Code switching for power wielding

1.       What is code switching

Language is a way for us to understand and communicate with each other. But, in every language, there are different ways to, or how we communicate with others. Either, formal to informal speech or, from one different language to another different language to suit the situation. Everybody during their lives had code switch. Code switching doesn’t really concerns codes. It is a linguistic sound that refers to the movement or shifting from one cultural language or one dialect to a different language or dialect. When a speaker is in contact with 2 or more languages, the term used by linguist are language contact phenomena or bilingual speech. Which in general, the definition is ‘code switching’; this basically means using or shifting of one or more languages to a different one within the same conversation or according to a situation that requires them to code switch. Code switching is not the same as lexical borrowing, whereby lexical borrowing is a borrowed word from one donor language to be used in the recipient language.  Examples for code switching and lexical borrowing is as below.

Code switching example

“For once in your life, cuba dengar nasihat orang” (code switch from English to Malay.)

“Kami nak pergi dinner di restoran” (code switch from Malay – English – Malay)

Lexical borrowing example

Hijab – tudung [head cover] (Arab (donor language) words borrowed for use in (recipient language) Malay)

Amok – rampage (Malay (donor language) words borrowed for use in (recipient language) English)

One major difference between these two is that borrowed words usually follow the morpho-phonological patterns (interaction of word formation) of the recipient language, unlike code switching.

                        “Code switching performs several functions”

(Zentella, 1985)

As stated by Zentella. There are many reasons a person code switch. For example 1) to hide memory or fluency problems in the second language, 2) to switch from a formal to informal situations or vice versa, 3) power wielding or to apply control. Between a teacher – student, supervisor – staff, parents – children relationships, 4) code switching is also use to make even side of the speaker to and with others such as to show him as a member of a specific ethnic group.

“Code switching also function to announce specific identities, to create certain meanings, and facilitate particular interpersonal relationships”

(Johnson, 2000, p.184)

1.1     What is Power Wielding in code switching – the relationship and why it is important.

Language is the primary means of power wielding in our society and also considered to be as a societal occasion in which we distinguish ourselves to be either as individual or as a member of a group. In multi-language conversations, one of the sensible ways on the use of language is intervention of power. The concept of power can be described to be one of human’s social behaviour. Power is having the potential to carry one’s own will even if it opposes to the interest of others. During a conversation, influence and control can be achieved in many ways. Such as, linguistically, by code switching, both speakers can negotiate social relations and identities, therefore every linguistic act is considered as a social act. In code switching, one of the pragmatic linguistic means of negotiating power relations and identities is of course language variation and the specifically bilingual tool is the way to achieve it. For example a preschool teacher, teaching English to her students, she will consciously code switch in order to ensure that her students gets what she have been teaching. And also to show that the social relations between her and her students, is that she is a teacher and is there to teach, for the students to learn from her teachings.

            “Do you understand me? Kamu faham tak?”

A manager also may code switch to show authority to his staffs and to show importance.

            “Dokumen ini perlu dihantar petang ini. I need you to prepare it as soon as possible”

However, the efficiency of a power motivated language choice is determined on the status of the two languages. One language can be more powerful than the other, and therefore, bilinguals will have a powerful and powerless language. They also have the advantage of selecting between these languages and with it, be used as the means of power. Thus, participant who is the most influential in a conversation will be able to choose which language that he or she prefers within the conversation.

To show how code switching and power wielding comes together, an Associate Professor from Copenhagen, Lian Malai Madsen, studied the linguistic development of bilingual Turkish – Danish children’s in a Danish school (Madsen, 2001). Starting from their first day in school until the time they graduated in 1998, 9 years later. The data was compiled from a group conversation that is recorded. She finds that different pragmatic linguistic variation and code switching strategies are used by these bilingual children’s as means of power relationship negotiation, strategy for dominance and to handle conflict.

