enong: disglossia, code switching and code mixing

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Sociolinguistics is the descriptive study of the effect of any and all aspects of society, including cultural norms, expectations, and context, on the way language is used, and the effects of language use on society. Sociolinguistics differs from sociology of language in that the focus of sociolinguistics is the effect of the society on the language, while the sociology of language focuses on language's effect on the society. Sociolinguistics overlaps to a considerable degree with pragmatics. It is historically closely related to linguistic anthropology and the distinction between the two fields has even been questioned recently. It also studies how language varieties differ between groups separated by certain social variables, e.g., ethnicity, religion, status, gender, level of education, age, etc., and how creation and adherence to these rules is used to categorize individuals in social or socioeconomic classes. As the usage of a language varies from place to place, language usage also varies among social classes, and it is these sociolects that sociolinguistics studies.

In this discussion we will discuss about the variety of a language as a “code”. This term is useful because it is neutral because it doesn’t arouse emotions. Moreover, this code can be used to refer to any kind of system that two or more people used for communication. It can be used as a private code to protect certain secret. The code here means the way of expressing something through a language using certain dialect, style, register or variety of a language. We will look at the phenomena of code choice, code switching, and code mixing. We will choose bilingual and multilingual situations because they can give us with fairly clear cases. so in this paper the author more describes about code choice, diagglosia, billingualism and multilingualism, code choice, code switching and code mixing.

CHAPTER II

DISCUSSION

2.1 Diglossia

Issues regarding bilingual would seem closely with the development of the Indonesian language. This is because the Indonesian people use more than one language, the language of their mother (the local language) and the Indonesian language as the national language. The use of local language is also called the use of the first language, while the use of Indonesian is also known as a second language use. The use of such language is referred to as diglossia (Aslinda, et al., 2007:26). The word comes from the French “diglossie”, which was used by Marcais, a French linguist but the term has become popular in the study of linguistics was used by scholars from Stanford University, the CA Ferguson in 1958 in a symposium on "Urbanization and standard languages" organized by the American Anthropological Association in Washington DC.

Diglossia is relatively stable language situation in which, in addition to the primary dialects of the language (which may include a standards or regional standard), there is a very divergent, highly codified (often grammatically more complex) superposed variety, the vehicle of a large and respected body of written literature,. Either of an earlier period or in another speech community, which is learned largely by formal education and is used for most written and formal spoken purposes but is not used by any sector of the community for ordinary conversation.

Diglossia has three crucial features:

1. Two distinct varieties of the same language are used in the community, with one regarded as a high (or H) variety and the other a low (or L) variety.

2. Each variety is used for quite distinct functions; H and L complement each other.

3. No one uses the H variety in everyday conversation.

A key defining characteristic of diglossia is that the two varieties are kept quite apart in their functions. One is used one set of circumstance s and the other in an entirely different set. For example, the H varieties may be used for delivering sermons and formal lectures, especially in a parliament or legislative body, for giving political speech, for broadcasting the news on radio and television, etc. in contrast, L varieties may be used in giving instructions to workers in low prestige occupations or to household servants, in conversation with familiars, in popular programs on the radio and in folk literature.

Diglossia was described by Ferguson to summon the nine topics, namely the function, prestige, literary heritage, acquisition, standardization, stability, grammar, lexicon, and phonology.

1. Function: diglossia is a very important criterion. According to Ferguson in diglosis society there are two variations of the language: first language variation called high dialect (dialect abbreviated H or H range) and the second is a low dialect (dialect abbreviated L or range L). Functional distribution of dialects H L means that there are situations where only H dialect suitable for use, and in others only the L dialect that can be used. The function of H only on official or formal situations, while the L function only on an informal and relaxed situations.

2. Prestige: In a society diglosis speakers usually considered more prestigious dialect H, more superior, more respected, and is a logical language. While L is considered inferior dialect, instead there is a deny its existence.

3. Literary heritage: In three of the four languages used Ferguson as an example there is literature in a variety of H used and respected by the community language. If there are also works of contemporary literature by using a variety of H, then it is perceived as a continuation of that tradition, the literary work should be in the range of H. Literary tradition that is always in the range of H is causing foreign literature it became public.

4. Acquisition: Variations of H obtained by learning in formal education, while regarded L obtained from the association with family and peers. Therefore, those who have never entered the world of formal education will not know the range of H at all. Those who study the range of H is almost never hang smoothly, surfing mastery of various L.

