Code-Switching Between Arabic and English: Reasons, Types and Attitudes as Expressed by EFL Female Students at Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University

Abstract

This is a preliminary qualitative quantitative survey of the code-switching reasons, forms and attitudes as expressed by Imam Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic University language and translation female students. To achieve this purpose, seventy (70) students responded to an open questionnaire on the various reasons, forms of code-switching and attitudes towards code-switching during the summer semester, 2018. The results revealed that eminent among the reasons behind code-switching was the desire to speak two languages. As for the types of code-switching, these included, according to the participants, switches within the sentence (intrasentential CS), switches that occur at sentence boundary level (intersentential CS) between Arabic and English and switches at the beginning and at the end (Tag CS) of the sentence. As for the attitudes toward code-switching, these were mainly split between those who were positive towards code-switching to indicate, for instance, that the speaker is more knowledgeable and holds a higher educational qualification and rank and those who were negative towards this phenomenon. Also, the study pointed to those participants who expressed their admiration of their mother tongue having strong faith in its communicative potentiality. Other attitudes encompassed mixed attitudes towards code-switching and the need to restrict using code-switching to certain intercultural situations. Based on the results of the study, the researcher recommends that further in-depth studies are demanded to investigate the various variables that constitute this sociolinguistic behavior and how co-switching may be perceived by some as an avenue for further intercultural and global communication. Meanwhile, the pedagogical implications of CS need to be investigated.

Attitudes Toward Code-switching in a Saudi Public Hospital

“…Expressing positive attitudes toward CS was also reported in a number of studies (e.g., Al-Qahtani, 2014;Al Matarneh, 2011;Alhamami, 2019;Alkhawaldeh, 2019;Asmari, 2014;Hleihil, 2001;Omar & Ilyas, 2018;Shuchi & Islam, 2016).…”

“…This means that most participants rejected negative attitudes toward CS because it annoyed them when they did not understand the switched language. As for the results for positive attitudes, a number of studies reported that their subjects rejected negative attitudes (Al-Qahtani, 2014;Al Matarneh, 2011;Alhamami, 2019;Alkhawaldeh, 2019;Asmari, 2014;Hleihil, 2001;Omar & Ilyas, 2018;Shuchi & Islam, 2016).…”

“…The predominance of positive attitudes toward CS in professional contexts also was reported in the literature. For example, some studies in academic contexts reported that more participants expressed positive attitudes toward CS in the classrooms than those who expressed negative attitudes (Al-Qahtani, 2014;Alkhawaldeh, 2019;Almohaimeed & Almurshed, 2018;Asmari, 2014). In workplace contexts, both Al Matarneh (2011) andHleihil (2001) reported that Jordanian workers expressed positive attitudes more than negative attitudes toward CS in urban cities of Jordan.…”

Bilingual Palestinians' Attitudes towards Code-Switching

“…He said that this happened because of youth's exposure to social media, education, or modernization. Alkhawaldeh (2019) pointed out people's attitudes toward code-switching. He said that some people's views were positive toward code-switching.…”

Code Choices in Marriage Discourse Preach: A Sociolinguistic Analysis

“…Bilingual or multilingual people can use code-mixing (CM) and code-switching (CS) more often. Many scholars explore the phenomenon of CM and CS in many contexts and situations, such as educational context (Alkhawaldeh, 2019;Alkhresheh, 2015;Hayek, 2016;Kustati, 2014;Susylowati, Sumarlam, Abdullah, & Marmanto, 2019;Zetri, Arasuli, & Aziz, 2018), Islamic religious discourse (Bassiouney, 2013;Ismail, 2015;Stille, 2018;Susanto, 2006;Syam & Fitrawati, 2020;Triana & Eka Saputra, 2018), Christian discourse (Dladla, 2017), media (Octaviana, 2019;Silaban & Marpaung, 2020;Sutrisno & Ariesta, 2019), and leaders' discourse (Purba, 2017;Sugiantari, 2018;Wibowo et al, 2017).…”