Definition:

1) Early definition by Valdes-Fallis (1978), says that code-switching is an interchangeability

of two codes done by transfer, borrowing or mixing of words
Valdes-Fallis, G. (1978). Code-switching among bilingual Mexican-American women:
Towards an understanding of sex-related language alternation. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language, 1978 (17), 65–72.
Fareed, M., Humayun, S., & Akhtar, H. (2016). English language teachers’ code-
switching in class: ESL learners’ perception. Journal of Education & Social Sciences,
4(1), 1-11. http://doi.org/10.20547/jess0411604101
2) Gumperz (1982) found that code-switching refers to the use of more than one code or
language in the course of a single speech event (p. 59)
Gumperz, J. (1982). Conversational code-switching. In Discourse Strategies (Studies in
Interactional Sociolinguistics, pp. 59-99). Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834.006
3) Gumperz (1982) also referred to code-switching as “the juxtaposition within the same
speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical systems or
subsystems” (p. 59).
Gumperz, J. (1982). Conversational code-switching. In Discourse Strategies (Studies in
Interactional Sociolinguistics, pp. 59-99). Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834.006
4) Bokamba (1989, p. 278) defines, the mixing of words, phrases and sentences from two
distinct languages or varieties of the same language within the same speech event
Bokamba, E. G. (1989). Are there syntactic constraints on code-mixing? World Englishes
8(3), 277-292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1989.tb00669.x
5) Cook (1991) defined the term code-switching as “going from one language to the other in
mid-speech when both speakers know the same two languages” (p. 174)
Cook, V. (2008). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (4th ed.). Hodder
Education. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203770511
6) Rodman and Fromkin (1998) defined code-switching as “the insertion of a word or phrase
of a language other than that being spoken into a single sentence, or the movement back
and forth between two languages or dialects
Rodman, R. & Fromkin, V. (1988). An introduction to language. Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
7) Codeswitching can be defined as “a phenomenon of switching from one language to
another in the same discourse” (Numan & Carter, 2001, p.275)
Numan, D. & Carter, D. (2001). Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages.
Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667206
8) Jamshidi and Navehebrahim (2013) opined on code-switching as the alternation of two
languages within a single discourse, sentence, or constituent
 Jamshidi, A., & Navehebrahim, M. (2013). Learners’ use of code-switching in the English
as a foreign language classroom. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 7(1),
186-190.

The usage of the first language (L1) in foreign language (L2) classrooms has been a
controversial issue since the 19th century (Hall & Cook, 2012). Since researchers noticed that the
phenomenon of code-switching often happened in classroom activities, various research on code-
switching has been carried out. Many definitions of code-switching have been established
throughout different studies. The earliest definition by Valdes-Fallis (1978) defined code-
switching as the interchangeability of two codes done by transfer, borrowing or mixing of words
(as cited in Fareed et al., 2016, p. 2). In other words, code-switching refers to the use of more than
one code or language within a single discourse, sentence, or constituent (Gumperz, 1982;
Jamshidi & Navehebrahim, 2013; Numan & Carter, 2001; Rodman & Fromkin,1988). In addition,
code-switching includes the shifting between varieties of the same language (Bokamba,1989, p.
278). Gumperz (1982) also contributed to code-switching as “the juxtaposition within the same
speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical systems or
subsystems” (p. 59). Another definition by Cook (2008), which added a further specific condition
when code-switching happens, stated code-switching as “going from one language to the other in
mid-speech when both speakers know the same two languages” (p. 174). In short, code-switching
occurs when a speaker alternates between two or more languages, or language varieties, in the
context of a single conversation or situation.

References
Bokamba, E. G. (1989). Are there syntactic constraints on code-mixing? World Englishes 8(3),
277-292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1989.tb00669.x
Cook, V. (2008). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (4th ed.). Hodder
Education. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203770511
Fareed, M., Humayun, S., & Akhtar, H. (2016). English language teachers’ code-switching in
class: ESL learners’ perception. Journal of Education & Social Sciences, 4(1), 1-11.
http://doi.org/10.20547/jess0411604101
Gumperz, J. (1982). Conversational code-switching. In Discourse Strategies (Studies in
Interactional Sociolinguistics, pp. 59-99). Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834.006
Hall, G., & Cook, G. (2012). Own-language use in language teaching and learning. Language
Teaching, 45(3), 271-308. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000067
Numan, D., & Carter, D. (2001). Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cambridge
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667206
Rodman, R. & Fromkin, V. (1988). An introduction to language. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Types:
1) Poplack (1980, p. 613-615) as “tag-switching,” “inter-sentential switching,” and “intra-
sentential switching.”
 Poplack, S. (1980). Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in English y termino en espanol:
toward a typology of code-switching. Linguistics 18, 581-616.
http://www.sociolinguistics.uottawa.ca/shanapoplack/pubs/articles/
Poplack1980Sometimes.pdf

2) Tag-switching is phrased by Romaine (1989, p. 112) as the insertion of words that can be
put anywhere within the boundary of a sentence or speech without violating the
grammatical rules of that sentence. Inter-sentential switching involves “a switch at a
clause or sentence boundary” (Romaine, 1989, p. 112) where, for example, the clause or
sentence might have been in L1 before changing to L2 (Yletyinen, 2004, p. 15). Intra-
sentential switching occurs when words or phrases from another language are inserted into
a sentence of the first language (Yletyinen, 2004, p. 15).
Romaine, S. (1989). Bilingualism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
Yletyinen, H. The Functions of Codeswitching in EFL Classroom Discourse. Unpublished
dissertation. University of Jyväskylä, 2004.
Intra-sentential switching takes place within the clause or sentence and is considered to be the most complex form of switching. It
seems most frequently found in the utterances, though it involves the greatest syntactic risk since the switching between languages
occurs within the clause or sentence boundaries. According to Poplack [6], intrasentential switching may be avoided by all but the
most fluent bilinguals. Intra-sentential switching occurs when words or phrases from another language are inserted into a sentence
of the first language (Yletyinen, 2004, p. 15). When two different languages are utilised in a sentence, proficiency in both
languages is a prerequisite for avoiding structural errors.
Intra-sentential switching takes place when words or phrases from another language are incorporated into a clause or a sentence of
the first language. It seems most frequently found in the utterances, though it involves the greatest syntactic risk. When two
different languages are utilised in a sentence, proficiency in both languages is a prerequisite for avoiding structural errors.

