Subordinate Elements in Code-Switching Conversation Structure

Faculty of Arts, Nasarawa State University, Keffi

15

Subordinate Elements in Code-Switching Conversation

Structure

Jidda Hassan Jamaa

University of Maiduguri

[email protected]

Abstract

Subordinate clauses are grammatical units in languages, which play

the role of complements, adverbial, subjects and objects. It was

observed in code switching studies that different languages

participating in discourse tend to maintain their grammatical rule at

both intra- and inter-sentential levels. This notion has been

investigated with regard to subordinate clauses from Nigerian

Arabic (Shuwa), Hausa, English, Standard Arabic and Kanuri used

in code switching (CS) discourse. The outcome of these

investigations revealed that, despite the structural differences of the

languages used in CS discourse, each language grammar remains

the same even when they were used in mixed constituent structure

involving elements from more than two languages at a time. It thus

informs us of how formidable is language grammar, no matter the

social circumstances surrounding the language use.

Keywords: subordinate elements, discourse relations, matrix

language, embedded language, dominant language

O. Introduction

A subordinating clause, is also known as dependent begins with, a

subordinating conjunction or relative pronoun and contain both

subject and a verb. These combinations of words may not form a

complete sentence. It will instead make a reader want additional

information to finish the thought. In discourse studies what

Nasara Journal of Humanities Vol. 5 No.1, June, 2012

16

grammarians call “adverbial” or “adjunct” clause may be

considered as grammaticalized discourse relations i.e. rhetorical

relations holding between clauses as a minimal discourse segments.

The traditional type of grammatical subordination, is considered a

grammatical construction fulfilling a particular type of role in

discourse structure? In a language like English, the two types of

clauses, main and complement clauses take zero element, that, if or

Wh- phrase while adjunct take an adverbial conjunction like

because, since, as, when, although etc. These elements are found

across languages with similar functional role, but as to which

function is prominently featured in subordinate clause is subject to

the specific language rule.

In Hausa, for example, subordinate conjunctions introduce

sentence initial clause. The conjuncts are many in the language and

play different roles in clause sequence structure such as conjoining,

extra position and extending clause relations (Newman 2000). In

Kanuri, subordinating adjuncts as described in Cyffer (1990) and

Ziegelmeyer (2008) are used with the temporal relations of

posterity, anteriority, concession and exception. There is only one

subordinating element in Kanuri that is exemplified as “duwo” with

the meaning “yet” and “not yet”.

In reference to the above introduction therefore subordinate

clauses in monolingual text have the grammatical function of

sentence complement, adverbial, subject and object. These

functions when used in a multilingual discourse text may probably

overlap in word sequence structure, giving the complex nature of

the code-switching text. In her pioneer work, Myers Scotton (1993)

introduced a relevant approach to code-switching study known as

the Matrix Language Frame model (MLF). According to the

approach, languages in a code-switching text are classified into

Matrix and embedded languages. The matrix language is the one in

control of the frame- building which dominates the structure. The


17

embedded language provides lexical material to the language

building the frame. The two languages (matrix and embedded)

sequence of word order should grammatically be well-formed

according to the rule of the discourse languages.

This paper, investigates the subordinate clauses used in

code switching texts involving Nigerian Arabic, Hausa, English

and Standard Arabic in order to see if their traditional grammatical

functions have changed or remained the same. The study intends to

achieve the following designed objectives:

-Identify the sequence of word order and that of

subordinating clauses in all the languages that have

participated in the code switching discourse text.

-Identify if the subordinate clauses are modified by elements

from the same or different language.

- Explain the role played by the matrix language in re-

shaping the subordinate clauses structure if there are.

The study is based on Myers Scotton (1992, 1993), insertion model

of approach to code switching, which she borrowed using Levelt

(1989) psycholinguistics approach to speech production which was

discussed below in some detail.

1. Framework-Insertional model

The notion matrix language/embedded or base language have been

variously used by Azuma (1993), Myers Scotton (1992, 1993,

2001) and Boumans (1998, 2000) among others. It explains that

when two languages interact in a discourse, one of the two is in

control of the frame -building the constituent and the other

provides the inserted elements. The language in charge of building-

frame is called the matrix or base language which controls the

content morpheme and supplies the system morpheme (functional)

to the frame. The one that provides the inserted constituent element

is the embedded language.