Code switching, - Power wielding

Defence Counsel :         Yang Arif, it has to be highlighted in the case of PP against Hai Min in 1971, that the described law that even the falsity, the falsity of the defence does not relief the prosecution from proving this case beyond reasonable doubt and that is very important Yang Arif. Thus it is submitted Yang Arif, that this honourable court should under the circumstances and in light of the evidence presented during the defence case reveal its ruling that a prima facie case has been made out for the defence for the accused to be call. This court Yang Arif is not …. official to do so. And we further submit Yang Arif, that upon the occasion of the Section of 37(da), the accused will need to number one, raise a reasonable doubt on the issue of possession, b) if they fail to do so they will need to rebut the presumed trafficking under Section 37(da) on balance of probability. Now, if they succeed in raising a doubt on the issue of possession, they must be acquitted entirely, but if they fail to do so, but manage to report the present trafficking charge they will be convicted on the lesser offences of possession Yang Arif. Yang Arif pihak pembelaan telah dari awal mengemukakan cadangan – cadangan menerusi saksi – saksi pihak pendakwaan which have in turn Yang Arif materialized into evidence upon the sworn testimony of both the accused and to which it has been collaborated by the particular SD3. Which we educe as follows Yang Arif. I will not go into detail Yang Arif because my submission will also touch into the crux of the defence story. So at page 7, 8 and 9, kami menghujahkan atau perkara – perkara tersebut to be considered wrapped, Yang Arif.

                                    Yang Arif, there must be an overt act di dalam kes ini, bahkan Yang Arif, in all case of an overt act; it must be shown that they have the power of disposal over it. And they had, they can exclude other people from the enjoyment of that property Yang Arif. Now it is clear, from the very beginning, the defence case adalah beg tersebut bukan milik mereka. They were just in possession, momentarily possession of these 2 bags Yang Arif, yang telah diberikan oleh Christina. Dan telah ditunjukkan apa kandungan beg tersebut. And in case of Shamsudin bin Hasan, Yang Arif, where the chain of evidence which is led by the prosecution has been broken, this honourable court is left with no trustworthy evidence to rely upon. This material gap must be closed by the prosecution; it is not upon the duty of the defence di dalam kes ini. But nevertheless, the defence has adduced those evidence which the gaps are glaringly appearing. In this case, what actually transpired before the arrest took place, what actually transpired in the hotel to which SP5, had actually mention dan telah mengesahkan bahawa kedua – dua OKT telah keluar. SP5 mahupun IO tersebut tidak mengesahkan bahawa merekalah yang duduk di hotel tersebut, merekalah yang menyewa hotel tersebut Yang Arif. And this is very important. I move on Yang Arif. At page 40, we submit on the doctrine of wilful blindness. Where the learned DPP had submitted at the close of the prosecution case, the doctrine of wilful blindness applies. Our submission is thus Yang Arif. Dihujahkan bahawa OKT 1 telah menjelaskan mengapa beliau sendiri tidak memeriksa kasut – kasut yang diberikan kerana adalah merupakan custom warga negara Afrika untuk tidak membuka barang orang lain. This is important, wilful blindness is subjected to the custom of each and every nationality ataupun each and every person. Dengan penjelasan tersebut dan tanpa dicabar oleh pihak pendakwaan, that evidence remains solid and it could not be disturbed. Yang Arif, I have just one case. If Yang Arif may indulge me, on the issue of the case of the PP v. Hua Win (1995) 2 SLR 424 at plat 60. This is a Singaporean case. It has persuasive effect upon this honourable court, and bearing in mind that this case had actually been adopted in the Federal Court’s decision on Maulana Hasbi, Zulfikar bin Mustapha and so on and so forth. Now in this case, it is an appeal by the prosecutor that the doctrine of wilful blindness should apply in this case and that apa yang telah dibawa oleh OKT, OKT  was to its own falling for not actually checking what was in the kotak yang telah dibawa. Saya bawa Yang Arif, jika diizinkan, kepada mukasurat 425, tab 11.