5. Standardization: Since the range of H is seen as a prestigious variety, it is not surprising that the range of H standardization done through formal codification. Dictionaries, grammar, pronunciation guide, and books for the use of the correct rules written for a variety of H. In contrast, the range of L was never taken care of and addressed.

6. Stability: Stability in the long-running diglosis usually where there is a variation of a language that maintained its presence in the community. Discrepancy or difference between the range and variety of H L in the diglosis always highlighted because of the development in mixed forms have characteristics H range and variety of L.

7. Grammar: Ferguson argued that the range of H and L in the range of diglossia are forms of the same language support, but in grammatical apparently there is a difference.

8. Lexicon: Most of the vocabulary in the range of H and L are the same variety. however, there is a vocabulary in the range of H is not no mate the range of L, or vice versa, there is a vocabulary in the range of L that there is no partner on the range of H.

9. Phonology: In the field of phonology there are structural differences between the various kinds of H and L. This difference could be too much close. Ferguson stated range sound system and a variety of L H is actually a single variety, but phonological H is a basic system, while diverse phonological L-variety, a subsystem or parasystem.

In the situation of diglossia we will find the diglossia levels in several regional languages in Indonesia such as Javanese, Sundanese, Balinese, etc. which hasa name. In Sundanese people are known “undak usuk basa” which there are grammatical rules governing low-level language diversity and high diversity of languages such as basa cohag (coarse variety), basa loma (range for others), basa sedeng (medium range or middle), basa lemes (fine variety). In Java there are ngoko language (the lowest level), krama (middle), krama inggil (high level). Both have a standard size of each and recognized by the wearer.

The Relation between Bilingualism and Diglossia

Diglossia is defined as a function of differences in the use of language (especially the function of H and L) and bilingualism is a state of the use of two languages interchangeably in the community, Fishman (1977) describes the relationship diglossia and bilingualism were as shown in the chart.

There are four types of relationships between Bilingualism and diglossia;

1. Bilingualism and Diglossia

2. Bilingualism without diglossia

3. Diglossia without bilingualism

4. No bilingualism and no diglossia

POLYGLOSSIA

Polyglossia is the coexistence of multiple languages in the same area. Polyglossia is also defined as the use of three or more varieties in a community wiith a function differentiation, a shared language value system and common norms. For example, in North Sumatra use Batak language, but there are several Batak languages, such as Batak Toba language, Batak Karo language, Batak Simalungun and Indonesia Language. The problem use of H and L depend on the attitudes of the language user, for example; RW meeting in Kotabaru use Indonesian language, because it is H and L Java language considered, but in the Kadipaten Kidul meeting RW use Java language, because H Javanese and Indonesian L.

2.2 Bilingualism

The term bilingualism (Indonesian: Kedwibahasaan), mean two languages are commonly used and understood in day-to-day use in that society. First, their own mother tongue or first language, and the second are another language.

Finally, bilingualism start from dominate the first language (as mother tongue) and know a little about second language, and then can dominate the second language and make the second language as well as with the first language in communication.

According to Bloomfield (1933:56), “Bilingualism is speaker’ ability use two languages as well as.” So, it mean that a person called bilingual if the speaker use the first language and the second language as well as.

Example:

Anahina is a bilingual Tongan New Zealander living in Auckland. At home with her family she uses Tongan almost exclusively for a wide range of topics. She often talks to her grandmother about Tongan customs, for instance. With her mother she exchanges gossip about Tongan friends and relatives. Tongan is the language the family uses at mealtimes. They discuss what they have been doing, plan family outings, and share information about Tongan social events. It is only with her older sisters that she uses some English words when they are talking about school or doing their homework.

Certain social factors ¾ who you are talking to, the social context of the talk, the function and topic of the discussion ¾ turn out to be important in accounting for language choice in many different kinds of speech community.

Bilingualism is defined as the use of two languages by the speakers in the interaction with other people, Mackey (in Chaer and Agustina 2004:84). Additionally, according to Meckey there are four aspects to facilitate discussions about bilingual, is as follows:

a. Level of Ability

The language ability will appear on the four skills, namely listening, reading, speaking, and writing.

b. Function

Proficiency level depending on the function or use of the language. It can be said that the more often the language used, the level depending of speakers. The factors that influence the internal and external factors.