Considerable efforts have been made to establish a typical framework for code-switching. This
study adopts the three types of code-switching, which were identified by Poplack (1980), namely
tag-switching, inter-sentential switching, and intra-sentential switching (pp. 613-615).
The first type of code-switching is tag-switching, which is the insertion of a tag phrase from one
language into an utterance from another language. Since tags are syntactically free and can be
added practically anywhere in a sentence without violating any grammatical rules, “their insertion
in discourse has few, if any, ramifications for the remainder of the sentence” (Poplack, 1980,
p.589).
The second type of code-switching is inter-sentential switching. According to Romaine (1989),
inter-sentential switching occurs at a clause or sentence boundary, where each clause or sentence
is in a different language. Romaine also pointed out that as major parts of the discourse have to
conform to the rules of both languages, inter-sentential switching could be considered as requiring
greater fluency in both languages than tag-switching. (as cited in Jingxia, 2013). Later, Yletyinen
(2004) added that “this type of switching requires the least integration as codeswitching happens
between sentences” (p. 14).
The third type of code-switching is intra-sentential switching. It takes place when words or
phrases from another language are incorporated into a clause or a sentence of the first language.
Intra-sentential switching appears to be the most common code-switching type encountered in
utterances, despite the fact that it has the most syntactic danger. The reason for the risk is that to
avoid structural problems when two separate languages are used in a sentence, proficiency in both
languages is a prerequisite (Poplack, 1980; Yletyinen, 2004).
References
Poplack, S. (1980). Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in English y termino en espanol: toward a
typology of code-switching. Linguistics, 18, 581-616.
Azlan, N. M. N. & Narasumanb, S. (2013). The role of code-switching as a communicative tool in
an ESL teacher education classroom. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 458-467.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.115
Yletyinen, H. (2004). The functions of codeswitching in EFL classroom discourse [Unpublished
manuscript]. University of Jyväskylä.

The usage of the first language (L1) in foreign language (L2) classrooms has been a
controversial issue since the 19th century (Hall & Cook, 2012). Since researchers noticed that the
phenomenon of code-switching often happened in classroom activities, various research on code-
switching has been carried out. Many definitions of code-switching have been established
throughout different studies. The earliest definition by Valdes-Fallis (1978) defined code-
switching as the interchangeability of two codes done by transfer, borrowing or mixing of words
(as cited in Fareed et al., 2016, p. 2). In other words, code-switching refers to the use of more than
one code or language within a single discourse, sentence, or constituent (Gumperz, 1982;
Jamshidi & Navehebrahim, 2013; Numan & Carter, 2001; Rodman & Fromkin,1988). In addition,
code-switching includes the shifting between varieties of the same language (Bokamba,1989, p.
278). Gumperz (1982) also contributed to code-switching as “the juxtaposition within the same
speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical systems or
subsystems” (p. 59). Another definition by Cook (2008), which added a further specific condition
when code-switching happens, stated code-switching as “going from one language to the other in
mid-speech when both speakers know the same two languages” (p. 174). In short, code-switching
occurs when a speaker alternates between two or more languages, or language varieties, in the
context of a single conversation or situation.
Considerable efforts have been made to establish a typical framework for code-switching.
This study adopts the three types of code-switching, which were identified by Poplack (1980),
namely tag-switching, inter-sentential switching, and intra-sentential switching (pp. 613-615).
The first type of code-switching is tag-switching, which is the insertion of a tag phrase
from one language into an utterance from another language. Since tags are syntactically free and
can be added practically anywhere in a sentence without violating any grammatical rules, “their
insertion in discourse has few, if any, ramifications for the remainder of the sentence” (Poplack,
1980, p.589).
The second type of code-switching is inter-sentential switching. According to Romaine
(1989), inter-sentential switching occurs at a clause or sentence boundary, where each clause or
sentence is in a different language. Romaine also pointed out that as major parts of the discourse
have to conform to the rules of both languages, inter-sentential switching could be considered as
requiring greater fluency in both languages than tag-switching. (as cited in Jingxia, 2013). Later,
Yletyinen (2004) added that “this type of switching requires the least integration as codeswitching
happens between sentences” (p. 14).
 The third type of code-switching is intra-sentential switching. It takes place when words
or phrases from another language are incorporated into a clause or a sentence of the first
language. Intra-sentential switching appears to be the most common code-switching type
encountered in utterances, despite the fact that it has the most syntactic danger. The reason for the
risk is that to avoid structural problems when two separate languages are used in a sentence,
proficiency in both languages is a prerequisite (Poplack, 1980; Yletyinen, 2004).

