type III) is related to teachers’
translation or word substitution i.e., switching within a sentence. The fourth type
(type IV) is identified as teachers’ switches with interactional particles, including
discourse markers (e.g., “now then”, “O.K.”, “All right”, “now”), and classroom
management routines (e.g., “again, big voice”, “speak loudly”, “someone else”)
(Merritt et al., 1992).
Merritt et al.’s (1992) type I and type II could be seen as Poplack’s (1980) inter
– sentential code – switching (i.e. switching between sentences). Their type III
could be Poplack’s (1980) intra – sentential (i.e. switching within a sentence).
However, their fourth type (type IV) does not appear to coincide with extra –
sentential code – switching (i.e. switching involving tags, fillers, etc.) in Poplack’s
(1980) classification because they did not seem to consider such discourse markers
as tags, but rather separate utterances.
Other studies of code – switching in this context are Brice (2000); Rezvani &
Raskh (2011) and Tayjasanant (2014). These studies also found the three types of
code – switching classified by Poplack (1980).
In Vietnam, some authors recently examined this phenomenon. For example,
Nguyen (2013) and Grant and Nguyen (2017) analysed 12 English teachers’ speech
and they found that they code – switched in five forms namely filler and tag
switching, parts of an utterance, whole utterances, marginal code – switching and
borrowing as code – switching. Nguyen’s (2013) category of code – switching is in
line with Poplack’s (1980) typology to the extent that the three types termed filler
and tag switching, parts of an utterance and whole utterances fit in Poplack’s (1980)
types of code – switching. Examples below are cited from Nguyen’s (2013) with
respect to the three switching types.

10


Example 2.4

T:

I want you Ờm (Erm) to look at the screen and tell me. [Showing
images] What are they?
(Nguyen, 2013, p. 83)

Example 2.5
T:

Bánh bích quy, right?
(Biscuit,

right?)
(Nguyen, 2013, p. 84)

Example 2.6.
T:

Và tất cả các con đường dẫn tới

mountains.

(And all the roads lead to

mountains)
(Nguyen, 2013, p. 87)

Nguyen’s switching type 1 involved fillers/tags (i.e., “À” (Ah), “Ờ”(Er), “Ờm”
(Erm), “Ừm” (Umm), “Ứm” (Umm), “Hừm” (Hmm)) or tags (i.e., “understand?”,
“right”, “okay”). The filler in example 2.4 is “Ờm (Erm)” and the tag in example 2.5

is “right”. They are similar to the tag in Poplack’s typology.
The switching involving parts of an utterance were in the form of a word or a
group of words from one language that they inserted into an utterance in the other
language. That is, speakers were speaking in one language and, in the same
utterance, they inserted a word or a group of words of the other language into that
utterance, as example 2.6. Speaker was speaking in Vietnamese, and they inserted
the English word “mountains” into their Vietnamese utterances. In other words, this
switches involving part of an utterance, i.e., single word in this case, occurred
within an utterance.
The third type of code – switching in Nguyen’s (2013) perspective was
switching involving whole utterances. That is, the speaker was using one language
in a utterance, then shift to another language in next utterance.

11


Example 2.7.
“Language” is the first noun of the compound. Ở đây có một 1 cái danh từ
ghép, đúng không ạ?
(“Language” is the first noun of the compound. There’s a compound noun
here, right?)
(Nguyen, 2013, p.91)
In example 2.7, speaker was speaking in English, i.e., “language” is the first noun
of
the compound, and then shifted to Vietnamese in the whole next utterance, i.e., ở
đây có một 1 cái danh từ ghép, đúng không ạ. (one utterance was made in one
language, and the next utterance was in another language).
To date, there seems no evidence of the speakers’ switching in the contexts
other
than classroom setting in Vietnam.

2.2.3.

