Visiting Seblish: A Congruence Approach to Sebuano-English Code-Switching

INTRODUCTION
Code-switching is a term in linguistics referring to alternation between one or more languages, dialects, or language registers in the course of discourse between people who have more than one language in common. Sometimes the switch lasts only for a few sentences, or even for a single phrase. The switch is commonly made according to the subject of discourse, but may be for a variety of other reasons such as the mood of the speaker. It often occurs in bilingual communities or families. It also occurs within a particular language. It within a sentence tends to occur more often at points where the syntaxes of the two languages align.
Switching of code refers to alternating between one or more languages or dialects. It also occurs within a particular language. We use different forms of expression depending on the person we are speaking to and where we are speaking to that person. There are different degrees of formality and informality. Would you say that the idea of code-switching exists in your first language? If so, would you consider yourself to be a “code switcher”?
Of course, I live in a multilingual country so I do code-switch frequently. According to Lorente (2000), the Philippines is a highly multilingual country. McFarland (1994) indicates that there are 110 mutually unintelligible codes or languages known to exist in this country. Filipino is one of these languages. For Gonzales (1985), this language is understood and spoken by a vast majority of Filipinos. Aside from these 110 languages, English is used for medium of instruction and in the major domains of the Philippines. This is according to our professor in Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL theory), Prof. Paula K. Alinsangan. Therefore, at least half of the population of the Filipinos can speak and understand first, a native language (not Tagalog or Filipino), then, Filipino (which is Tagalog-based), and, English (Lorente 2000).
Furthermore, Lorente (2000) states that such a multilingual setting, it is not surprising to find that Filipinos code-switch. The variations are numerous that Filipino could potentially code-switch between two, maybe more, of the 110 Philippine languages (it could be between their native language and Tagalog; between their native language and English). The main interest of this paper is not the code switching between Tagalog and English (TAGLISH) but of Sebuano and English (SEBLISH). If Tagalog has the most number of speakers in the country, Sebuano has the most numbers of native speakers. This is according to our professor in Introduction to Philippine Linguistics, Dr. Luvizminda Dela Cruz.

OBJECTIVES AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PAPER
For Bautista (1980, 1991), Taglish is definitely not a new phenomenon in the Philippines as far as speakers and researchers are concerned. In like manner, Seblish is also not a new phenomenon as far as speakers are concerned. However, when it comes to studies and research, there are only less compared to Taglish. Thus, this paper is to fill in the research gap.
This paper is a replica of the study from Ateneo de Manila University by Beatriz P. Lorente entitled “Revisiting Taglish Na Naman: A Congruence Approach to Tagalog-English Code-Switching.” As such, this study uses the “congruence approach” posited by Sebba (1998) as the framework for classifying and attempting to explain Seblish code-switching strategies.
Thus, the objectives of this study are first to place Seblish into the mainstream of code-switching or at least people would acknowledge that Seblish does exist and is being used by a major population here in the Philippines. Second, it aims to answer these following questions:
1. Is there congruence between the structures of Tagalog and English?
2. Which structures of Tagalog and English are congruent?
3. Why do bilinguals code switch when they do?
4. What are being code-switched?
5. To what extent is the code-switching?
6. How competent are the speakers in Sebuano and English?

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The sentences to be used for the study are limited only to the data I have collected from the Gatabon-Polito Wedding Ceremony on August 13, 2005. The sentences to be considered are only the code-switching within a sentence. Then, to know why speakers code switch, my study is based on the congruence approach and is limited to its only three out of four elements, namely: Harmonization, Neutralization, and Compromise. Blocking, as the fourth element is not included here. Basically, it is to study the structure in terms of what are being code switched (nouns, adjectives and conjunctions), and to what extent is the code switching (word, phrase or clause level). This study also will prove that, like the Taglish speakers, Seblish speakers are proficient and competent on both Sebuano and English languages.

DATA GATHERING AND PROCEDURE
This data was gathered last August 13, 2005 in the afternoon during the Gatabon-Polito Nuptials. This was just a simple wedding where it was held in the home of the bride, invited guest were only 250 plus, and, most specially, almost all of the people speak the vernacular language, Sebuano.
I have recorded the message of the minister of the wedding, the testimonies of the elders, parents of the couple, and so with the groom’s and bride’s speeches. The minister is 47 years old, the elder’s age ranges from 76 to 80, the father of the groom is 71, and the father of the bride is 47 and the mother is 49. All of them have graduated from college, two of them are businessmen, and one of them is an engineer. All of them can be said to use the Seblish characteristic of middle class Iligan.
I have not transcribed 100% of all their speeches but have chosen only those parts where they code switch within sentences for this study. At the last page of this paper is where you can find the data I have collected and transcribed.