Internal factors include:

1. Internal usage such as counting, estimation, praying, cursing, a dream, a diary, and record

2. Aptitude: talent or intelligence, and is influenced by: 1. Sex 2. Age 3. Intelligence 4. Memory 5. Attitude discuss 6. Motivation.

Influenced by external factors:

1. Contacts, means speaker’s contact with their language at home, language in society, language at schools, language in mass media, and correspondence.

2. Variable means of speaker’ contact is determined by: 1. Length of exposure, 2. frequent contacts, 3. Pressure, meaning that influence speakers in the field of language usage, such as the economic, administrative, cultural, political, military, historical, religious, and demographic.

c. Substitution between languages (alternation)

Substitution between language fluency and also depends on the external and internal functions. Conditions speakers switch languages invented by at least three things: topic of conversation, people involved, and tension.

d. Interference

Interference is an error that caused entrainment habits of speech or language into the language of maternal dialect. Interference bias occurs in pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and meaning even culture. Description interference with such individual, so it is idiosyncratic and parole speakers.

In addition, according to Alwasilah added two other aspects, namely:

e. Shifting language (Language shift)

When a new group comes to other places and mingled with the local group then it will pass the language shift (language shift).

f. Convergence (convergence)

Convergence is met activities and mainly move towards unity and uniformity.

Bilingualism in Indonesia, namely:

1. Local language and Indonesian language

Bilingualism in Indonesia (Local language and Indonesian language). Use bilingualism, this can happen because:

(a) When Sumpah Pemuda on 1928 using the Indonesian language (at the time called Maleis) associated with the struggle for independence and nationalism.

(b) Language - the language of the area has a natural addition to coaching and development of the language and culture of Indonesia.

(d) Transfer of population from one region to another due to urbanization, internal migration, mutation of the employee or employees, and so on.

(e) Interaction between ethnic groups: that in trade, socializing and business office or school.

(f) Many motivation is driven by the interests of the profession and the interests of life.

2.3 Multilingualism

Multilingualism is a society that has several languages. Such communities occur because some ethnic communities that helped shape an ethnically plural society can be regarded as (plural society). (Sumarsono and Paina Partana, 2002: 76).

The development of monolingual language became bilingual and multilingual eventually be caused by many factors. The development of communication technology, globalization, rapid education cause needs of the community led to a shift of the language as well as the progress of time indirectly confound between languages.

Multilingualism refers to the depiction of a speaker who controls more than two languages, three languages, or four, even five languages. Its use similar to bilingualism, mean that know when and where the language is used.

Example:

The Javanese, even they can speak Java language (as mother tongue), as well as can speak Indonesian as second language, and English as third language, even some who can speak Japanese, Dutch, and so on.

In the history of the formation multi-language, a language that we look at - least there are four patterns is through migration, colonization, federation and various language at border region.

(a) Migration

Migration or displacement society which have problematic nature of language can be divided into 2 types. The first type is a large group of the population to expand to other areas already inhabited by other groups. The second type occurs when a small number of ethnic members into areas already under national control.

(b) Colonization

In the process of colonial control was held by a relatively few number of people from the region of the new controller nationality.

Federation is the union of different ethnic or nationality under the political control of the country.

(d) The Various Language in the Border Region

In the border region sometimes the society become citizen A, but as socio cultural become citizen B. Complications border regions usually associated with war. Vanquished people forced to give up some of its territory to the win.

2.4 Code Choice

· Choosing Your Variety or Code

What is your linguistic or code?

The code we choose to use on a particular occasion is likely to indicate how we wish to be viewed by others. If we can comfortably control a number of codes, then we would seem to have an advantage over those who lack such control. Speaking several of the languages can obviously be distinctly advantageous in a multilingual gathering. Code-switching may be a very useful social skill. The converse of this, of course is that we will be judged by the code we choose to employ on a particular occasion.

Example 1

Kalala is 16 years od. He lives inBukavu, an African city in eastern Zaire with a population of about 220,000. It is a multicultural, multilingual city with more people coming and going for work and businessreasons than people who live there permanently. Over forty groups speaking different language can be found in the city. Kalala , like many of his friends is an employed. He spends his days roaming the streets, stopping off periodically at regular meeting places in the market place, in the park, or at a friend’s place. Dueing a normal day he uses at least three different varieties or codes, and sometimes more.