References
Azlan, N. M. N. & Narasumanb, S. (2013). The role of code-switching as a communicative tool in
an ESL teacher education classroom. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 458-467.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.115
Bokamba, E. G. (1989). Are there syntactic constraints on code-mixing? World Englishes 8(3),
277-292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1989.tb00669.x
Cook, V. (2008). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (4th ed.). Hodder
Education. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203770511
Fareed, M., Humayun, S., & Akhtar, H. (2016). English language teachers’ code-switching in
class: ESL learners’ perception. Journal of Education & Social Sciences, 4(1), 1-11.
http://doi.org/10.20547/jess0411604101
Gumperz, J. (1982). Conversational code-switching. In Discourse Strategies (Studies in
Interactional Sociolinguistics, pp. 59-99). Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834.006
Hall, G., & Cook, G. (2012). Own-language use in language teaching and learning. Language
Teaching, 45(3), 271-308. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000067
Ma, J. (2014). Students’ attitudes towards code-switching in the bilingual classroom of
accounting English. Journal of Education and Practice, 5, 177-188.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234635994.pdf
Numan, D., & Carter, D. (2001). Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cambridge
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667206
Poplack, S. (1980). Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in English y termino en espanol: toward a
typology of code-switching. Linguistics, 18, 581-616.
Rodman, R. & Fromkin, V. (1988). An introduction to language. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Yletyinen, H. (2004). The functions of codeswitching in EFL classroom discourse [Unpublished
manuscript]. University of Jyväskylä.
The research mentioned above gives a theoretical
All the mentioned research above lays a solid foundation for this study. Although many aspects
related to teacher code-switching have been discovered, Ma (2014) mentioned participants’
proficiency level as a considerable limitation. As participants in his study had low English
proficiency, Ma proposed that the results may be different if the subject have high English
proficiency. However, little research had a clear view of participants’ language proficiency as
they were chosen randomly from various majors. Therefore, this study aims to figure out the
attitude of English Faculty (EF) teachers and learners towards code-switching as well as explore
whether there are any differences between participants with different English proficiency.
Does this research try to answer the following question?
1) To what extent do EF teachers perceive teachers’ code-switching?
2) To what extent do EF learners perceive teachers’ code-switching?
3) Is there any difference in attitude between learners with different English proficiency?
All the above findings lay a solid foundation for this paper, but the findings or conclusions are
based on some evidence drawn from some empirical research conducted in western or some Latin
American countries. Little was conducted in China
The limitations in this study might be that most of the participants’ English level is average and they have
low English proficiency and limited time for this course. Otherwise, the conclusion may be quite different,
so it needs further study. Moreover, in this study, there are still a few students who take the opposite
position since they think their English is good and their attitudes vary a lot. Next time we should choose
some participants who have high English proficiency as the study subjects. If possible, we should take a
diachronic study to see how students’ attitudes toward code-switching change with the development of
their English within a certain period.

Many definitions of code-switching have been established throughout different studies.

The earlier definition by Valdes-Fallis (1978) defined code-switching as “the
interchangeability of two codes done by transfer, borrowing or mixing of words” (as cited
in Fareed et al., 2016, p. 2). Though Valdes-Fallis had pointed out the core factor of code-
switching, his definition hadn’t set a limitation for it. Therefore, a later definition seemed
to supplement Valdes-Fallis’ by adding that code-switching refers to the use of more than
one code or language within “a single discourse, sentence, constituent” (Jamshidi &
Navehebrahim, 2013), “a single speech event” (Gumperz, 1982), “the same discourse”
(Numan & Carter, 2001). Gumperz (1982) even contributed that code-switching is not
only the alternate of phrases or sentences but also the “exchange of passages of speech
belonging to two different grammatical systems or subsystems” (p. 59). Subsequently,
Lightbown (2001) noticed that code-switching also includes the shifting between varieties
of the same language (p. 598). Another definition by Cook (2008), which is a
straightforward definition, stated code-switching as “going from one language to the other
in mid-speech when both speakers know the same two languages” (p. 174).

In short, code-switching occurs when a speaker alternates phrases, sentences or passages

of two or more languages, or language varieties, in the context of a single conversation or
situation.

According to Lightbown (2001), code-

switching is “the systematic alternating
use of two languages or language
varieties within a single conversation
or utterance” (p.598)
Lightbown, P.M. (2001). L2 instruction: Time to teach. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 598-99.

English which is widely considered an international language and spoken by innumerable people has
become the primary communication tool for many purposes.
Throughout the past decades, English has been considered
For many reasons, English, which is commonly regarded as an international language and
spoken by a large number of people, has become the dominant communication tool.
Over the past few decades, English has continuously developed and proved its position as an international language. The number
of countries that recognize English as a second language is constantly increasing, and so is the number of English speakers.
English currently plays an extremely important role in communication, linking aspects such as science, traffic, economy, and
politics. As a result, most of the world's population today is multilingual rather than monolingual.
English has established and proven its place as an international language during the last few decades. The number of nations that
recognize English as a second language, as well as the number of English speakers, is steadily expanding. English now plays a
critical role in communication, connecting fields such as science, transportation, economics, and politics. As a result, rather than
being monolingual, the majority of the world's population is now multilingual.
In that context of integration, countries are constantly improving the criteria and requirements for foreign languages for their
people. In the Vietnam context, teaching and learning English are also taken under significant consideration. Teachers and
lecturers in Vietnam are placed with a heavy burden of helping learners develop language skills as native-like as possible and
conveying knowledge successfully simultaneously. Since both educators and learners know the same two languages English and
Vietnamese. The use of code-switching is sometimes utilized by educators to convey lessons.
Countries are continually upgrading the criteria and standards for foreign languages for their citizens in this set of integration. In
the context of Vietnam, teaching and learning English are also taken into account. Teachers and lecturers in Vietnam are faced
with the difficult task of assisting students in developing native-like language abilities while also effectively imparting content.
Because both educators and students are bilingual (English and Vietnamese), they can communicate effectively. Educators employ
code-switching to communicate their messages.
There are different opinions about teachers’ use of code-switching. Some believe that code-switching has many beneficial
functions in classroom management or emphasises messages so that educators employ code-switching is understandable. On the
contrary, some argued that a teacher’s code-switching would create adverse effects on learning English as learners would depend
on the teacher’s code-switching to comprehend information.
There are differing viewpoints on the usage of code-switching by teachers. Some argue that code-switching has a variety of useful
roles in the classroom, such as emphasizing messages so that instructors may use code-switching effectively. Some, on the other
hand, claimed that a teacher's code-switching would hurt learning English since students would rely on the teacher's code-
switching to understand information.