Judge                    :       Yes

Defence Counsel   :       I apologize for not highlighting it earlier Yang Arif. But I will guide Yang Arif kepada perenggan tersebut. Perenggan kedua, this is very important. By majority, dismissing the appeal, it was for the Respondent to rebut this statutory presumption of possession of the drugs and knowledge of the nature of the drugs. It was a difficult task in the circumstances because the Respondent had the material to smuggle jams and knew the elicit nature of the contents of the pack. Furthermore, the defence put forth by the Respondent was one commonly used by drug carriers. However it was not the law that by reason of the Respondent knowledge through the elicit nature of the contents of this bag, his evidence is that he did not know that the contents were drugs could not and should not be believed. Such knowledge only renders more difficulties for the Court to believe his evidence very much dependant on the circumstances of the case. As in this case, Mahkamah Rayuan Sivil 4, tidak membenarkan rayuan DPP kerana mahkamah tinggi di dalam kes tersebut telah melepaskan dan membebaskan. Singapore court had affirmed dimana pembelaan OKT adalah seperti berikut: dinyatakan bahawa dia dapat contoh tersebut daripada Lian Wah, dalam kotak tersebut ada jem, illegal jams. He had to carry it to Singapore dan bawanya kepada Tai Yin, he did not check the bag. The learned DPP in that case has submitted on wilful blindness. He did not check the bag. Therefore his evidence should not be believed. But the Court of Appeal had stated it must be based on the circumstances of the case. Di dalam hal ini fakta bahawa beliau sebenarnya terima beg itu daripada orang lain ada dibuktikan bahkan fakta di dalam kes tersebut juga menunjukkan bahawa eksibit tersebut tidak dibuka oleh OKT. Namun, OKT percaya kerana kawan beliau telah menyatakan itu adalah jem. But in our case, we go one step further, di dalam kes ini no other witnesses were arrested. Exhibit was intact and all was tendered and there’s no break in the chain of evidence and no witnesses called to support the prosecution’s case as to what had actually transpired, therefore, keterangan OKT yang disokong oleh SD3 di dalam kes ini yang menunjukkan bahawa beg itu diberikan oleh Christina  dan telah ditunjukkan adanya kasut, he has, we submit, OKT 1 and OKT 2 has fulfil the requirement untuk mengetahui apa sebenarnya yang diberikan atau diserahkan. They did not blindly take the bags, it was shown to them apa yang terkandung di dalam beg tersebut.

2.1       Description of verbatim

The above conversation occurred during a court proceeding. This conversation is during the process of submission, which is done after a full trial. The submission process is to sum up all of the during trial examinations. It is a drug matter (methamphetamine), whereby the accused was caught by the authorities with drug possession, disguised in a box of shoes. And if they are found guilty, they will be sentenced to be hanged by the neck, till death.

The accused defence is, they claim that they did not know the ‘real’ content of the bag, but only as what showed to them as shoes in a box. The bag was handed to them by a woman acquaintance asking for their favour to help bring the bag to another fellow friend. This submission was done by the defence counsel to strengthen the proof of innocence that the defence have against all charges that are put against the accused by the Public Prosecutor. The defence counsel is submitting to the learned judge by referring him to several previous court cases for the learned judge to indulge on the relevancy of the cases to theirs and to break the Public Prosecutor’s prosecutions against the accused. The speaker is the learned defence counsel. His social reaction is with the learned judge. He is submitting to the learned judge to win his case against the Public Prosecutor by putting in citations of winning cases. He is also interacting to the Public Prosecutor submitting against all of the Public Prosecutor’s charges had on his client. To show that they have reasonable doubt on the case. He is also acting on behalf of his client to speak on behalf of them to win the case. The learned defence counsel is an attorney, in his 30’s acting on behalf of his client, 2 Nigerian citizens. The first accused is a man in his late 30’s and the second accused is a man in his late 20’s. They came to Malaysia as a student. The language involved and used by the defence counsel are English and Bahasa Melayu. The purpose of this submission is to uphold the innocence of his 2 clients as claimed against the charges put by the prosecutor. 

The learned defence counsel code switch from English to Bahasa Melayu during his submission to affirm and convince the learned judge on his statement. He also code switch, when he addresses the learned judge as Yang Arif, as to show his respect to the authority of the learned judge.

Code switching is done by the learned counsel; that is transition from English to Bahasa is to show how crucial is the detail of the case given to the learned judge to consider in making his decision. He feels that his first language (English) is powerful, but by stressing it with his second language, Bahasa Melayu, he will be getting the learned judge attention to consider his client’s innocence. In this submission, he is using his ability to code switch to convince the learned judge, to carry his own will of winning the case, even if it opposes the learned DPP’s interest. 

Why code switch?

Here we analyse on the part of where the learned counsel code switch within the submission why he code switched and linguistic choices.

Yang Arif – To address the learned judge. To show respect. Lexical to Yang Arif in English is Your Honour.

pihak pembelaan telah dari awal mengemukakan cadangan – cadangan menerusi saksi – saksi pihak pendakwaan which have in turn Yang Arif materialized into evidence upon the sworn testimony of both the accused and to which it has been collaborated by the particular SD3. – This is to suggest and personalized his messages to the learned judge that his cross examination to the prosecution witness, in turn is solid enough to break the DPP’s accusation. The code switch is accurately put, as a continuation from Bahasa to English.