18

The idea of a matrix in code switching was based on the

psycholinguistic study of speech production used by Levelt (1989)

and Azuma (1993), where the process begins with the formulation of

a non linguistic preverbal message in the conceptualizer. The output

from the conceptualizer is fed into the next component, called the

formulator. In the formulator, the non linguistic message is encoded

grammatically as well as phonologically so that it can be readily

pronounceable at the next component called the articulator. Speech

production, according to the model, involves the assignment of

segment ally specified major category items to sites in the surface

phrasal planning frame which bears inflectional elements and minor

category free forms. This was used by Azuma (1993 : 1071-3) to

illustrate code-switching in bilingual speech communities, where

word class that is open class items may participate in code-switching

but not closed class items which he (Azuma) specified as definite

articles, quantifiers, prepositions, possessives, auxiliaries, tense

helping verbs etc. Although quite a good number of scholars have

made contributions to the development of this model, Myers

Scotton´s (1993) work is the most detailed presentation of the matrix

language frame model. In the model (MLF), three types of code-

switching constituents governed by related constrains are identified:

(ML+EL) constituent, ML islands and EL islands). When the frame

of the ML+EL is being built, all basic linguistic procedure specify

selecting the ML; that is, it is the ML which sets the morphemes

order and also supplies the syntactically relevant system morphemes.

The matrix language in a sentence structure can be identified by

system morphemes and or morpheme sequence. System morphemes

though slightly different from closed class items according to Myers

Scotton (1993 and 1995:240), is defined as “any lexical item

belonging to a syntactic category which involves quantifications

across variable”. What she explains as system morpheme may co

occur with the functional morphemes. Morpheme sequence is used


19

when there is no functional morpheme to determine the matrix; the

slot occupied by the morpheme in the structure will determine the

matrix language.

The EL content morphemes are inserted into these ML

frames and only content morphemes congruent with morph-

syntactic specification of the ML is allowed (Myers Scotton 1993).

The matrix language frames the morph-syntax of the ML+EL

constituent and that the morpheme sequence must follow that of

the matrix language. The ML islands in code-switching consist

only of the matrix language morphemes that are grammatically

well formed, while the ( embedded language) EL islands is

composed of the EL content morpheme constrained by the

embedded language grammar (Myers-Scotton 1992:20-29).

In order to illustrate this, Myers Scotton

(1992:23) used data from Nairobi Swahili/English code-

switching which was discussed here with the aim

exemplifying the three types of constituents used in the

matrix language frame model. The examples of these

constituent were presented in the sequence of ML + EL,

ML Island, and EL Island.

1-a) wew ulikuwa umeiji kunja kwa corner-u-na- m- time tu

2nds Prog. her time just

“you had folded yourself in a corner (and) you were just timing

her”

b) wewe,Ben, siku ile ulisosika-plates tatu safari moja

-plates-three-journey-one

“ you Ben you really ate a lot that day three plates at a go”

2)-nyumbani imezidi hapa. Inaanza usika na kuendelea throughout

the day


20

“And at home it exceeds (the rains of) here. It begins at night and

continues throughout the day”

According to Myers Scotton, the constituent “ corner -u-na-m-time

tu” in sentence (1-a) comprises the functional Swahili element “u”

representing second person, “na” tense marker, “m” 3rd

person

pronoun marker, while “corner” and “time” are the content English

morphemes. The constituent is thus governed by the Swahili matrix

which provided the functional elements and English is the

embedded language which provided the content morphemes. The

constituent “plates tatu safari moja” in sentence (1-b) is marked by

the use of the functional morpheme plural “s” of English and

Swahili “tatu” (three). The functional elements in this constituent

are from English with the content word “plates” which is made up

of singular form of the word “plate” and the functional element

plural suffix “s” and Swahili is also the matrix language with the

element “plates tatu” (Three plates) composed in Swahili order

(noun+modifier) as different from English order (modifier+noun).

This is explained by the morpheme order sequence, which

stipulates, that, if a matrix language cannot be established on the

presence of functional elements in the constituent structure, the

morpheme order sequence can be used as the yardstick for

determining a matrix language in the structure (Myers Scotton,

1992: and 1993).

