The Influence of Code Mixing on Speaking Skills Among Indonesian College Students

INTRODUCTION

With more than 700 languages spoken across its 17,000 islands, Indonesia can boast its linguistic diversity and be ranked among the most linguistically diverse countries on the face of the earth. In this respect, 88% of Indonesians speak Bahasa Indonesia as the national language but concurrently use regional dialects, with growing interest in learning English for higher education and professional development.

Language is a medium for expression and sharing of ideas, feelings, and knowledge. Interaction among diversities of language within Indonesian higher education has developed a socio-linguistic phenomenon. Therefore, two varieties of language practices have been recorded as follows:

1. Code switching: 'Switching' at sentence boundaries.

2. Code mixing: The mixing of different linguistic varieties within one sentence.

More and more Indonesian higher education uses, besides Bahasa Indonesia, English as an additional language of instruction. Students commonly engage with both linguistic practices too, so the local languages, Bahasa Indonesia and English are put in a complicated position regarding language contact in the educational setting.

Demographically, issues that can have more substantial implications for Indonesian students' language use include:

-geographic location, urban versus rural settings

-socio-economic status

-prior experiences of English education

-family linguistic background

-discipline-specific needs

According to Hamers and Blanc (1989), code mixing represents a process where linguistic elements from different codes are incorporated into another, creating a unique form of communication. This phenomenon is particularly evident in Indonesian higher education, where students navigate between their native language(s), Bahasa Indonesia, and English in their academic pursuits.

Code mixing is one kind of phenomenon that lately happens widely in the multilingual community, precisely in educational settings. Most Indonesian students need to manage more than one language. That is, Indonesian students switch between Indonesian and English as alternatives during interaction. It happens in every higher education since many Indonesian students have English as their second language. Cases where students use code mixing include in ordinary conversations, class presentations, academic debates, in personal conversations with friends, hence this is an important part of the students' communication.

The reasons for code mixing, as Hoffman (1991) suggests, include:

- Carrying on conversations about specific topics

- Quoting others

- Showing solidarity

- Using exclamatory phrases

- Providing clarification

- Explaining concepts to aid listener understanding

- Maintaining a sense of belonging

While code mixing has its benefits in facilitating communication and building the students' confidence in speaking, it also has its problems. The advantages are that there is an increased expression of oneself and increased ease in participating in discussions and learning processes. However, allowing too much or inappropriate code mixing may make learners fail to learn proper English for formal speech communication. This might lead to incorrect grammatical expressions in communicating in English and limit the students from achieving full proficiency in the English language.

This study aims to explore the effects of code mixing on the speaking skills of Indonesian college students, considering both its advantages and disadvantages. By examining how code mixing influences students' ability to communicate in English, the research will shed light on its role in language learning and its implications for language pedagogy in multilingual contexts. Understanding these dynamics can help educators develop more effective strategies for teaching English, while also supporting students' bilingual or multilingual identities. The study will focus on the specific contexts in which code mixing occurs, the attitudes of students and teachers toward this practice, and its impact on students' overall language development

LITERATURE REVIEW

The objective of this mini-research is to examine the phenomenon of code mixing and its influence on speaking skills among Indonesian college students. Code mixing is the use of two or more languages in a conversation without any limitation of language boundaries. In Indonesia, particularly among learners of English as a Foreign Language, they are likely to come across code mixing since both lingua franca, and the local language, Bahasa, are present. This section summarizes the state-of-the-art on code mixing, resistance to it, the need to have it in language acquisition, and the impact on speaking as related to education.

Code mixing

Definition and context

Code mixing is a process in which speakers combine linguistic elements from different codes in one discourse (Hamers & Blanc, 1989). This is particularly true for the case of higher education in Indonesia, where students switch between several languages while pursuing their degree.

in Indonesian academic discourse, there are two major kinds of code mixing :

1. Intrasentential mixing:

   - Example: Saya sedang working on tugas akhir.

   - Example: Professor minta kita submit essay before minggu depan.

2. Intersentential mixing:

   - Example: Materinya sangat sulit. But I will try my best to understand it.

   - Example: I don't understand this concept. Bisa tolong jelaskan lagi?

More recent research suggests that code mixing may actually help the language acquisition process by allowing learners to express themselves more meaningfully when vocabulary is limited (Sert, 2005). On the other hand, Gardner-Chloros, 2009 asserts that too much reliance on such a strategy may hinder general English language competence in aspects such as grammar and vocabulary development.

Code Mixing and Language Learning

Learning Code-mixing would help in facilitating language acquisition. It would help a learner in finding a means of expression when one's target language vocabulary or grammatical structures are lacking. This enables learners to overcome communication barriers and build confidence in situations where they haven't yet mastered English. Sert (2005) notes that code mixing can function as an avoidance strategy for learners while managing linguistic gaps and maintaining communication flow.

