CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.0. Introduction

Communication via the use of language, therefore, is neither a recent phenomenon nor

can it ever be an over flogged debate. Communication is the activity of conveying or

passing information. It often requires a sender, a message, and an intended, or in some

cases unintended audience or “ recipient “ although the recipient need not be present or

be aware of the sender’s intent to communicate at the time of communication; thus,

communication can occur as long distance, in time and space. But then communication

often requires that the communicating parties have a common understanding of the

subject matter” (source lost). Longe and Ofuani (1996:1) capture the concept of

communication succinctly stressing particular words in the extract below:

The word COMMUNICATION derives from the verb COMMUNICATE which

means to SHARE. Therefore to communicate means to share and when people are in
communication, they are sharing what we have in common with others and to decide
to have something in common with other people presupposes some level of
cooperation and understanding. What we share, we cannot each have as our own
possession. Hence when people are in communication, they are associating,
cooperating or jointly in organization. The organization possesses a structure which
we can describe as a set of rules.

1
Language is therefore a method of human communication, either spoken or written in a

structured conventional manner (or in some cases unstructured and unconventional

manner) with the intention of passing across a message. It can be buttressed here that to

achieve this linguistic necessity, man explores different channels of communication at his

disposal to achieve this rather undying and unending linguistic need. This proposition is

not unconnected to the fact that man has continued to use different media of

communication to expand the frontiers of his insatiable needs for sharing and gathering

information. This linguistic need is further shaped by the linguistic environment and the

linguistic conventions that may or may not be strictly adhered to.

Also, language, whether written or spoken, is expected to convey some sort of

information. To put it more aptly, meaning is the primacy of language use. Thus the

“words, grammatical constructions, intonation patterns conspire to realize this in the

fullest, richest, subtlest way” (Goddard, 1997:11).

The importance of language has been captured by many scholars across the globe.

Meyers affirms that “the most tangible indication of our thinking power is language –our

spoken, written, or signed words and the ways we combine them as we think and

communicate. Humans have long and proudly proclaimed that language sets us above all

other animals”. But the primacy of language use is to communicate. Nevertheless,

language does not occur in a vacuum. Halliday (1978:28) corroborates this view when he

remarks that:

2
 Language comes to life only when functioning in some environment. We do not
experience language in isolation-if we did, we would not recognize it as language-
but always in relation to a scenario some background of persons and actions from
which the things which are said derive their meaning.

1.1 Background to the Study

In the Nigerian context, many languages exist and are used for different communication

purposes, and are often designated foreign language (e.g. English, French, and German

etc.) or indigenous languages (e.g. Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba among several others). Some

scholars even classify them into indigenous, exogenous and indi-exogenous language like

Pidgin.

The implication of this linguistic pluralism is that terms like bilingualism, borrowing,

code switching and code mixing have recurrent linguistic features over time; and as such,

speakers of a given language will have a wide variety to make deliberate or conscious

linguistic choices given the different linguistic codes at their disposal; however, the

language aptitude and attitude of the language users among other linguistic parameters

often come to bear. Nevertheless, this linguistic reality which is a clear manifestation of

languages in contact has its pros and cons.

One of the advantages of having multiple languages for communication is that it gives the

user the ability to make different linguistic choices at a particular point in time. This of

3
course is dependent on the context or on the domain of social interaction. This table

below validates this claim:

Domain Addressee Setting Topic

Family Parent Home Planning a family party

Friendship Friend Beach How to play beach tennis

Religion Priest Church Choosing the Sunday

liturgy

Education Teacher School Solving a Maths problem

Employment Employer Workplace Applying for promotion

Accordingly, since language, according to McGregor (2009:156), is a social

phenomenon, the domain of its use is not only suggestive of the different places it is used

but also of the interactive context in which it occurs. He is of the view that “these include

lexical and grammatical choices that express appropriate experiential meaning, that is,

meaning concerned with the construal of the world of experience. It is expedient to refer

to Fisherman’s (1972:22) model as illustrated above is apt here in order to see what

domain actually refers to.

From the table above, it is obvious that language domains are different, and as the table

shows, it is foremost before the likes of addressee, setting and the topic of discourse.