The matrix language island is illustrated in example 2 above

by the constituent “inaanza usika” (begins at night) while the

embedded language island is by the English constituent

“throughout the day”. The difference between the two is that the

matrix language island is preceded by the Swahili constituent and

followed by the English one, while the embedded language island

is preceded and followed by Swahili constituents.


21

To identify matrix and embedded language constituent

structure, a single inserted element from an embedded language can

justify ML+EL structure. The matrix language island on the other

hand consists of the matrix language morphemes well-formed

according to the matrix language grammar, while the embedded

language island should also be composed of the embedded

language morpheme grammatically well-formed according to the

embedded language constraints.

This could explain that the matrix language frame model

has a dual analysis structure, where the ML+EL constitute a unit

and, ML island and EL island as other units of analysis. Although

both ML and EL islands should be grammatically well-formed, the

EL well-formedness has to be constrained sometimes by its

functional and grammatical status as EL, in which case its system

morpheme had to be drawn from the matrix. It therefore suggests

that only one of the languages in switching could have greater

advantage over the other in analytical terms.

2. Research Methodology

The data used in the present work constitute part of a PhD corpora

collected sometimes in 2003 among Shuwa Arabs in Gwange.

Audiotape was used in recording individual and group discussions,

which were later transcribed with narrow phonetic transcriptions.

The transcribed data was put on a computer word program coded

according to the parameters designed to suit the purpose of the

research. In this regard a tagging system was devised for all the

transcribed text where arbitrary numbers were assigned for all

words code switched from different languages. For example a

switch from Shuwa Arabic to Hausa, English to Standard Arabic or

Kanuri where word classes categories and functions were all given

a reference number so as to determine the language, or the word

category beginning or ending a sentence in a short or longer


22

discourse in the text. This strategy is meant to assist in quantifying

the code switched elements in the text and their frequent

occurrence in the total text. The coded text was later put into access

program with concordance for easy reference to the electronic

resource data.

The participants in this research comprise 19 males and 5 females

whose age ranges are between 18-50. All of them attained a certain

literacy level.

The material used in this research are the subordinate

clauses which have very few representation compared to the large

amount of the data collected which exceeded (80,000) words. This

is because subordinate clause comprises functional words which

are ideally limited in number in any language and thus their limited

featuring in code switching text. The subordinate clauses are found

in Nigerian Arabic (NA), Hausa (H), English (E) and Standard

Arabic (SA). The subordinate clauses identified in the text from

these languages, may occur with subordinate conjunct in any one of

the languages in question. The next section will show how

subordinate clauses from the four languages are analysed based on

the Myers Scotton insertion approach

3. Data Presentation

3.1-Subordinating Conjunction in CS

Subordinating clauses in our data are restricted in number. They

were used with limited items in Nigerian Arabic, Hausa, English

and standard Arabic. In the code-switching data, 34 subordinating

clauses were identified they cut across all the languages that

participated in the discourse text. Nigerian Arabic and Hausa have

considerable representation, while standard Arabic and Kanuri (K)

have the least or no representation among them. The following

table shows the sequence order of arrangement to the subordinating

clause used in different discourse languages.


23

Table (1) the sequence order of subordinating clause in code

switching

Item

category

Subordinate

conjunct

Item

category

Language

NA H E SA K

Adv. do pro - + - - -

N do N + + - - -

Dem do pro - + - - -

Conj. do V + - - + -

Adv. do V. - + - - -

Dem. do Dem. - - + - -

- do V - - + - -

Dem. do Adv. - - + - -

N do V + + - - -

Conj. do N + - - + -

3.2-Subordinate Clause in Nigerian Arabic

3)- humma da, hassa fi naadim yaa taara kuɗi

Them this right now loc.. Pers. pers. Collect money

Right now there is someone who gathered money?


24

4)-naaka da kake da shi , haw ille kan fakkar ke kula

Yours that you with it even if you think like also

Even if you take the matter the way it is.