However, depending too much on code mixing will prevent the fully acquisition of English. As noted by Gardner-Chloros (2009), code-switchers often have lower grammar and vocabulary intake of English, which negatively affects their speed of language fluency. This could become a problem in more formal situations that require the use of pure English.

Code Mixing and Speaking Skills

Speaking skill is an important part of language learning, and English fluency is one of the most difficult parts for EFL students. Code mixing influences students' confidence and accuracy in speaking both positively and negatively.

Code mixing would give students confidence in speaking in English; whenever the vocabulary item was not known, they would fill the gap with Indonesian terms. This flexibility reduces anxiety, one of the most widespread obstacles to fluency in a foreign language. According to MacIntyre and Gardner, 1994, code mixing reduces anxiety, probably contributing to "more willingness to engage in conversations and discussions in the classroom and thus gradual improvement in language proficiency ".

However, reliance on code mixing may limit learners' chances to practice speaking in pure English only. According to Brown (2006), learners who frequently make use of more than one variety will find it hard to achieve absolute language competence. This can be reflected later on in grammatical accuracy and fluency if those students engage themselves in a formal engagement, such as presenting something or undertaking an exam, wherein code mixing will become a hindrance instead of a help.

Impact on Speaking Skills

Speaking is a significant aspect of learning a language. Code mixing affects students' speaking in various ways.

1. Positive Impact:

- More confident in talking.

- Less apprehension due to language production

Take part more in academic debates.

2. Potential Issues:

- Extremely limited practice of pure English speaking

- Interference with formal language acquisition

- Decreased motivation to learn more English vocabulary

Code-mixing in Indonesian Higher Education Setting

Recent studies conducted by Kurniasih (2018) and Ahmad et al. (2020) show that Indonesian universities also widely present code mixing within an English-medium instructional setting. Although this approach might enhance students' understanding of challenging concepts, it could simultaneously hinder their capacity to fully develop competencies in English-medium instruction within formal academic environments.

METHODOLOGY

The study employs a qualitative methodology and a small sample size (n=2) for a number of specific reasons.

1. The investigative nature of the research demands detailed and elaborate answers.

2. A focus on personal experiences and perspectives is consistent with a smaller sample size.

3. The resource and time constraints of a mini-research project

4. Capacity for detailed case analysis of specific cases.

Limitations of the Sample Size:

- Reduced generalizability to broader populations

- Potential for sampling bias

- Limited representation of diverse student populations

- Increased influence of individual participant characteristics

Participants

Given the mini-research scope, the study shall focus on a small manageable sample:

Students: those attending English classes. Sampling will be purposive; it targets those who are willing to participate, and most importantly, those who use both Indonesian and English in daily interaction.

Data Collection Methods

Interview 

Semi-structured interviews will be carried out with students and teachers. The interview will be geared towards the following aspects:

1. Language Use Patterns:

 -How often do they mix languages, 

Indonesian and English in conversations, especially at academic settings?

- How does code mixing help or hinder their ability to express themselves in English?

-Do they think that code mixing affects their confidence or proficiency in speaking English?

2. Identity and Language:

   In what manner does your capacity to utilize several languages influence your perception of identity?

In what ways does code mixing represent your cultural identity?

- How do you identify yourself as a bilingual speaker?

3. Learning Environment:

   - How do your professors respond to code mixing in class discussions?

   - How does language choice impact your academic success?

  - To what degree does the academic environment influence your language choices?

4. Impact on Speaking Skills:

   - In what ways does code mixing facilitate or impede your ability to express ideas in the English language?

   - What effect does code mixing have on confidence and proficiency? 

   - How has your English speaking ability evolved through code mixing?

DISCUSSION AND RESULT

This section presents the findings from interviews conducted with two participants concerning code mixing and its effects on their speaking abilities in colleges in Indonesia. The reflective face of both positive and negative impacts of code mixing, as experienced in real-life academic and social contexts, is reflected in their responses.

 Both respondents stated that code mixing impacts their ability to speak in English, but with somewhat different results of this process. Participant 1 felt that, although code mixing 'facilitates' the speaking skill, it can hinder complete proficiency because it creates a reliance on the inclusion of the mother tongue. This remark corroborates the existing literature that states code mixing is a facilitator and at the same time can be a barrier to language development.

Participant 2 demonstrated improvements in pronunciation over time; however, lexical development was still restricted due to code-mixing. As indicated above, this finding corroborates Sert's (2005) assertion about code-mixing being both a facilitating and a constraining resource depending upon how the exploitation of it goes.

 2. Advantages and Disadvantages of Code Mixing

The respondents identified several key benefits and drawbacks:

Benefits:

-it allows complex thoughts to be expressed.