THE CONGRUENCE APPROACH TO SEBLISH
Sebba (1998) recognizes “congruence” is a basis for code switching and posits that it is “… not just a function of the syntax of the languages involved. The locus of congruence is the mind of the speaker, but community norms determine by and large, the behavior of individual speakers. Bilinguals “create” congruent categories by finding common ground between the languages concerned.”
Sebba believes that congruence did not only depend on the structure of language and that it is “… relative to the language pairs, speech communities and speakers involved.” To explain why bilinguals switch code when they do, the congruence approach identifies “… four possibilities with regard to switching between two categories… these [are] harmonization, neutralization, compromise and blocking.” For this study, however, I will only use the first three. According to the understanding of Lorente to the postulation of congruence approach, she says, “… code switching may be the process by which congruent categories are negotiated by two languages and what emerges from such convergence (or non-convergence, as the case may be) is a new mixed language that has rules and quite possibly, quirks of its own.”
I do believe that congruence approach is as effective to be used in my analysis on the Seblish sentences as it has been used by Lorente in her analysis of the Taglish sentences. This approach and framework seem to be promising to generate answers to the stated questions. Seblish is typologize and analyzed according to the three alternative outcomes:

Harmonization
Harmonization, Lorente defines, as the term used to refer to the state where full congruence is established between categories in the two languages. Sebba (1998) says, “(g)rammatical categories may be construed as congruent if they: have similar syntactic function, including possibly the same subcategorization frame… and… similar semantic properties…” Thus, for Lorente, the categories that may potentially be harmonized by code-switching speakers are not just the phrase structure or the so-called X-bar categories but many other categories of the grammar as well, including gender, plurality, animacy, tense, and aspect. I would also like to say that some parts of the sentences could also harmonize like the phrases and clauses.
In the data I have collected, this harmonization is obviously observed and is seen at work in code-switches between certain open set items (most obvious are nouns, adjectives and conjunctions) in Sebuano and English. Like what Lorente did to her study, I also have a convention that is similar to hers, all English elements are in regular type, all Sebuano elements in italics, and the structure under consideration is in bold face. The first sentence is the Seblish sentence data and the second sentence is a translation into pure English or pure Sebuano.
There are code-switches between nouns:

(1) … mura’g naa ‘ta ba atubangan sa Universal nga Wedding.
… mura’g naa ‘ta ba atubangan sa Universal nga Kasal.

(2) Matud pa niya sa iyang message namo….
Matud pa niya sa iyang mensahe namo….

(3) …madala ra pud niya sa Church ang iyang bana.
…madala ra pud niya sa Iglesia ang iyang bana.

(4) … og nagpasalamat ko sa mga prayers….
… og nagpasalamat ko sa mga pag-ampo….

(5) …basaha ninyo ang Matthew….
…basaha ninyo ang Mateo….

There are code-switches between adjectives:

(6) …atubangan sa Universal nga Wedding.
…atubangan sa Unibersal nga Wedding.

(7) Si brother Joey….
Si igsoong Joey….

(8) …pure gayud nga Hudiyo.
…putli gayud nga Hudiyo.

Predictably, there are code-switches between X-bar categories such as noun phrases made up of Adj + Noun:

(9) Dunay mga pipila diri ka mga Young People….
Dunay mga pipila diri ka mga Batan-ong Katawhan….

(10) sa mga full-timers….
to the full-timers….


There are code-switches between conjunctions:

(11) So, gusto ko….
Busa, gusto ko….

(12) So, mao ‘to ang akong….
Busa, mao ‘to ang akong….

There are also code-switches in the direct object of the verb:

(13) I hope… ato kining isipon…
I hope… we will think of this…

(14) Atong hangyuon ang mga Young People sa pagkanta….
Let us ask the Young People to sing….

There are also code-switches in the subject:

(15) …basaha ninyo ang Matthew…
…basaha ninyo ang Mateo….


(16) Likayan ninyo ang boy-and-girl relationship….
Likayan ninyo ang pagpanguyab [or laki-og-baye nga relasyon]….
The examples above show that one reason why Seblish speakers code switch is to Harmonize. It is to converge both to the rules in Sebuano and English languages. In this case, Seblish is congruent with the two languages and the structures that are congruent are the noun phrases, phrases and clauses within the sentence. Henceforth, the extension of the elements being code switched neither are not only up to word nor phrasal but also clausal level. The switches, therefore, happens between lexical categories within larger phrasal and clausal structures. From the data I have presented, I have observed that this element is called harmonization because it is fully congruent and converging to both of the languages. This means that when you translate the word or phrase or clause (a code-switch), you would still have a grammatically and semantically correct sentence. You may translate it to either of the languages, you would still get the same meaning correctly as the first one. I believe, that is the harmony in code-switching – neither of the two languages is affected or is distorted because all words within the sentence (although code-switched) still attain and achieve harmony, convergence, conformation and full agreement.