5)- wa foog an-nuqda di al-ustaz bidawwir bilkallam fookha

And on def. point this def. teacher want talk on it

It is on this issue the teacher wants to talk

The above subordinating conjunction in Nigerian Arabic, function

as adverbial and complement in the structure. The first two

sentence complements are mixture of Nigerian Arabic and Hausa

while the last comprises only of Nigerian Arabic elements. In

example 3 above the clause is made up of Nigerian Arabic

elements “humma da hassa fi naadim” and the Hausa elements

“yaa taara kuɗi” both phrases appeared in their different matrix

languages. Nigerian Arabic with its functional elements

demonstrative and preposition “da” that and “fi” in; the Hausa part

of the clause shows the functional elements pronoun “yaa” 3rd

person and suffix “a” object marker attached to taar+a . What

appears to be interesting in the two parts of the constituent

subordinate conjunct is their ability to qualify both as matrix

languages in the same structure something considered to be

theoretically impossible in the matrix language frame approach.

The other two examples, 4 and 5 have only one matrix language

each; Hausa and Nigerian Arabic respectively though the 4th

example has two language parts.

3.3-Subordinating Clause in Hausa

6- Wade mash+at maa nada+tki ajala wanda taa zoo taa cee

mana

One went+pers. Neg.call+pres. Quick that one who came pers.

say us


25

“She is the one who called you as we were told by the person that

came”

7-kwana+kin baaya can lokac+in al+visii al+gabul

Days +poss. behind that time+poss.det.+VC det.+ before

“It was during the time of the former VC’s tenure”

8-moto+ci gariib sun kai ukku maa misha’inn+um

Car+pl. near pl.3rd

pers. almost three also escort+ pl.3rd

pers.

“almost three cars were also in the escort team”

The above subordinate Hausa element function as complement and

adverbial with the elements (wanda), (lokac+in ) and (maa). The

Hausa part of the constituent with subordinate conjunct underlined

are all shown in italic boldface. For example the constituent in

example 6 comprises two parts; the first part is in Nigerian Arabic

and the second Hausa. Functional elements used in the two

language parts qualify both as matrix languages giving the presence

of the two languages functional elements in the structure e.g.: wade

(pro), at (pers.fem) atki (pers. Poss.) of Nigerian Arabic and wanda

(that), taa (2nd

pers.fem) and mana (1st pers. Pl.) of Hausa. In the

other examples: 7 and 8, Hausa is the matrix language in the

structure while the Nigerian Arabic elements (gariib) “almost”,

(misha’inum) “escorting them” and the English element (al-visi)

“VC” i.e. Vice Chancellor, serve as the embedded language islands

in the structure.

3.4-Subordinating conjuncts in English

There are few English subordinating conjunctions which occur in

the subordinate clauses used in our code switching corpora. The

subordinating conjunct function respectively as complement and

adverbial as in the below examples:


26

9-bekoos-ana-fi-tarfi -le- l -maʔwan da…

I -prep.Definition-prep.det. assistance-that

“Because my definition to assistance is…….”.

10-…abin da ya sa wannan ɗin bekooz-akwai-wassu- infomeeʃin

Thing that put in this loc. there are some

“Why things were this way is because of the incoming

information…”

11- ……dat was da faas taayim zan faara aplaayin barra

I begin outside

“……that was the first time I applied for a job outside”

In example (9) the English subordinating conjunction “because” is

used with the Nigerian Arabic functional elements pronoun “ana” I,

preposition “fi” in, reflexive “i” my, preposition “le” to, and

definite article “l” and “da” demonstrative. In example (10), the

same item was used with the Hausa adverbial element (akwai)

“there are” and the plural (wassu) “some”. The first and second

constituents with functional elements from Nigerian Arabic and

Hausa show that they are the matrix or dominant languages in the

two constituent structures. The element “because” used in the two

constituent in boldface is from English the embedded language in

the structure. In example (11) English is the matrix language with

the functional elements (that) and (the ) followed by Hausa

embedded island(zan faara) “I begin”, English matrix language

island (applying) and Nigerian Arabic embedded element (barra)

“outsde”.

3.5-Subordinating Clauses in Standard Arabic

The Standard Arabic subordinating conjunctions were rarely

featured in the code-switching data, they function as adverbial in

the following subordinating clauses.

