Code-Switching: Demythologizing Preconceived Notions and Addressing Pedagogical Dilemmas in the EFL/ESL Instructions

Abstract

'language-mixing', or 'language shift', or 'language interference'. Thus, researches from every corner throw new light on the advancing nature of CS in the context of multi/pruli-ligualism. The arguments are then with sharp controversies, as marked by Turnbull & Dailey-O'Cain (2009), the "extreme versions of the virtual opposition". As confirmed by Raschka et al. (2009), cited in J. Shin (2013:137), many language teachers then discourage CS in the classroom. This is because they believe that it hinders the students' learning of the target language. In addition, Richards and Rodgers (2001) point out, "In Natural Method, though acquisition is in focus, a foreign language could be taught without translation or the use of the learner's native language" (p. 11). Others come out with different views. They adamantly argue against the above-mentioned notion. They long in vain to the backdrop as total immersion in English is virtually impossible. Particularly, "English-only" becomes a lazy rule when everyone in the classroom speaks the same first language. Thus, they questioned why CS in FL classroom is still viewed as undesirable and subjected to negative comments or even sanctions (Raschka et al 2009, p. 137, Knapp and Antos, 2009, pp. 64-65). Thus, they wonder why some educators have insisted on the "English-only" rule.