Presumably, apart from these three, it is the domain that determines the variety or code in

4
use, and further determines whether or not the other sociolinguistic factors like code

switching and code mixing can even occur in the first place. Thus from the domain, it is

easy to suggest the variety (or varieties) of language that is likely to be used in the

communication process. This research examines the use of languages in different social

settings specifically Pidgin, English, Hausa and one’s Mother Tongue. Also, the term

setting, context, situation and domain are used to refer to the same thing in the context of

this research.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

The fact that there are many languages available for use is both a blessing and a curse.

With reference to the latter, the use of many languages by an individual could affect

his/her linguistic competence in the many languages at his or disposal. On the other hand,

the tendency to use one language in an inappropriate domain or situation or context is

likely another issue. For instance, Pidgin can be used in formal environment where

Standard English is supposed to be used or Standard British English can be used where a

Mother is considered most appropriate. The point is that linguistic pluralism can also be

disadvantageous to the issue of competence in a language or several languages as the case

may be.

1.3. Research Questions

i. Do you speak Pidgin?

5
ii. Do you speak English or Standard British English?

iii. Do you have speak a Mother Tongue that is different from Hausa?

iv. Are there instances or situations where you use one of these languages in a situation

where you are not supposed to use it like speaking Hausa in a school setting?

1.4. Aims and Objectives of this Study

Aim

The aim of this study is to examine the use of language in different social setting: a case

of the 100L English/Social Studies students in the Department of English, Kaduna State

College of Education, Gidan Waya, Kafanchan, Kaduna.

Objectives

The objectives of this study are carefully spelt out thus:

To find out if the student of 100LEnglish/Social Studies students in the Department of

English, Kaduna State College of Education, Gidan Waya, Kafanchan, Kaduna speak

Pidgin

To show that the student of 100L English/Social Studies students in the Department of

English, Kaduna State College of Education, Gidan Waya, Kafanchan, Kaduna speak the

English language

6
To prove that the student of 100L English/Social Studies students in the Department of

English, Kaduna State College of Education, Gidan Waya, Kafanchan, Kaduna speak

Hausa apart from their Mother Tongue (MT)

To investigate whether or not there are instances or situations where a student (s) use one

of these languages in a situation where he/she is not supposed to like speaking Hausa in a

school setting instead of English or Standard British English

1.5. Significance of the Study

The significances of this study are presented in the individual paragraphs that follow:

The students of language as well as others interested in language will find this study

relevant in that it shows how language contact and language variation can have either a

negative or positive effect on the user of the language particularly in a multilingual

setting.

Similarly, this research will show how language is used in different social settings and

possibly why. This research subscribes to the view that it is the domain that sets the mood

for the context of language use. In summary, however, Crystal (2008:155) remarks thus:

In SOCIOLINGUISTICS domain refers to a group of institutionalized social

situations typically constrained by a common set of behavioural rules e.g. the
domain of the family is the house, of religion is the church etc. the notion is seen
as of particular importance in the analysis of MULTILINGUAL settings
involving several participants, where it is used to relate variations in the
individuals’ choice and topic of language to broaden socio-cultural norms and
expectations of interactions.

7
Also, to show future researchers interested in the analysis of language variation and

contact how to go about it, particularly in terms of how to collect and analyze data, but

most importantly to explore other theoretical models or approaches apart from the ones

adopted here in order to further not just the frontiers of knowledge.

Furthermore, curriculum planners and linguistic experts are to take the necessary steps on

how to advise teachers and people who teach language on how to enlighten their students

on how to use language in different social settings and also stress the need on how to

keep the languages apart. It will therefore be expedient to organize workshops and

seminars meant strictly for this purpose regularly.

1.6. Scope and Delimitation of the Study

This study is specifically delimitated to the of 100L English/Social Studies students in the

Department of English, Kaduna State College of Education, GidanWaya, Kafanchan,

Kaduna. About fifty (50) students are going to be used for this exercise.

8
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction

A number of linguistic phenomena characterize the speech behaviour of many bilinguals.

In many speech communities, bilinguals sometimes produce discourse which in the same

conversational turn or in consecutive turns, include morphemes from two or more of the

varieties in their linguistic repertoire. This sociolinguistic situation is what sociolinguists

refer to as code mixing and code switching used to refer to interchangeable use of codes

in the speech pattern of bilinguals mostly in bilingual or multilingual settings. But there

are times when words are borrowed from a more dominant language to be used or

employed in a less dominant language because of language contact. This chapter

examines concepts like, language contact, borrowing, code switching and code mixing.