Functions of code – switching

Many people believed that code – switching may be the deficiency or lack of
mastery of both languages of speakers. However, as a common feature of
bilingualism, code – switching serves different functions including discourse
functions and social functions.
Discourse functions
In 1982, Gumperz suggested functions of codeswitching, including quotations,
addressee specification, interjections, reiteration, and message qualification.
(Gumperz, 1982, pp.75-79).
First of all, Gumperz (1982) shows that code – switching has relevance in
terms of direct and reported speech. Bilingual speakers quote a message in one
language amidst the production of an utterance in the other language. This is the
function of quotations making. Quotation is used when, for example, person A
wants to report something person B has said; person A is talking in English but
inserts the reported words of person B in Vietnamese.
12


Secondly, code – switching can be used in addressee specification which
means that by employing code – switching a person can direct his/her message to
one of

13


possible addressees (Gumperz, 1982). Addressee specification can be used with
monolinguals and with bilinguals (Romaine, 1995). However, addressee

specification can also be used to exclude someone by code – switching to a
language no one else in the group understands apart from the speaker and his/her
addressee.
Example 2.8.
Where ‘nother knife? walima pocket-knife karrwa-rnana?
(Where’s the other knife? Does anyone have a pocket knife?)
(McConvell, 1988, p. 135)
The example 2.8 was from a bilingual speaker living in an Australian village.
The speaker switches from Kriol (an English-based Creole spoken by Aborigines) to
Gurindji (spoken in the Wave Hill area as 2nd or often 3rd or 4th language by
Whites and Aborigines). His/her switch “walima” “karrwa-rnana” (Does anyone
have a) implies the group of butchers who are indirectly spoken to (McConvell,
1988).
Thirdly, interjection occurs when code – switching is used to mark an
interjection or serve as sentence fillers (Gumperz, 1982, pp.77-78). This can be tag –
switching according to Poplack’s (1980) notion.
Fourthly, reiteration occurs when a message is repeated in another language.
That is, the repetition may serve to clarify or emphasise a message.
Finally, code – switching is also used to qualify a message. That is, a message
is introduced in one language and qualified or expressed in another way in another
language.
Example 2.9.
The oldest one, la grande la de once años
(The oldest one, the big one who is eleven years old)
(Gumperz, 1982, p. 79)
The example 2.9 above is a sentence in English and Spanish, where the speaker
11


starts the subject in English (i.e., the oldest one) and switches to Spanish (i.e., la

grande la de once años) to qualify the subject.

12


Social functions
Social function is “the main cause for code – switching” (Auer, 1995) when
speakers negotiate a change in social distance between themselves and other
participants in a conversation (Hawazen, 2012). It performs in social relations
between interlocutors, in establishing and maintaining social identity.
As stated, Bloom and Gumperz (1972) classified code – switching to two types
including situational code – switching and metaphorical code – switching (or
conversational codeswitching). Although Myers-Scotton (1993) doubts about how
these two functional types are classified, she notes that situational code – switching
is motivated by changes in factors external to the participants’ own motivations, and
conversational code – switching is understood as a shift in topic and in other extra
linguistic context markers that characterise the situation.
Other authors (e.g., Auer, 1998; Baker, 2006; Hoffmann, 1991) also examined
the phenomenon of code – switching and found other social functions of this
phenomenon. They found that code – switching can serve as a means for expressing
group identity (an in-group marker) and solidarity with such a group (Auer, 1998;
Hoffmann, 1991). As Myers-Scotton (1993), the different language choices used in
other communities by speakers of different social backgrounds reveal different
identities, or social roles. Thus, social functions of code – switching can be
understood as the functions that code – switching performs in social relations
between interlocutors, in establishing and maintaining social identity. In addition,
Baker (2006) considers one social function of speakers’ code – switching as
marking changes in attitudes or relationships with each other.
In Nguyen’s (2013) study, she examined 12 teachers’ speech and found two
main social functions of their switches, i.e., establishing good rapport and showing

shifts in attitude. The first social function, i.e., establishing good rapport, in her view
is when the speakers switched to joke, which had a positive effect on the listeners.
Such switches, from Nguyen’s (2013) perspective, served the purpose of building up
a good rapport between teachers and their students. “The attitude shift included:
commenting, criticising or even warning” (Nguyen, 2013, p.135). Similarity, some
12