Kalala speaks an informal style of shi, his tribal language, at home with his family, and he is familiar with the formal shi used for wesddings and funerals. He uses informal shi in the market-place when he deals with vendors from his own ethnic group. When he wants to communicate with people from a different tribal group, he uses the lingua franca of the area,Swahili. He learned standard zairean Swahili at school but the local market-place variety is title different. It has its own distinct linguistic features and even its own name-Kingwana. He uses kingwana to younger children and adults he meets in the streets, as well as to people in the market-place.

Standard Zalrean Swahilli, one of the national languages in bukavu for most official transactions. Despite the fact that French is the official language of Zaire, Kalala uses standard Zairean Swahili with officials in government offices when he has to fill in a form or pay a bill. He uses it when he tries for a job in a shop or an office, but there are very few jobs around. He spends most of his time with his friends, and with them he uses a special variety or code called indoubil.

· Domains of Language Use

Example 2

Anahina is a bilingual Tongan New Zealander living in Auckland. At home with her family she uses Tongan almost exclusively for a wide range of topics. She often talks to her grandmother about tongan costums for instance. With her mother she exchanges gossip about tongan friends and relatives. Tongan is the language the family uses at meal times. They discuss what have been doing, plan family outings and share information about tongan special events. It is only with her older sisters that she uses some English words when they are talking about school or doing their homework.

Certain social factors-who you are talking to, the social context of the talk, the functionand topic of the discussion-turn out to be important in accounting for language choice in many different kinds of speech community it has proved very useful, particularly when describing code choice in large speech communities, to look at typical interactions which involve these factors. We can imagine, for instance a typical family interaction. It would be located in the setting of the home; the typical participants will obviously be family members; and typical topics would be family activities Anahina’s family’s meal-time conversation described in example 2, illustrated this pattern well. A number of such typical interactions have been identified as relevant in describing pattern of code choice in many speech communities. They are known as domains of language use, a term popularized by an American sociolinguist, Joshua Fishman a domain involves typical interactions between typical participants in typical settings.

· Modelling Variety or Code Choice

Example 3

Maria is teenager whose Portuguese parents came to London in the 1960s. she uses mainly Portuguese at home and to older at the Portuguese chatholic church and community centre, but English the appropriate variety or code for her to use at school. She uses mostly English at her after school job serving in a local café, though occasionally order costumers greet her in Portuguese.

Domain is clearly a very general concept which draw on three important social factors in code choice- participants setting and topic. It is useful for capturing broad generalisations about any speech community. Using information about the domain of use in a community it is possible to draw a very simple model summarizing the norms of language use for community. This is often particularly useful for bilingual and multilingual speech communities.

The information provided in example 4, for instance, identifies four domains and describes the variety or code appropriate to each.

Domain Variety/code

Home/family Portuguese

Church/religion Portuguese

Work/employment English

School/education English

· Other Social Factors affecting Code Choice

Though I have used domains as useful summaries of relevant social factors in the model provided above, it is often necessary to examine more specific social factors if a model is to be a useful description of code choice in a community. The components of a domain do not always fit with each other. They are not always congruent. In other words within any domain individual interactions may not be typical in the sense in which typical is used in the domain concept. They may nevertheless, be perfectly normal. And occur regularly, this is illustrated by Oi Lin Tan’s use of Singapore English to her sisters as described in example 5. People may select particular variety or codes because it makes it easier to discuss a particular topic, regardless of where they are speaking. At home people often discuss work or school, for instance using the language associated with those domains rather than the language of the family domain. Some describe this as “leakage”, suggesting it is in some way irregular-the code associated with one domain is leaking into another. In fact it is quite normal and very common. Particular topics may regularly be discussed in one code rather than another, regardless of the setting or addresses.

The dimensions introduced in chapter 1 illustrate this point nicely. Any or all of them may be relevant in accounting for the choice of the variety or code in particular situation. When both participants share more than one variety , then other factors will contribute to the appropriate choice. The social distance dimensions is relevant, for instance. How well do they know each other Le what is the social distance between the participants? Are they strangers, friends, brothers? Kalala, for example, would use a different code to each.