So at page 7, 8 and 9, kami menghujahkan atau perkara – perkara tersebut to be considered wrapped, Yang Arif. – The learned counsel code switch from English to Bahasa and back again. It is lexical and accurate grammar. He can easily have used, “we submit that the above matter”, but, he needs to emphasize and to advise the court, of the eminent part to be considered covered within his submission. If he just uses the above English sentences, it would not make an impact. So by code switching it to Bahasa, it makes the sentence sounds powerful and with confidence.

Now it is clear, from the very beginning, the defence case adalah beg tersebut bukan milik mereka. They were just in possession, momentarily possession of these 2 bags Yang Arif, yang telah diberikan oleh Christina. Dan telah ditunjukkan apa kandungan beg tersebut. – The learned defence counsel is stressing to the Court about the beg. To tell the Court, that the bags are not theirs. Again, he is code switching in lexical. Instead of saying, “the bags are not theirs” he puts it in Bahasa, to make the sentence sound powerful, and to show confidence and truth within the statement to the learned judge.

In this case, what actually transpired before the arrest took place, what actually transpired in the hotel to which SP5, had actually mention dan telah mengesahkan bahawa kedua – dua OKT telah keluar. SP5 mahupun IO tersebut tidak mengesahkan bahawa merekalah yang duduk di hotel tersebut, merekalah yang menyewa hotel tersebut Yang Arif. – to make the sentence feels dramatic and to show that the Investigating Officer and SP5 had made a loop hole in the case by putting it in Bahasa. The word “mengesahkan” puts the power in the sentence, by stating that, it is not confirmed by the witness and IO that the accused stayed in the hotel. Here, he is convincing and to gain trust from and judgement from the learned judge to believe his side of the story. 

Dihujahkan bahawa OKT 1 telah menjelaskan mengapa beliau sendiri tidak memeriksa kasut – kasut yang diberikan kerana adalah merupakan custom warga negara Afrika untuk tidak membuka barang orang lain. – in this sentence, the code switch is done from Bahsa to English. The word “custom”, which means “adat” in Bahasa. The reason may be on why the learned counsel code switch is perhaps that he is not familiar with the word “adat”. He unconsciously code switch by way of intrasentential.

Dengan penjelasan tersebut dan tanpa dicabar oleh pihak pendakwaan, that evidence remains solid and it could not be disturbed. – Intrasentential code switching is done here to emphasize to the learned judge and to make the sentence powerful. In this sentence, the matrix language is more powerful; than the second language. And again to show that the prosecutors cannot break the defence evidence, because the prosecutors did not challenge the situation that is put to them during the cross examination.

….. wilful blindness should apply in this case and that apa yang telah dibawa oleh OKT, OKT  was to its own falling for not actually checking what was in the kotak yang telah dibawa. – intersentential code switching is done by way of lexical. Here the second language is more powerful that the matrix language. “apa yang telah dibawa oleh…”and “kotak yang telah dibawa…” is just code switching not in the context of putting power to the sentence but may be momentarily lapses of memory. The learned counsel is doing it unconsciously. Because the power in this sentence is put in “wilful blindness…” and “…was to its own falling for not actually checking…”. This shows, on how the familiarity and fluency of both languages is to him.

Conclusion

Some of us have the propensity to code switch in two different contexts such as discussions, meeting and informal conversations. The frequent use of code-switching during formal situation might be the influences of the English reference acquired from our social surroundings or through the existence of linguistics abilities within the speaker itself.

“Code switching is and has variety of linguistic and interactional functions, for example emphasizing, marking discourse boundaries, expressing emotions or opinions, and signalling in-group/out-group membership that can have simple uses in expanding vocabulary. As a sentence produced by a bilingual may begin in one language and finish in another, phrases from both tongues often succeed in an apparently random order. The use of more accessible word may depend on speakers’ linguistic abilities in their two languages or momentary lapses of memory”.

 Nancy Bonvillain (2003)

Since conversation constitutes as the major part of human interaction, code switching serves a new dimension towards linguistics choices as it promotes different functions for expressing affective purposes.