The rationale of the study

Over the past few decades, English has continuously developed and proved its position as
an international language. The number of nations that recognize English as a second
language, as well as the number of English speakers, is steadily expanding. English now
plays a critical role in international communication, connecting different aspects such as
business, aviation, science and technology. As a result, rather than being monolingual, the
majority of the world's population today is bilingual or multilingual.
In this set of integration, countries are continually upgrading the criteria and requirements
for foreign languages for their citizens. In the context of Vietnam, teaching and learning
English are also taken into account. Teachers and lecturers in Vietnam are placed with a
heavy burden of assisting students in developing native-like language abilities while also
effectively imparting knowledge. Since both educators and learners know the same two
languages English and Vietnamese. Educators sometimes utilize code-switching, the act of
shifting from English to Vietnamese or vice versa, to convey messages.
There are different viewpoints on the usage of code-switching by teachers. Some argue
that code-switching has a variety of beneficial functions such as classroom management or
explaining messages so that educators employ code-switching is understandable. Some, on
the other hand, claimed that a teacher's code-switching would create adverse effects on
learning English as learners would depend on the teacher’s code-switching to comprehend
information. Apart from the benefits and drawbacks of code-switching, whether or not
teachers employ it is determined by their beliefs and attitudes toward code-switching.
Furthermore, students have their perspectives on teachers’ code-switching, which can help
teachers in determining the best course of action. Therefore, the attitude of educators and
learners towards teacher code-switching is a matter of concern.
Aims of the study
In terms of the rationale of the study and the research gap found in earlier research, our
team have three main objectives as follows:
- To examine EF teachers’ perspectives towards teachers’ code-switching
- To examine EF students’ perspectives towards teachers’ code-switching
- To investigate how students at different levels of English proficiency perceive
teachers’ code-switching
Based on the findings, EF lecturers can make appropriate adjustments to the use of code-
switching in the classroom to obtain the optimum learning effect.
Outline of the paper
The research consists of five chapters. Chapter one, Introduction, provides an overview of
the topic and the reason for choosing it. Next, chapter two, Literature review, reviews the
theoretical framework developed by previous researchers related to the topic. Then,
chapter three, Methodology, presents the method used in the study including research
design and research instruments. Following that, chapter four, Results and Discussion,
reports the findings after analysing data and discusses them. Finally, chapter five,
Conclusion, highlights important points during the study, points out its limitation and
gives recommendations for future studies.

The perception of lecturers and English-major learners towards teachers’ code-switching.

The usage of the first language (L1) in the second language (L2) classrooms has been a
controversial issue since the 19th century (Hall & Cook, 2012). Since researchers notice that
code-switching often happens in classroom activities, preliminary studies have been carried out
by Ahmad and Jusoff (2009), Jingxia (2010), Gumperz (1982), and Nordin et al. (2013) to deeply
explore this phenomenon. This literature review reviews the key concepts outlined in the study,
namely the definition of code-switching, types of code-switching, reasons for code-switching,
functions of code-switching, and attitudes towards code-switching.

1. Definition of code-switching

Many definitions of code-switching have been established through different studies. An early
definition by Valdes-Fallis (1978) stated that code-switching is “the interchangeability of two
codes done by transfer, borrowing or mixing of words” (as cited in Fareed et al., 2016, p. 2).
Though Valdes-Fallis has pointed out the core factor of code-switching- the interchangeability of
two codes, his definition did not have a clear condition where code-switching takes place.
Therefore, later definitions seemed to supplement Valdes-Fallis’ by adding that code-switching
refers to the use of more than one code or language within ” (Jamshidi & Navehebrahim, 2013),
“a single speech event” (Gumperz, 1982), “the same discourse” (Numan & Carter, 2001).
Gumperz (1982) even contributed that code-switching is not only the alternation of phrases or
sentences but also the “exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical
systems or subsystems” (p. 59). Subsequently, Lightbown (2001) noticed that code-switching also
includes the shifting between varieties of the same language (p. 598). Another definition by Cook
(2008) stated code-switching as “going from one language to the other in mid-speech when both
speakers know the same two languages” (p. 174).
In short, adapting the theories developed by Gumperz (1982) and Lightbown (2001), code-
switching occurs when a speaker alternates phrases, sentences or passages of two or more
languages, or language varieties, in the context of a single conversation or situation.

2. Types of code-switching
Considerable efforts have been made to establish a typical framework for code-switching. Our
study adopts the most completed classification of code-switching, which were identified by
Poplack (1980), namely tag-switching, inter-sentential switching, and intra-sentential switching
(pp. 613-615).
The first type of code-switching is tag-switching, which is the insertion of a tag phrase from one
language into an utterance from another language. Since tags are syntactically free and can be
added practically anywhere in a sentence without violating any grammatical rules, “their insertion
in discourse has few, if any, ramifications for the remainder of the sentence” (Poplack, 1980,
p.589).
The second type of code-switching is inter-sentential switching. According to Romaine (1989),
inter-sentential switching occurs at a clause or sentence boundary, where each clause or sentence
is in a different language. Romaine also pointed out that as major parts of the discourse have to
conform to the rules of both languages, inter-sentential switching could be considered as requiring
greater fluency in both languages than tag-switching (as cited in Jingxia, 2010). Despite its higher
language proficency requirement, Yletyinen (2004) added later that “this type of switching
requires the least integration as code-switching happens between sentences'' (p. 14).
The third type of code-switching is intra-sentential switching. It takes place when words or
phrases from another language are incorporated into a clause or a sentence of the first language.
Intra-sentential switching appears to be the most common code-switching type encountered in
utterances, despite the fact that it has the most syntactic danger. The reason for the risk is that in
order to avoid structural problems when two separate languages are used in a sentence,
proficiency in both languages is a prerequisite (Poplack, 1980; Yletyinen, 2004).

