Memorias del XI Encuentro Nacional de Estudios

Memorias del XI Encuentro Nacional de Estudios en Lenguas (2010)
ISBN: 978-607-7698-32-6
Code-mixing in Text Messages: Communication Among University Students
Alma Lilia Xochitiotzi Zarate
Universidad del Valle de Tlaxcala
Abstract
Different strategies are developed when language is used in text messages (SMSs). One of
these strategies is the mixture of L1 and L2 elements into the text message content. This
investigation researched the phenomenon of code-mixing in text messages (Short
Message Service –SMS), by using the Computer Mediated Discourse Analysis (CMDA).
The results were focused on the domains of social behavior and grammatical structure of
the CMDA. These domains helped in analyzing and describing the social functions and
grammatical components that Mexican bilingual (Spanish/English) university students use
when mixing elements from Spanish and English in a SMS. The results are based on a
corpus of 42 text messages gathered in a private university from Mexico. The elements
found in the SMSs in English suggest that the bilingual participants reinforce the social
bonds with people close to them, in addition to the identification with the English
speaking group. Moreover, the results of this study illustrate the manners in which
students learn and use their L2 (English) in their everyday SMS communication.
Furthermore, these L2 elements show and support the idea that it is possible to type fewer
characters using structures (lexicon, phrases, sentences) from that language within the text
message.
1. Introduction
There has been research on the language use in text messages and code mixing (Annamalai,
1989; Ho, 2007; Li, 1998; Mashler, 1998; Muysken, 2000; Peters, Almekinders, Van Buren,
Roys and Wessels, 2003; Thrulow, 2003, Hutchby and Tanna, 2008; Thurlow and Poff, 2008,
among others); however, little research has been done on both topics at the same time (Lin 2005,
Deumert and Masinyana, 2008). For this reason, the purpose of this investigation was to study the
language used by bilinguals when text messaging, specifically when those bilinguals included L2
elements in the SMS. In this case, the Spanish-based text messages that included English codemixing were used.
For achieving this purpose, there were three research questions, which were: a) What motivates
bilingual university students to code-mix in their text messages?, b) What is the most common
language function (transactional or interactional) and grammatical structures (lexical, phrasal,
Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala –Facultad de Filosofía y Letras | 500
Memorias del XI Encuentro Nacional de Estudios en Lenguas (2010)
ISBN: 978-607-7698-32-6
and sentential) from the L2 that appear on the text messages?, c) Are these features of L2
(functions and grammatical structures) related to the motivation students have for code-mixing in
their text messages?
A study with similar characteristics to my study was done by Angel Lin (2005) in Hong Kong.
Lin‘s investigation took into consideration how her participants used language(s) when using
their cell phone, whether there were instances of code-switching or code-mixing and when those
cases were common. Participants in her study were university students, which is the population I
studied as well. The instrument this author used contained elements (questions related to the
receivers of the messages, the languages used when sending a text messages, and the motives
people had for sending text messages) that were important for my investigation.
Another study very similar to the one I did was done by Deumert and Masinyana (2008). They
worked with 22 bilingual (isiXhosa/English) South African participants, whose age was ranged
from 18 to 27. All of them owned a cell phone, and all of them were text messages users.
Deumert and Masinyana found that their participants, when mixing the two languages in one
SMS, the message contained abbreviations from English words and paralinguistic restitutions,
that is, their participants used different characters for showing emotions, shortening words
according to the way they sound and not their appropriate spelling or using common
abbreviations. Another feature reported by the researchers was that the mixed messages were
used for friendship work, practical arrangements and the exchange of information; while nonmixed English and isi-Xhosa text messages were intended to show love or emotions. In the case
of the latter, the SMS typed in this language also showed values and beliefs from their culture.
Finally, an additional study that was a frame for my investigation was performed by Peter, et al
(2003). This research not only focused on the content of the text messages, but it also considered
the motives people have for sending text messages, which was one of my main concerns, with the
difference that I considered the inclusion of L2 elements in the SMS. This study, along with Lin‘s
(2005) research, helped me in the creation of the instrument I used for my investigation.
Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala –Facultad de Filosofía y Letras | 501
Memorias del XI Encuentro Nacional de Estudios en Lenguas (2010)
ISBN: 978-607-7698-32-6
2. Methodology
The number of bilingual (Spanish/English) university students that participated in the data
collection was 124; however, from them only 108 were Mexicans, the rest were foreigners, and
their responses were not considered for the results and conclusions of this study.
The participants‘ contribution to the study was recorded with the help of an instrument, a
questionnaire, which contained specific questions about the mixture of languages and the
relationship participants had with their contacts with whom they code-mixed. In the same
instrument, the participants were asked to provide a text message in which they had mixed two
languages. This questionnaire was based on previous studies (Lin‘s study, 2005, Peters,
Almenkinders, Van Buren, Roy, and Wessels, 2003) and translated into Spanish for the 3 pilot
studies and final application.
For the analysis of the data, a corpus with 42 text messages was created. The analysis of the
content of the text-messages was focused on two main domains, which in terms of the Computer
Mediated Discourse Analysis (CMDA) cover the domain of structure, that is, the lexicon, phrase
and sentence. In case of these three structures, the parts of the speech (noun, pronoun, adjective,
adverb, verb, preposition, conjunction and interjection) were also considered for giving a more
accurate analysis. The other domain has to do with the language functions (interactional and
transactional) that appeared on text messages. These in the CMCA were analyzed through the
domain of social behavior.
In order to analyze the domain of social behavior, the model that Thurlow (2003) proposed for
analyzing social interactions was used. The orientations he suggested were: InformationalPractical orientation, Informational-Relational Orientation, Practical Arrangement Orientation,
Social Arrangement Orientation, Salutory Orientation, Friendship Maintenance Orientation,
Romantic Orientation, Sexual Orientation and Chain Messages.
3. Results
In the following lines, answers to the research questions are presented.
What motivates bilingual university students to code-mix in their text messages? According to the
results, the main motivation that bilingual university students had for code-mixing in SMSs was
the need they have for economizing the language in text messages (75.3%). This behavior was
Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala –Facultad de Filosofía y Letras | 502
Memorias del XI Encuentro Nacional de Estudios en Lenguas (2010)
ISBN: 978-607-7698-32-6
accompanied by the fact that the bilingual participants also code-mixed during oral speech as part
of their everyday lives. Thus, they reflected bilingualism not only by code-mixing during oral
speech, but also when communicating through text messages.
What is the most common language function (transactional or interactional) and
grammatical structures (lexical, phrasal, and sentential) from the L2 that appear on the text
messages? The most common language function was the interactional (81.5%). In this case,
served as a reinforcement of the existing bonds between the person who texted the message and
the receiver. According to the participants‘ responses, the most common L2 elements appearing
on the SMS were in the form of: daily greetings (76.9%), birthday greetings (53.8%), expressing
love (50.7%), and festive greetings(Valentine‟s day, Christmas, New Year‟s eve, 47.6%), see table
1. These responses were corroborated in the SMS samples they provided, which in terms of the
communicative orientations (Thurlow, 2003) are: friendship maintenance, salutory, romantic, and
social arrangement.
This language function appeared to be the most common because the receivers of the code-mixed
SMSs, who were bilinguals as well, had a close relationship with the producers of the messages,
in other words, they were close friends, boyfriends, girlfriends or family members. Examples of
these are the following:

Happy-b-day!!! Espero te la pases increíble

Hi como estas? Acuerdate de la cita. See you around

Hola amor! I miss you =*

I’m busy righ now, pero vamos al antro
(Note: The spelling error in the word ―righ‖ was taken literally from the sample provided
by one of the participants)
Option
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Number
people
50
Daily greetings
35
Birthday greeting
Festive greeting (valentine’s day, Christmas, new year’s 31
eve)
17
Thanking
23
Asking for favors
of Percentage
76.9%
53.8%
47.6%
26.5%
35.3%
Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala –Facultad de Filosofía y Letras | 503
Memorias del XI Encuentro Nacional de Estudios en Lenguas (2010)
ISBN: 978-607-7698-32-6
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.
n.
o.
p.
q.
16
Encouraging others to change their mood
12
Informing about papers and homework.
11
Informing about social activities
9
Making dates
2
Making new friends
17
Making invitations
33
Expressing love
20
Joking
6
Making recommendation or suggestions
2
Business deals
2
Gambling
13
Other
Table 1. Language Functions used when code-mixing in SMSs.
24.6%
18.4%
16.9%
13.8%
3.0%
26.1%
50.7%
30.7%
9.2%
3.0%
3.0%
20%
In the case of the most common grammatical structure, it was found that the preferred
grammatical structure was the lexicon (58.1%). Within that category, the most common part of
the speech was the noun (66.7%). Some examples are the following:

Vamos por unos drinks, va a haber una party en casa de Lalo

Oye ya te extrañamos! Hasta mis roomies! Ya apurate! Te quiero!

Bitchie a que hora pasas por mi?