2.1 Language Contact

The linguistic phenomenon of language contact is no doubt responsible for terms like

borrowing, code switching and code mixing. As two or more languages come in contact,

this linguistic phenomenon becomes inevitable. The languages may have some

similarities or differences or in some extreme cases have nothing in common. Wardhaugh

(2010:386) describes this linguistic phenomenon thus:

9
On very rarely, if ever, does a language find itself spoken in a completely isolated

environment, with no contact at all between its speakers and the speakers of other

languages. Most speakers of any given language have day-to-day dealings with the

speakers of at least one or two other languages, and possibly with a larger part of human

existence, the situation was probably for everybody to routinely learn and use two, three,

even four different languages. This is still what we find today over most of the planet: it

is that between 70 percent and 80 percent of the earth’s population are bilingual or

multilingual. Millars (1996:388) further describes it thus:

Language contact is such a common phenomenon that it would be tempting

merely to illustrate its diversity in relation to lexis, phonology and syntax. It is
more informative, however, to look at the phenomenon from a range of view
points. It is important, for instance, to note the social relationship between the two
languages in contact. Generally, we distinguish between superstratum, substratum
and adstratum contact situations.
He further goes ahead to give the differences among the strata mentioned above below:

In superstratum, the language of a socially powerful element in a society

influences the language of less power groupings…adstratal influence is where two
(or more) languages come into contact, but there is no dominant community…
substratal influence involves influence upon a dominant one (often one which is
losing native speakers). Influences of this type are very common. (388) .
Schmitt (2002:158) is of the view that there are many social factors that correlate with

language variation and they include the likes of geographical and social mobility, gender

and power, age, audience, identity and social remarks that “in LINGUISTICS, a term

which describes any regionally or socially definable human groupm which can be

identified by the use of a shared spoken LANGUAGE or language VARIETY. It can

10
vary in size from a tiny cluster of speakers to whole nations or supranational groups (such

as Russian-using speech community in Asia”

Regardless of all these distinctions, Thomas (2001)-quoted by Miller (1996:389)-explains

why some contact have mere profound effect than others by addressing contact

phenomenon in terms of levels of impact in a four-part scale:

1. Casual contact (borrowers need not be fluent in the source language, and/or few

bilinguals among borrowing-language speakers): only non-basic vocabulary

borrowed.

Lexicon only content words- most often nouns, but also verbs, adjectives and

adverbs

Structure none.

2. Slightly more intense contact (borrowers must be reasonably fluent bilinguals, but

they are probably a minority among borrowing-language speakers): function

words and slight structural borrowing. Lexicon function words (e.g. conjunctions

and adverbial particles like ‘then’) as well as content words; still non basic

vocabulary…

3. More intense contact (more bilinguals, attitudes and other social factors favoring

borrowing) moderate structural borrowing.Lexicon more function words

borrowed; basic vocabulary-the kinds of words that tend to be present in all

11
 languages-may also be borrowed at this stage, including such closed- class items

as pronouns and numerals as well as nouns and verbs and adjectives; derivational

affixes may be borrowed too (e.g. able/-ible, which originally entered English on

French loan words and then spread to native English vocabulary)

4. Intense contact (very extensive bilingualism among borrowing-language speakers,

social factors strongly favouring borrowing): continuing heavy lexical borrowing

in all sections of the lexicon, heavy structural borrowing.

2.2. Lexicon Heavy borrowing

Thomas’ submission above shows that language contact leads to different kinds of

borrowing but equally important is the need to explain terms like lexical or content

words, structural or function words in order to ascertain the type of linguistic implications

for students of English/Social Studies in the light of the many languages available.

According to Kaplan (2010:373), studying language contact is of particular interest to

Applied linguists thus:

The interest of applied linguistics in language contact research or contact

linguistics-a term used since the Brussels “contact and conflict” congress in 1979-
begins with the recognition that the majority population of the world’s
polpulatiom is multilingual, so that multilingualism is to be regarded as the norm
rather than the exception. Although multilingualism and language contact
between individuals and among groups are as old as the Babylonian confusion of
tongues.

2.3. Bilingualism/Mltilingualism

12
Bilingualism has to do with the existence of two languages and people who speak same

while multilingualism has to do with the existence of several languages like in the case of

Nigeria where there are so many languages and many bilinguals or “multilinguals”.