All the mentioned research above lays a solid foundation for this study. Although many aspects
related to teacher’s code-switching have been studied, Ma (2014) mentioned students’
proficiency level as a considerable limitation. As participants in his study had low English
proficiency, Ma proposed that the results might be different if the subject has high English
proficiency. However, little research had a clear indication of students’ language proficiency as
they were chosen randomly from various majors. The level of students’ language proficiency may
also affect the way their lecture Therefore, this study aims to examine the attitude of The Faculty
of English Linguistics and Literature (EF) teachers and learners towards code-switching as well as
explore how students at different levels of English proficiency perceive teachers’ code-switching.
To address the issue, this research tries to answer these following questions:
1) To what extent do English-major teachers perceive teachers’ code-switching?
2) To what extent do English-major learners perceive teachers’ code-switching?
3) How do students at different levels of English proficiency perceive teachers’ code-
switching?

1. Rationale of the study

Over the past few decades, English has continuously developed and proved its position as
an international language. In the setting of integration, the majority of the world's
population today is bilingual rather than monolingual (Nordin et al., 2013, p. 478). As a
result, teachers and lecturers are placed with a heavy burden of assisting students in
developing native-like language abilities while also effectively imparting knowledge
(Nordin et al., 2013, p. 479). Since both educators and learners know the same two
languages (English and the first language), it is unavoidable that educators sometimes shift
from English to first language or vice versa to convey complicated or important messages.
This phenomenon is code-switching and it has a variety of effects depending on the forms
it takes.
A significant amount of research has investigated the functions and effects of code-
switching which stated clearly the pros and cons of teachers’ code-switching. Due to this,
different viewpoints on the usage of code-switching by teachers have emerged. Some
argue that code-switching has a variety of functions such as classroom management (Brice
et al., 1998) or explaining challenging information (Nurhamidah et al., 2018; Uys & Van
Dulm, 2011) so it is reasonable for educators to employ code-switching during classes.
Some, on the other hand, claimed that teachers' code-switching would create adverse
effects on learning English as learners would depend on teachers' code-switching to
comprehend information (Nordin et al., 2013, p. 479).
Besides the benefits and drawbacks of code-switching, teachers’ perceptions and learners’
perceptions of code-switching are also carefully examined. Although several research has
been conducted, little attention was paid to learners’ language proficiency. Therefore, this
study tends to explore teachers’ and learners’ perceptions of teachers’ code-switching in
the context of Vietnam and examine whether there are different perceptions among
learners with different English levels.

To address the issue, this research tries to answer these following questions:
1) To what extent do EF teachers perceive teachers’ code-switching?
2) To what extent do EF learners perceive teachers’ code-switching?
3) How do students at different levels of English proficiency perceive teachers’
code-switching?
1. What are the perspectives of English-major lecturers on teachers’ code-switching?
2. What are the perspectives of English-major students on teachers’ code-switching?
3. How do students at different levels of English proficiency perceive teachers’ code-
switching?