Neutralization
According to Sebba (1998), in neutralization, switching is permitted “… by creating a slot for a congruent category, where the alternative syntactic construction[s] would involve noncongruent categories. Thus, neutralization also includes nativization strategies which involve the introduction of a morpheme that serves to nativize a word.”
There are a good number of examples of this from the data, most of which use Sebuano verbal prefixes to inflect English verbs:
(1) …ministro nga mo-solemnize….
(2) Labaw na gayud kung na-fellowship na….
(3) … dili kamo mag-entertain…
(4) …gusto ko mo-intervene….
(5) … na-postpone….
(6) … ang akong i-share sa inyo….
(7) … gusto lang nako nga maka-raise….
In these set of examples, it is clear that the second reason why speakers code switch is Neutralization. In this case, I can only have, obviously, the extension of code switching in word level. However, this is no longer congruent to both the Sebuano and English languages. In this case, the product of neutralization is forming new words. These lexicon, nonetheless, are the reason of its noncongruency to the two languages. If we were to follow the congruence approach, according to Lorente, it would appear that these inflected verbs belong to neither Sebuano nor English, but would simply be indicative of the degree to which these two languages are harmonizing such that what emerges is a hybrid form, a combination of Sebuano and English. So to speak, the rising of these Seblish lexicons indicates that these belong to neither Sebuano nor English.

Compromise
“Compromise strategies… allow switching to take place in spite of the resulting structure lacking grammatically from the viewpoint of monolingual speakers of one of the two languages concerned” (Sebba 1998). At first, I thought I have no examples for this, but I soon realized that there are some.
When you already have a Sebuano marker for plurality ‘mga’, the noun that follows it should no longer have the inflection ‘s’ as an English marker for plurality. For example, *mga suitors is wrong for it should be mga suitor. It is because there will be a redundancy of markers, you have a Sebuano plus an English marker and both are for plurality. Obviously, because of redundancy, it is grammatically wrong to both Sebuano and English languages. Here are some examples of this:
(1) *sa mga elders
(2) *sa mga full-timers
(3) *sa mga prayers
Another relevant example of this is the redundant use of the marker for the tenses. I do not have examples from my data but frequently, I hear people saying ‘na-held’ when it should be ‘na-hold’ because ‘na’ can be a verb marker referring to past activity. Thus, it is wrong to use the past tense of the English word ‘held’ because ‘na’ already gives the marker for past. You cannot have two same markers when you only mean one for a particular element or substance in the sentence.
Another grammatically wrong sentence that I see in my data is the awkwardness of its result. When one is to code-switch, he/she must make sure that the product or the sentence is correct. For this example, I find it wrong because, I believe, it is awkward:

*Our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ dunay dako kaayo nga tinguha nga mag-minyo!

The mistake there is that there seems to be missing or lacking of something so that it would sound better. I refer to the missing word between ‘Christ’ and ‘dunay’. There must be a ‘kay’ in between those two words to mark a clear and correct predication. For the word ‘dunay’, I believe in this sentence, there should be an ‘a’ added before it to form ‘adunay’ which means ‘there is’ because when it is only ‘dunay’ it only means ‘there’. In addition, I believe that the beginning of the sentence has to have a Sebuano determiner to have a Sebuano predicate. It would have been better to have ‘Ang atong’ and then to be followed by ‘great God’. These alternatives could make the sentence sounds better. This is my transformation of it:

Ang atong great God and Savior, Jesus Christ kay adunay dako kaayo nga tinguha nga mag-minyo!

Obviously, in this case, compromise is really not congruent to either of the two languages. The presence of compromise in my data seems to say that the speakers that I have studied are not that competent and proficient enough in either Sebuano or English language. However, I still believe that they are competent and proficient speakers of both the Sebuano and English language because almost all the people I have observed when they code-switch still produces sentences with redundant markers, like the ‘mga suitors’. Even from my teachers, classmates and friends, they still say ‘mga chairs’. Anyway, code-switching as define earlier by Sebba, is a new mixed language that has its own rules and quite possibly, quirks of its own. The examples above prove this statement. Hence, like the Taglish, Seblish speakers also belong to the specific social class as highly competent in both Sebuano and English and can be considered as maximally fluent bilinguals. If others will say that they are not competent because of the presence of compromise, I would say that there are only a few of them and in fact, those errors are accepted by the speakers of Seblish. These newly formed words, therefore belong neither to Sebuano nor to English but to Seblish.

CONCLUSION
In this paper I have proven things. First, that Seblish does exist and is being used by Sebuano speakers in the present. Second, there is congruency in the Seblish code-switching when it comes to Harmonization, a partial congruence in Neutralization and a total noncongruent in compromise. Third, the elements or substances in the sentences that are being code-switched are nouns, adjectives, noun phrases, conjunctions, phrases and clauses. Fourth, it is to the extent of word, phrasal and clausal level that categories are code-switched. Finally, Seblish, like the Taglish, are competent and proficient enough in both the Sebuano and English languages although there may be few loopholes.
I am therefore that Seblish, like Taglish, is an emerging new hybrid language with that is neither of Sebuano nor of English. It has its own specific and particular rules, principles, grammar, quirks, oddities and eccentrics. This makes it unique. The hope is that educators become aware of such analyses so that they do not dismiss out-of-hand Sebuano-English code switching as an instance of random, irregular mixing of languages that result from imperfect control of either language. Code switching is bilingual performance on display and merits continuing study.