2.5 Code switching

The term code switching (or code-switching) refers to the alternation between two or more languages, dialects, or language registers in the course of discourse between people who have more than one language in common. Typically one of the two languages is dominant; the major language is often called the matrix language, while the minor language is the embedded language.

· (Code-switching) "occurs when a bilingual introduces a completely unassimilated word from another language into his speech." (Haugen 1956:40)

· "Codeswitching ... is the selection by bilinguals or multilinguals of forms from an embedded variety (or varieties) in utterances of a matrix variety during the same conversation" (Myers-Scotton 1993:3).

As we know that people know two languages are the first language(mother tongue) and the second language. So from this case sometimes people combine these languages in their communication. So in this problem they have used code switching.

There are some experts have given definition about code switching. Some of them are

· Appel ( 1976 : 76) code switching” the changing of the using language because of tthe changing of situation”

· Hymes (1875: 103)state that code switching is not happen between language but also can happen between variety or styles in the any language. On generally Hymes state that “Code switching has become a common term for alternate us of two or more language, varieties of language, or even speech styles”

Studies of the social motivations for code-switching, such as those discussed above, have demonstrated the following :

· Bilingual code switching is meaningful. it fulfils certain function of an interaction

· A speaker choice of language has to to do with maintaining or negotiating a certain type of social identity in relation to other; code switching between language allow speaker access to different social identities.

· Particular switches may be meaningful

· Code switching may switching maybe unmarked, or expected choice, or a marked or unexpected choice: in this manner it may function as an attempt to initiate a change to relationships.

· Code switching is useful in cases of uncertainty about relationship; it allows speaker to feel their way and negotiate identities in relation to other.

Example :

(The Maori is in italics. THE TRANSLATION IS IN A SMALL CAPITALS)

Sarah : I think everyone’s here except Mere.

John : she said she might be abit late but actually I think that’s her arriving now.

Sarah : you’re right. Kia ora Mere. Haere mai, Kei tepehen koe?

[HI MERE, COME IN. HOW ARE YOU?]

Mere : Kia ora e hoa. Kei te pai. Have you started yet?

[HELLO MY FRIEND. I’M FINE]

People sometimes switch code within a domain or social situation. When there is some obvious change in the situation, such as the arrival of a new person, it is easy to explain the switch. When the local English-speaking priest called, however, everyone awitched to English. In both cases the switch reflects a change in the social situation and takes positive account of the presence of a new participant.

2.6 Code Mixing

Code mixing also called intra-sentential code switching or intra-sentential code-alternation occurs when speakers use two or more languages below clause level within one social situation. Muysken (2000) defines three types of code mixing: insertion, alternation, and congruent lexicalization. In his view, insertion occurs when lexical items from one language are incorporated into another. The notion of insertion, according to Muysken (2000), corresponds to what Clyne (1991) terms as “transference” and Myer-Scotton as “embedding”.

Equating in this instance code of language, there are two kinds of code-switching: situational and metaphorical. Situational code-switching occurs when the languages used change according to the situations in which the conversant find themselves: they speak one language in one situation and another in a different one. No topic change is involved. When a change of topic requires a change in the language used we have metaphorical code-switching. In this point, some topics may be discussed in either code, but the choice of code adds a distinct flavor to what is said about the topic. The choice encodes certain social values. Code-switching is often quite subconscious: people may not be aware that they have switched or be able to report following a conversation which code they used for a particular topic. Code-mixing occurs when conversant use both languages together to the extent that they change from one language to the other in the course of a single utterance.

Metaphorical code-switching has an affective dimension to it: you change the code as you redefine the situation – formal to informal, official to personal, serious to humorous, and politeness to solidarity.

Example of code switching English/Spanish

A: The picture looks so cool.

B: Which picture?

A: The one you have in your messenger.

B: Ah…Si, me gusto mucho. (Ah…Yes, I liked it a lot.)

Conversational code-mixing involves the deliberate mixing of the language without an associated topic change. Pfaff (1979) provides the following examples of conversational code-mixing among Spanish and English bilinguals:

 No van a bring it up in the meeting

‘They are not going to bring it up in the meeting’

 Todos los Mexicanos were riled up.

‘All the Mexicans were riled up’

Example of code-mixing in English/Indonesian

· I mean, ganti ke kalimat laen.