1. Aims of the study

In terms of the rationale of the study and the research gap found in earlier research, our
team have three main objectives as follows:
 To examine EF teachers’ perspectives towards teachers’ code-switching
 To examine EF students’ perspectives towards teachers’ code-switching
 To investigate how students at different levels of English proficiency perceive
teachers’ code-switching
Lý do chọn đề tài
Trong vài thập kỷ qua, tiếng Anh đã không ngừng phát triển và chứng minh vị thế của
mình là một ngôn ngữ quốc tế. Trong bối cảnh hội nhập hiện nay, phần lớn dân số thế giới
đều sử dụng song ngữ thay vì đơn ngữ (Nordin và cộng sự, 2013, trang 478). Chính vì lẽ
đó các giáo viên và giảng viên tiếng Anh hiện nay phải gánh vác trách nhiệm nặng nề
trong việc vừa hỗ trợ sinh viên phát triển khả năng ngôn ngữ như người bản xứ vừa phải
truyền đạt kiến thức một cách hiệu quả (Nordin và cộng sự, 2013, trang 479). Bởi vì cả
giáo viên lẫn học sinh đều cùng biết những ngôn ngữ giống nhau (tiếng Anh và tiếng mẹ
đẻ) do đó không thể tránh khỏi hiện tượng các giáo viên đôi khi đổi từ tiếng Anh sang
tiếng mẹ đẻ (L1) hoặc ngược lại nhằm truyền tải những thông tin phức tạp hoặc quan
trọng. Hiện tượng này được gọi là chuyển mã ngôn ngữ (code-switching) và nó có nhiều
tác động khác nhau tùy thuộc vào hình thức.
Nhiều nghiên cứu đã được tiến hành nhằm tìm hiểu các chức năng cũng như những tác
động của hiện tượng chuyển mã mang lại. Đồng thời, các bài nghiên cứu cũng nêu rõ
những ưu và nhược điểm của việc giáo viên chuyển mã ngôn ngữ trong lúc giảng dạy. Từ
đó, các quan điểm khác nhau về việc giáo viên chuyển mã ngôn ngữ đã được đưa ra. Một
số người thì cho rằng việc chuyển mã ngôn ngữ có nhiều chức năng có lợi khác nhau, ví
dụ như quản lý lớp học (Brice và cộng sự, 1998) hoặc giải thích kiến thức khó tiếp thu
(Nurhamidah và cộng sự, 2018; Uys & Van Dulm, 2011), vì thế việc giáo viên sử dụng
chuyển mã trong các lớp học là thích hợp. Mặt khác, một số người lại cho rằng việc
chuyển mã của giáo viên sẽ tạo ra những ảnh hưởng tiêu cực đến quá trình học tiếng Anh
vì người học sẽ dần dần phụ thuộc vào việc chuyển mã của giáo viên để nắm bắt thông tin
(Nordin và cộng sự, 2013, trang 479).
Bên cạnh những lợi ích và hạn chế của chuyển mã ngôn ngữ, một số bài nghiên cứu cũng
tìm hiều về quan điểm của các giáo viên và của người học về nó. Tuy nhiên, dù cho nhiều
nghiên cứu đã được tiến hành, nhưng có rất ít bài chú ý đến trình độ ngôn ngữ của người
học. Ma (2014) đưa ra nhận xét rằng trình độ ngôn ngữ của sinh viên là một hạn chế đáng
kể trong bài nghiên cứu của ông và đề xuất các nhà nghiên cứu sau này nên tiến hành
nghiên cứu trên những sinh viên có trình độ ngôn ngữ cao hơn. Do đó, bài nghiên cứu của
chúng tôi có mong muốn tìm hiểu về suy nghĩ của giáo viên và của người học về việc
chuyển mã của giáo viên trong bối cảnh Việt Nam và tìm hiểu xem giữa những suy nghĩ
này có thay đổi khi trình độ của người học khác nhau hay không.
Mục tiêu nghiên cứu
• Tìm hiểu quan điểm của giáo viên đối với việc chuyển đổi mã của giáo viên
Tìm hiểu quan điểm của sinh viên đối với việc chuyển đổi mã của giáo viên
• Tìm hiểu xem học sinh với trình độ tiếng Anh khác nhau cảm nhận cách chuyển mã của
giáo viên như thế nào
Tổng quan đề tài nghiên cứu
Việc sử dụng L1 trong các lớp học ngoại ngữ là một vấn đề gây tranh cãi kể từ thế kỷ 19
(Hall & Cook, 2012). Từ khi các nhà nghiên cứu nhận thấy rằng việc chuyển mã ngôn ngữ
thường xuyên xảy ra trong lớp học thì nhiều công trình đã được tiến hành bởi nhiều nhà
nghiên cứu tiêu biểu như Ahmad và Jusoff (2009), Jingxia (2010), Gumperz (1982) và
Nordin và cộng sự (2013), mục đích là để tìm hiểu hiện tượng này một cách toàn vẹn.
Tổng quan đề tài nghiên cứu này xem xét các vấn đề chính được nêu lên trong nghiên cứu
về chuyển mã ngôn ngữ, đó là định nghĩa về chuyển mã ngôn ngữ, các loại chuyển mã
ngôn ngữ, vai trò của chuyển mã và thái độ của giáo viên và học sinh đối với chuyển
mã.
Định nghĩa chuyển mã ngôn ngữ
Nhiều định nghĩa về chuyển mạch mã ngôn ngữ đã được đặt ra trong các bài nghiên cứu
khác nhau. Định nghĩa của Valdes-Fallis (1978) đã nói rằng chuyển mã là “khả năng hoán
đổi cho nhau của hai ngôn được thực hiện bằng cách chuyển, mượn hoặc trộn các từ” (như
được trích dẫn trong Fareed và cộng sự, 2016, trang 2). Mặc dù Valdes-Fallis đã chỉ ra yếu
tố cốt lõi của chuyển mã, khả năng hoán đổi cho nhau của hai ngôn ngữ, định nghĩa của
ông chưa giải thích rõ ràng về điều kiện khi chuyển mã xảy ra. Do đó, các định nghĩa sau
này dường như bổ sung cho Valdes-Fallis bằng cách bổ sung rằng chuyển mã đề cập đến
việc sử dụng nhiều hơn một ngôn ngữ trong "một diễn ngôn, câu, thành phần" (Jamshidi
& Navehebrahim, 2013), "một bài phát biểu duy nhất”(Gumperz, 1982),“ cùng một diễn
ngôn ”(Numan & Carter, 2001). Gumperz (1982) thậm chí còn đóng góp rằng chuyển mã
không chỉ là sự thay thế của các cụm từ hoặc câu mà còn là “sự trao đổi các đoạn lời nói
thuộc hai hệ thống ngữ pháp hoặc hệ thống phụ khác nhau” (trang 59). Sau đó, Lightbown
(2001) nhận thấy rằng việc chuyển mã cũng bao gồm việc chuyển đổi giữa các biến thể
của cùng một ngôn ngữ (trang 598). Một định nghĩa khác của Cook (2008) đã nói rằng
chuyển đổi mã là “chuyển từ ngôn ngữ này sang ngôn ngữ khác ở giữa bài phát biểu khi
cả hai người nói đều biết hai ngôn ngữ giống nhau” (trang 174).
Nói tóm lại, với các lý thuyết được phát triển bởi Gumperz (1982) và Lightbown (2001),
chuyển mã ngôn ngữ xảy ra khi một người nói dùng xen kẽ các cụm từ, câu hoặc đoạn của
hai hoặc nhiều ngôn ngữ, hoặc các biến thể của cùng một ngôn ngữ, trong cùng một cuộc