Que fish dnd nos vemos see you
Lastly, in relation to question 3, are these features of L2 (functions and grammatical structures)
related to the motivation students have for code-mixing in their text messages?, it is possible to
say that that there was a close relationship between the grammatical structures and language
functions and the motives the participants had for code-mixing in text messages. This, as was
acknowledged in the response to the first question, the grammatical structures and language
functions used had to do with the space that the words would occupy. The use of lexicon and the
interactional function for communicating a message had to do with the use of fewer characters, in
addition to the maintenance or reinforcement of social relations. These were a friendship or a
romantic relationship that the participants shared with other people, who in this case were the
receivers of the messages. The maintenance was reflected when the producers of the SMSs
decided to use lexicon, phrases or sentences that suggested greetings or farewells, words of
Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala –Facultad de Filosofía y Letras | 504
Memorias del XI Encuentro Nacional de Estudios en Lenguas (2010)
ISBN: 978-607-7698-32-6
appreciation, words, phrases or sentences that indicated love, support and the coordination of
activities, such as meeting in a certain place or planning pastimes together.
4. Discussion
The results presented in this study display the manner in which young adults communicate
among each other. These people are making or following the same rules that English native
speakers when using text messages as a communication media. This is a result also found by
Deumert and Masinyana (2008). The decision on the part of the participants, who contributed in
my study, to follow the same rules as the English native population seems to imply that the
participants considered themselves part of a group that knows that language, and they showed
that knowledge by using elements that exhibited it.
This study contributed to our society, linguistics and language teaching by describing what is
happening in a community where technology not only improves people‘s lives, but also is
adapted according to people‘s personal needs. One of these adaptations is the use of technology
together with communication, in which the most important part is the negotiation of meanings. It
is in the negotiation of meaning where people use creativity in order to create or transfer
strategies they commonly use for other situations, such as making rules for text messaging in
which the inclusion of elements of other languages appears to be common.
5. References
Annamalai, E. (1989). The language factor in code mixing. Int‟l. J. Soc. Lang. 75, pp. 47-54.
Deumert, A., & Masinayan,S. O. (2008). Mobile language choices – The use of English and
isiXhosa in text messages (SMS). English World-Wide (29) 2, 117-147. Retrieved on
November 5th, 2008, from Communication and Mass Complete Database.
Ho, J.W. Y. (2007). Code-mixing: Linguistic form and socio-cultural meaning. The international
Journal of Language Society and Culture, 21. Retrieved September 4th, 2008, from The
International Journal of Language and Culture Database.
Hutchby, I., & Tanna, V. (2008). Aspects of sequential organization in text message exchange.
Retrieved on October 14th, 2008, from SAGE Publications Database.
Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala –Facultad de Filosofía y Letras | 505
Memorias del XI Encuentro Nacional de Estudios en Lenguas (2010)
ISBN: 978-607-7698-32-6
Kay, S., & Jones, B. (2003). American Inside Out. Student‟s book upper-intermediate. Thailand:
Macmillan
Li, D. (1998). The Plight of the Purist. In M. Pennington (Eds.). Language in Hong Kong at
Century‟s End (pp. 161-190). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Lin, A. M. Y. (2005). Gendered, Bilingual Communication Practices: Mobile text-messaging
among Hong Kong College Students. Fibreculture, Issue 6. Retrieved August26th, 2008,
from http://journal.fibreculture.org/issue6/issue6_lin.html#top
Maschler, Y. (1998) On the transition from code-switching to a mixed code. In P. Aurer (Eds.).
Code-switching in Conversation: Languages, Interaction and Identity (pp. 125-149)
London: Routledge.
Peters, O., Almenkinders, J. J., Van Buren, R. L., Roy, S., & Wessels, J. T. (2003).
Motives for SMS use. Conference Papers -International Communication Association. Retrieved
on December 4th, 2008, from Communication and Mass Media Complete Database.
Thurlow, C. (2003). Generation Txt? The sociolinguistics of young people‟s text messaging.
Retrieved on April 24th, 2008, from:
http://faculty.washington.edu/thurlow/papers/Thurlow(2003)-DAOL.pdf
Thurlow, C. & Poff, M. (2008). The language of text messaging. Retrieved on January,
18th,2009,from http://faculty.washington.edu/thurlow/papers/thurlow&poff(2009).pdf
La autora
Alma Lilia Xochitiotzi Zarate se desempeña como profesora de inglés y lingüística a nivel universitario.
Ha trabajado en la enseñanza de la lengua inglesa con niños, adolescentes y adultos jóvenes. Es licenciada
en Lenguas Modernas Aplicadas por la Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala y tiene maestría en Lingüística
Aplicada por la Universidad de las Américas, Puebla.
Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala –Facultad de Filosofía y Letras | 506