12-anshaan ma- daamit- inta ke gaa?id )


27

Because neg. since 2nd

pers.sing. also sitting

“ because you are also around”

13-….. wa ma- daamit inta kula nomad

And neg. -since 2nd

pers. Pl. also-

“ ….. and since you are also nomad…”

In these examples, Standard Arabic subordinating conjunctions are

used alongside Nigerian Arabic conjunct coordinating discourse

preceding them in the structure. The constituent comprises

Nigerian Arabic elements coordinating conjunct+ subordinating

conjunct “anshaan maa daamit” and “wa, maa daamit”. The

functional words in both examples came from Nigerian Arabic. In

examples (12) functional elements are (anshaan) “because”

pronoun (inta) “you” while (13) comprises the conjunct (wa)

“and” and the pronoun (inta) “you” . These functional elements all

came Nigerian Arabic is in control of the functional elements. It is

thus the matrix language, while Standard Arabic provides the

inserted material and it is the embedded language in the structure.

The structure of the subordinating elements reported from the

different languages that participated in code switching, clearly

showed, the influence of the matrix languages in the discourse

structure i.e. Hausa and Nigerian (Shuwa).Arabic.

4. Conclusion

Our analysis on the subordinating conjuncts occurring in

subordinate clauses in the four languages used in the CS data

above, clearly points to the grammatical function of subordinating

clauses as complement, adverbial and subject. The occurrence of

the items in different languages structures did not affect the

functional distribution of the elements in CS. This suggests the

formidability of language grammars and their resistance to any


28

form of structural changes under the influence of a language guise.

The elements sequence order in the CS structure as shown in table

1 above represent the grammatical order in subordinating elements

clauses in code switching text, which implies that the same

grammatical ordering will be observed in a more or less

monolingual text.

At the code-switching level, the dominant languages in the

subordinate structure are Nigerian Arabic and Hausa which were

technically the matrix languages in the subordinating clauses.

English and Standard Arabic remain the providers of lexical

elements and are thus the embedded languages in the CS structure.

What we found interesting in subordinating clauses in code

switching, is the occurrence of two language parts where each one

plays the role of a matrix language in the case of example 3 above.

This is considered a counter example to the matrix language frame

model (MLF) and therefore serves as complement to it i.e. (MLF).

This paper also suggests the proper investigation into multilingual

communities to see how the matrix language frame model

withstands the test of many languages participating in a discourse

text.

References

Azuma, S. 1993. The Frame-Content Hypothesis in Speech

Production: Evidence from Inter- Sentential Code-

Switching. Linguistics 31: 1071-1093.

Bouman, L. 1998. The Syntax of Codeswitching: Analysing

Morrocan Arabic/Dutch Conversations. Tilburg: Tilburg

University press.

Bouman, L and Caubet, D. 2000. Modeling Intra-Sentential Code

Switching: A Comparative Study. Owens (ed.) Arabic as

a Minority Language. Berlin : Mouton de Gruyter,

113-180.


29

Cyffer, Nobert. 1990. We Learn Kanuri. Koln : Rudiger Verlage.

Levelt, W. J M. 1989. Speaking: from Intention to Articulation.

Cambridge: MIT Press.

Myers-Scotton, C. 1992. Codeswitching in Africa: A Model of

the Social Functions of Code Selection. In Robert, K

Herbert (ed.). Language and Society in Africa: The Theory

and PracticeMof Sociolinguistics. Cape town:

Witwaterstrand.

Myers-Scotton, C. 1993. Dueling Languages; Grammatical

Structure in Code-Switching. Oxford: Clarendon.

---------------------1995. A Lexically Based Model of

Codeswitching. In L. Milroy & P. Muysken (eds.). One

Speaker Two Languages: Cross Disciplinary Perspective on

Codeswitching. Cambridge: CUP.

---------------------2001. The Matrix Language Frame Model:

Development and Responses. In Rudolf Jacobson (ed.)

Trends in code-switching worldwide (II),

Newman, Paul. 2000. Hausa Language: Encyclopedic Reference

Grammar. London: Yale University Press.

Zielgelmyer, G. 2008. Aspects of adverbial subordination in

Kanuri. MAJOLLS: Vol. 10: .16-27.

Documents

Subordinate Elements in Code-Switching Conversation Structure