trò chuyện hoặc tình huống.
Các loại chuyển mã ngôn ngữ
Các nhà nghiêng cứu đã nổ lực tìm ra nhiều cách phân loại khác nhau cho hiện tượng
chuyển mã ngôn ngữ. Nhưng chúng tôi quyết định lựa chọn cách phân loại toàn vẹn, đầy
đủ nhất của Poplack (1980). Ba loại chuyển mã ngôn ngữ là Tag-switching, Inter-
sentential switching và Intra-sentential switching (Poplack, 1980, trang 613-615).
Loại chuyển đổi mã đầu tiên là Tag-switching, đây là hiện tượng người nói chèn một cụm
từ của ngôn ngữ này vào một câu nói của ngôn ngữ khác. Vì các cụm từ thường tự do về
mặt cú pháp và có thể được thêm vào ở bất kỳ vị trí nào trong câu mà không vi phạm bất
kỳ quy tắc ngữ pháp nào, nên “phần chèn thêm trong diễn ngôn ảnh hưởng ngữ pháp rất ít
hoặc hầu như không đến cho phần còn lại của câu” (Poplack, 1980, tr.589).
Loại chuyển mạch mã thứ hai là Inter-sentential switching. Theo Romaine (1989), Inter-
sentential switching xảy ra trong giới hạn một mệnh đề hoặc một câu, trong đó mỗi mệnh
đề hoặc câu là một ngôn ngữ khác nhau. Romaine cũng chỉ ra rằng vì các thành phần
chính phải tuân theo quy tắc của cả hai ngôn ngữ, việc chuyển mã như thế có xu hướng
yêu cầu trình độ thông thạo cao hơn trong cả hai ngôn ngữ so với Tag-switching (như trích
dẫn trong Jingxia, 2010). Mặc dù yêu cầu về trình độ ngôn ngữ cao hơn, Yletyinen (2004)
đã bổ sung sau đó rằng “kiểu chuyển đổi này đòi hỏi ít sự tích hợp nhất vì chuyển mã xảy
ra giữa các câu” (trang 14).
Loại chuyển mạch mã thứ ba Intra-sentential switching. Nó diễn ra khi các từ hoặc cụm từ
từ một ngôn ngữ này được kết hợp vào một mệnh đề hoặc một câu của ngôn ngữ khác.
Intra-sentential switching đươc xem là kiểu chuyển mã phổ biến nhất dù cho cách chuyển
mã này có rủi ro về mặt ngữ pháp lớn nhất. Lý do là để tránh các vấn đề về cấu trúc khi
hai ngôn ngữ riêng biệt được sử dụng trong một câu, điều kiện tiên quyết là phải thành
thạo cả hai ngôn ngữ (Poplack, 1980; Yletyinen, 2004).
Gap
Tất cả các nghiên cứu được đề cập ở trên đã đặt nền tảng vững chắc cho nghiên cứu của
chúng tôi. Mặc dù nhiều khía cạnh liên quan đến chuyển mã ngôn ngữ của giáo viên đã
được nghiên cứu, Ma (2014) đã xem trình độ ngôn ngữ của học viên là một hạn chế. Bởi
vì những người tham gia nghiên cứu của ông có trình độ tiếng Anh thấp, Ma đề xuất rằng
kết quả có thể sẽ khác nếu đối tượng có trình độ tiếng Anh cao hơn. Hơn nữa, mức độ
thông thạo ngôn ngữ của sinh viên cũng có thể ảnh hưởng đến cách giảng viên cảm nhận
về việc chuyển mã ngôn ngữ của họ. Trên thực tế, ít nghiên cứu đã chỉ ra rõ ràng về trình
độ ngôn ngữ của sinh viên vì họ được chọn ngẫu nhiên từ các chuyên ngành khác nhau.
Do đó, nghiên cứu này nhằm mục đích tìm hiểu thái độ của giáo viên và người học của
khoa Ngữ văn Anh đối với việc chuyển mã ngôn ngữ cũng như tìm hiểu xem các sinh viên
có các mức độ thông thạo tiếng Anh có sũy nghĩ khác nhau về việc chuyển mã của giáo
viên không.
Để tìm hiểu vấn đề trên, bài nghiên cứu của chúng tôi sẽ hướng tới trả lời những câu hỏi
sau:
1) Quan điểm của giảng viên khoa Ngữ văn Anh về hiện tượng chuyển mã
ngôn ngữ như thế nào?
2) Quan điểm của sinh viên khoa Ngữ văn Anh về hiện tượng chuyển mã ngôn
ngữ như thế nào?
3) Các sinh viên với trình độ tiếng Anh khác nhau có quan điểm về chuyển mã
ngôn ngữ như thế nào?
Bố cục đề tài
Nghiên cứu của chúng tôi bao gồm năm chương: Giới thiệu, Tổng quan đề tài nghiên cứu,
Phương pháp nghiên cứu, Kết quả và thảo luận, và Kết luận. Chương đầu tiên cung cấp
một cái nhìn tổng quan về chủ đề và lý do chọn đề tài. Tiếp theo, chương hai xem xét lại
khung lý thuyết được phát triển bởi các nhà nghiên cứu trước đây liên quan đến chủ đề.
Sau đó, chương ba trình bày phương pháp được sử dụng trong bài nghiên cứu bao gồm
thiết kế nghiên cứu và công cụ nghiên cứu. Kế tiếp, chương bốn báo cáo những phát hiện
sau khi phân tích dữ liệu và thảo luận về chúng. Cuối cùng, chương năm nêu ra những
điểm quan trọng trong quá trình nghiên cứu cũng như chỉ ra những hạn chế của bài và đưa
ra các khuyến nghị cho các nghiên cứu trong tương lai.
Limitation
Bởi vì nhân lực và thời gian hạn chế nên chúng tôi phải giảm thiểu số lượng người tham
gia qua Google Biểu mẫu cũng như số người tham gia phỏng vấn trong bài nghiên cứu.
Điều này có thể dẫn đến việc dữ liệu thu thập bị hạn chế. Dữ liệu có thể sẽ mang tính bao
quát, không đi quá sâu về một khía cạnh của vấn đề, ít ý kiến đột phá và khác biệt. Bên
cạnh đó, nghiên cứu chỉ được tiến hành ở trường Đại học Khoa học Xã hội và Nhân văn,
Đại học Quốc gia Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh cho nên kết quả thu thập được sẽ không thể
khái quát thành kết quả của tất cả sinh viên và giảng viên.
In our study, because of time and budget constraints, we have to reduce the number of
participants and interviewees to a minimum. This may lead to limited data collection. The
information will probably be too general, not in-depth on the issue, and have less
divergent opinions and breakthroughs. In addition, the research was conducted only at the
Ho Chi Minh City University of Social Sciences and Humanities, so the findings are not
qualified to be generalized to the results of all students and lecturers.
Due to time and budget constraints, we had to keep both the number of participants and interviews in our study to a minimal. This can result in less
data being collected. The information will likely be superficial, lacking, less upsetting, and including a range of perspectives. Additionally, because
the study was limited to the University of Social Sciences and Humanities, it is impossible to extrapolate the findings to the performance of other
staff and students.