‘I mean, change it to another sentence’

Such conversational code-mixing is often used by bilinguals, primarily as a solidarity marker. A speaker who mixes codes in this way in conversation with a friend or acquaintance will almost certainly shift entirely to English when addressing a monolingual English-speaking person or entirely to Spanish when addressing a complete stranger who is obviously of Spanish origin.

Conversational code-mixing is not just a haphazard mixing of two languages brought about by laziness or ignorance or some combination of these. Rather, it requires conversant to have a sophisticated knowledge of both languages and to be acutely aware of community norms. These norms require that both languages be used in this way so that conversant can show their familiarity or solidarity.

Gumperz’s analysis of both choice of language and type of code-switching and code-mixing in the community reveals that the situation is quite complex because of the number of possibilities that are available with the ‘right’ choice highly depend on the social context and intend of the speaker like which occurs in Slovenian. Gumperz add that “each communicating subgroup tends to establish its own conventions with respect to both borrowing and code-switching, and that factors such as region of origin, local residence, social class, and occupational niche are involved in defining the norms.

Many other investigators have report results which clearly indicate the listeners partly judge what is said by the code the speaker choose to use. Certain codes are deemed more appropriate for certain messages than other codes. Code and message are inseparable. Consequently, when a choice between code exist, you must exercise that choice with great care since it can affect what happen to the message you wish to communicate.

Some form of mixed code,

1. insertion of the word, for example, “Ok. Kalian ujian minggu depan.”

2. Insertion of phrase, for example, “ Ini namanya reading skill.

3. insertion of word repetition, for example, “ada banyak souvenir-souvenir dari Cina”

4. insertion of idioms, for example, “makanya jadi orang itu don’t judge book by the cover”

5. insertion shape baster (native and foreign joint formation). for example, “saya menunggu transferan uang dari orang tua saya.”

2.7 Types of Code- switching and Code- mixing

There are many kinds of code-switching. Code-switching can be either intersentential, intrasentential or Tag- switching. In intersentential code-switching, the language switch is done at sentence boundaries. This is seen most often between fluent bilingual speakers. Sometimes I will start a sentence in English y terminό in español. (Poplack 1980) In intrasentential code-switching, the shift is done in the middle of a sentence, with no interruptions, hesitations, or pauses indicating a shift. It often happens within one sentence or even a one phrase. The speaker is usually unaware of the switch, until after the fact, and for example, you have to find a kalo pedi (good guy) and marry him. (English-Greek)

The first type of language switching is known as mechanical switching. It occurs unconsciously, and fills in unknown or unavailable terms in one language. This type of code-switching is also known as code-mixing. Code-mixing occurs when a speaker is momentarily unable to remember a term, but is able to recall it in a different language.

Another type of code switching, known as code-changing, is characterized by fluent intrasentential shifts, transferring focus from one language to another. It is motivated by situational and stylistic factors, and the conscious nature of the switch between two languages is emphasized (Lipski, 1985, p. 12).

The third type of code- switching is Tag- switching. This involves the insertion of a tag in one language into an utterance that is otherwise entirely in the other language. We can see example, so he asked me for money, znas #, I had to say no, znas #. The tag here is Serbian for ‘you know’.

Code-mixing is one of the major kinds of language choice which is subtler than ‘codeswitching’, as stated by Fasold (1984). In code- mixed sentences, pieces of the one language are used while a speaker is basically using another language.

CONCLUSION

Although most of the world's population can speak only one language, a sizeable minority is able to communicate in two or more. Of the world's 750 million speakers of English, for example, only 300 million use it as their first or native tongue. The remaining 450 million speak it as a second or third language. Whenever speakers of two or more languages come together, a decision has to be made about which of these languages is to be used. It may be thought that the factors affecting choice of language are few and simple, but such is not the case. Often no satisfactory explanation can be given as to why speakers make the choices they do.

Sociolinguists have long been fascinated by the phenomenon of bilingualism and the complex language switching patterns that often accompany it. Many bilingual speakers are able to switch from language to language with ease, sometimes in mid-sentence. Attempts to define such patterns have not, however, met with much success. Research reports on the subject are cluttered with such obscure terms as 'diglossia', 'domain', 'code-switching' and 'ethnolinguistic vitality', but reduced to the level of a layman's understanding, the less than original conclusion would seem to be that choice of language is dictated primarily by the milieu in which the speaker finds himself.