- Advanced Pronunciation Practice

- Reduced communication gaps

- Increased engagement in argumentation at school

Disadvantages:

- Possible obstruction to fluency in English

- Less motivated toward the development of pure English skills.

- Poor vocabulary development Possible inhibitions in the development of formal languages

3. Fluency and Grammar Accuracy Changes

Participants' responses showed the influence on their language development:

Participant 1 reported improved fluency in both languages.

Participant 2 reported a minor change in their English proficiency.

Results have shown mixed effects on grammatical accuracy.

Vocabulary development was not too consistent.

These findings are in line with Gardner-Chloros's research on the complex relationship between code mixing and language accuracy.

 4. Educational Environment and Implementation

Neither of these informants reported any direct input from the teacher on their code-mixing behavior, although there was some peripheral encouragement. The language of choice was heavily influenced in the educational setting, with peer interaction playing the key role

Limitations and Potential Biases

Numerous constraints must be acknowledged when analyzing these results:

1. Participant biases:

Self-reporting bias on language proficiency

-Social desirability bias in describing language practices

- Recall bias in describing past experiences

2. Methodological Limitations:

- Small sample size

- Single-point-in-time data collection

- No record of classroom observations - Geographical bounds

Recommendations for Educators

Based on our findings, we recommend these following strategies:

1. Systematic Language Alternation:

- Designate specific times for English-only communication

-Develop overt specification of what constitutes appropriate code mixing.

- Employ progressive methods of language immersion.

2. Assessment Strategies

-Design assessment frameworks that make room for strategic code mixing.

-Provide feedback related to both communication effectiveness and linguistic accuracy

- Devise ways of self-assessment.

3. Classroom Management:

-Crary one linguistic region or historical epoch. - Strategically implement peer learning groups. - Implement targeted activities of vocabulary building

Future Research Directions

Several promising areas for future research emerge:

1. Longitudinal studies

- Observe the development of code-mixing patterns over the academic years.

Long-term impact of training on English proficiency

Observe differences in the performance of studies.

2. Comparative Research:

- Explores the mixing code within academically different disciplines

- Compare urban and rural university settings

- Analyze regional differences

3. Pedagogical Studies:

- Evaluate efficacy of teaching method - Analyze how technology has impacted code-mixing. - Research assessment techniques

Conclusion

In conclusion this research illustrates that code mixing plays a complex role in Indonesian college students' English language learning experiences. While it facilitates complex idea expression, improves pronunciation, and builds speaking confidence, it may also affect vocabulary development, grammatical accuracy, and overall fluency in English.

The results indicated that code mixing was very important to participants both academically and socially, though caution should be used with its application, along with balancing this against full immersion in English. Code-mixing practices-both within and outside of the classroom-need to be planned by teachers if maximum language learning is to occur.

The present study provides a foundation for further investigation into code mixing's effects on Indonesian language learning. In the future, research with bigger and more diverse samples may provide deeper insights into specific aspects of language learning and help develop more effective teaching strategies in multilingual educational contexts.

REFERENCES

Ahmad, S., Rahman, A., & Wahab, N. A. (2020). Code Mixing Practices in Indonesian Higher Education: Patterns and Pedagogical Implications. Journal of Multilingual Education Research, 10(2), 45-63.

Brown, H. D. (2006). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (5th ed.). Pearson Education.

Gardner-Chloros, P. (2009). Code-switching. Cambridge University Press.

Hamers, J. F., & Blanc, M. H. (1989). Bilinguality and Bilingualism. Cambridge University Press.

Hoffman, C. (1991). An Introduction to Bilingualism. Longman.

Kurniasih, Y. (2018). Code Mixing and Academic Performance: A Study of Indonesian University Students. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(6), 741-753.

MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1994). The Subtle Effects of Language Anxiety on Cognitive Processing in the Second Language. Language Learning, 44(2), 283-305.

Muysken, P. (2000). Bilingual Speech: A Typology of Code-mixing. Cambridge University Press.

Rachman, A., & Sulistyo, G. H. (2019). Code-Mixing Practices in Indonesian EFL Classrooms: Teachers' Attitudes and Instructional Practices. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 369-378.

Sert, O. (2005). The Functions of Code Switching in ELT Classrooms. The Internet TESL Journal, 11(8).

Siregar, F. (2010). The Language Attitudes of Students of English Literature, University of Sumatra Utara Toward American English, British English and Englishes in Southeast Asia, and Their Various Contexts of Use in Indonesia. English Today, 26(2), 32-45.

Susilowati, M., & Hendryanti, R. (2021). The Impact of Code-Mixing on English Language Acquisition: A Case Study of Indonesian University Students. TESOL International Journal, 16(1), 78-92.

Wijaya, K. F., & Pusparini, R. (2019). Code-Mixing as a Bilingual Communication Strategy in Indonesian Higher Education. Asian Journal of Language and Communication, 2(2), 45-62.