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Definition of code-switching

The usage of the first language in second language classrooms has been a
controversial issue since the 19th century (Hall & Cook, 2012). Many definitions of code-
switching have been established. Gumperz (1982) stated that code switching is the use of
more than one code or language in the course of a single speech event and “the
juxtaposition within the same speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two
different grammatical systems or subsystems” (p.59). Subsequently, Lightbown (2001)
noticed that code-switching also includes the shifting between varieties of the same
language (p. 598).

In general, code-switching occurs when a speaker alternates phrases, sentences, or

passages of two or more languages in a single conversation or situation. In the classroom
context, it is considered code-switching as long as there is a change in language when
teaching and communicating, including both accidental and intentional code-switching.

2.2 Roles of code-switching

Borg (2014) suggests “…the first language...may play a supportive role in the
second language learning process”.

Firstly, code-switching helps explain new vocabulary and improve students’

vocabulary. When the students still cannot recognize new vocabulary after being
explained in the second language, the only option is to use code-switching. Furthermore,
Cook (2008) found that owing to code-switching, students’ vocabulary capacity can be
enhanced and restored. Code-switching even helps students study more motivationally and
translating makes them feel relieved (Nordin et al., 2013).

Secondly, teachers' code-switching can serve as a grammar teaching strategy

(Nurhamidah et al., 2018). According to Norrish (1997), teachers usually code-switch
when the level of English used is beyond the student’s ability or when the teachers have
exhausted the means to adjust their speech (as cited in Ahmad & Jusoff, 2009, p. 149).
Therefore, since grammar usually comprises specialized or advanced terminologies, code-
switching helps students avoid confusion and misunderstanding.

Thirdly, code-switching benefits teachers in comprehension check (Ahmad &

Jusoff, 2009; Nordin et al., 2012). By explaining the lesson in L1 when students cannot
comprehend L2 instructions, it ensures the students’ comprehension (Nurhamidah et al.,
2018). They can also gain a better comprehension of the new language by leveraging their
previous first language (L1) learning experience (Cole, 1998).

Furthermore, code-switching helps to give procedure and direction

(Nurhamidah et al., 2018). Teachers believe that students might misunderstand and
make some misconceptions when they prepare their papers (Brice et al., 1998). Lesson
handouts are likely to contain some complex terms. Hence, teachers have the intention of
providing students with a clear instructions in both L1 and L2 (Nurhamidah et al., 2018).

Finally, teachers emphasize important points by using code - switching to make the
teaching and learning process more approachable and noticeable. Macaro (1997) said,
“important messages can be reinforced or emphasized when they are transmitted in the
L1” (p. 68). Moreover, teachers favor repeating some quotes that need to be remembered
in class with the aim to gain students’ attention.

2.3 Perceptions towards code-switching

2.3.1 Teachers’ perceptions towards teachers’ code-switching

Code-switching is widely used by teachers for various reasons. Therefore, the

majority of teachers hold a positive attitude towards their code-switching as they agree
that it facilitates learning and provides a better grasp of the instructional topic (Chen &
Ting, 2011). It even tackled pedagogical as well as social issues (Obaidullah, 2016). Thus,
code-switching is becoming an increasingly important teaching tool in higher education
environments (Yao, 2011).

However, teachers are still apprehensive and hesitant about using code-switching in
the classroom due to institutional and ideological background restrictions (Azlan &
Narasuman, 2013; Asker & Jones, 2013). They believe it should only serve specific
purposes and consider it undesirable. For teachers, students' understanding is a dominant
influence on teachers' code-switching, and it is used as a last resort when other techniques
fail to convey the intended message (Obaidullah, 2016). This simultaneously revealed the
teachers’ restriction on code-switching as they consider the reliance on it will deprive the
students of better exposure to the second language.

2.3.2 Students’ perceptions towards teachers’ code-switching

Whether code-switching receives positive or negative attitudes from students

remains controversial.

Regarding the emotions of students towards teachers’ code-switching, studies have

shown that teachers' code-switching helps motivate students’ learning by allowing them to
comprehend their input. This, hence, reduces language exhaustion, allowing students to
focus and participate more successfully in classroom activities. (Nordin, 2013; Obaidullah,
2016). It also implied that psychological support from teachers' code-switching leads to
relaxation during the learning process, making students eager to learn more English
(Ahmad & Jusoff, 2009).

It is also shown that students have an open-minded perception of teachers' code-

switching during the learning process. Nordin et al. (2013) found that a majority of the
students considered teachers’ code-switching the best way to learn English better. They
preferred code-switching for specific purposes, such as giving instructions, feedback,
checking comprehension, and explaining new words (Nordin et al.,2013; Borg, 2014;
Jingxia, 2010).

Notwithstanding its advantages, some students displayed negative perceptions of

teachers' code-switching. Nordin et al. (2013) found that 17.7% of students felt code-
switching was not helpful for learning English. This attitude was based on Cook's (2008)
belief that learning a second language independently of the first language is beneficial for
L2 learning. Consequently, some students want limitations on code-switching, believing it
should be used for specific purposes only.

Overall, despite some negative attitudes towards teachers' code- switching, it seems
that the opposite side of it far outweighs its disadvantages (Jingxia, 2010; Nordin et al.,
2013). With the great benefits of code-switching, it should be motivated and considered as
a must in ESL classroom (Nordin et al., 2013, p. 485; Nurhamidah et al., 2018).

Although many aspects related to teachers’ code-switching have been studied, little
research had a clear indication of students’ language proficiency. Ma (2014) highlighted
this as a limitation in understanding teachers’ and students’ attitudes. Therefore, this study
aims to examine the attitudes of The Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature teachers
and students towards code-switching and explore how students perceive it at different
levels of English proficiency.

2.4 Conceptual framework

Figure 1. Conceptual framework