Olateju and Oyeleye (2005:188) subscribe to this view when they remark that

“Bilingualism is the existence of two or more languages in a country that interact. In

other words, bilingualism is the alternate use of two or more languages; and the person

who practices bilingualism is called a bilingual”. Simpson (2008:172) remarks:

Nigeria is a country with an immense population of over 140 million, the largest
in Africa and several hundred languages and ethnic groups, though with no single
group being a majority, and the three largest ethnic groups together constituting
only approximately half of the country’s total population. Having being termed a
united territory by the British in 1914, with artificially created borders arbitrarily
including certain ethnic groups while dividing others with neighbouring states,
Nigeria and its complex ethno linguistics situation in many ways is a prime
representation of the classic set of problems faced by many newly developing
states in Africa when decisions of national language policy and planning have to
be made, and the potential role of language in nation-building has to be
determined.
This rather long quotation above indeed describes the state of the Nigerian nation

linguistically as being multilingual nature. He further describes Nigeria’s multilingual

nature thus Nigeria’s many languages are spread broadly throughout the country’s thirty-

six states and have populations that vary quite considerably in size with three particular

enthno-linguistic groups making up over half of the total population… the remaining

several hundred languages are being spoken by much smaller, in many cases with the

linguistically endangered population.

13
Jowitt (1991:9) corroborates this view when he puts forward the claim that “to try to

determine the exact number of languages indigenous to Nigeria is a daunting task.

Estimates have ranged from 200 to over 400”. This proposition sums up the view that

indeed Nigeria is among the multilingual nations of the world and perhaps the most

linguistically heterogeneous in the African continent.This view too is corroborated by

Onah (2015:140), in Issues in Language and Linguistics, gives the following as the basic

characteristics of a speech community: Nevertheless, three languages stand out as

Zainab’s abstract (2014:181)-quoted in- shows:

The multilingual nature of Nigeria should not be seen as a barrier to having an

indigenous national language. Already, the three big languages-Hausa, Igbo and
Yoruba-have been prescribed for study throughout junior secondary and can also
be studied up to the tertiary level. Each of these languages possesses corpus
requirements, as they have developed writing system, rules on grammatical
usages and vocabulary, which can be expanded to meet linguistic needs as they
arise. This study proposes that any one of them can take over the role of English
is currently playing in all the domains. This is by virtue of the implementation of
the National Policy on Education whereby it is made compulsory for students to
learn at least one of the three major Nigerian languages and the status each
occupies in their regions…
With regard to this view, Jowitt (1991:9) also adds that:

In a situation of such multiplicity it is not surprising that (though not inevitable)

that some languages have greater prominence in national life than others; and
ultimately prominence is determined by the number of speakers. Again, for lack
of reliable statistics, it is impossible to be precise, but there can be no doubt that
the number of native speakers of the three of Nigeria’s languages, Hausa, Igbo,
and Yoruba, runs to several million, and each of these is an MT in at least three of
the twenty-one states of the Federation

14
Martin and Nakayama (2007:232), on multilingualism, remarks that “people who speak

more than two languages are often called bilingual; people who speak more than two

languages are considered as multilingual. Rarely do bilinguals speak both languages with

the same level of fluency. More commonly, they prefer to use one language over another,

depending on the context and the topic”. Therefore the inevitable linguistic relationship

between the Hausa language and Atyap is better summed up in the words of these

authors. They further add that “perhaps it is easier to think of language as a “prison

house”, to borrow Fredric Jameson’s (1972) metaphor. All of the semantic, syntactic,

pragmatic, and phonetic systems are enmeshed in a social system from which there is no

escape, except through the learning of another language…”

Arsenian (1937)-quoted by Ogunloye (1998:115)- also identifies five major variables in

bilingualism namely: degree of bilingualism, linguistic dissimilarity, method of

acquisition or learning, children’s attitude towards a second language and the

chronological age of the child. Of these five variables, of particular interest is linguistic

dissimilarity. He further describes it thus “the characteristics of the two languages differ

in phonology, morphology, and syntax”.

Also, Ogunleye (1998:119) is of the view that bilingualism could be societal which could

explain why the average Nigerian student has many languages at his or her disposal. He

also affirms that “societal bilingualism is where two or more languages exist in two or

more territorially distinct parts of the same country, state or nation such places are said to

15
be territorially bilingual or multilingual”. The processes of societal bilingualism include

all of the following: linguistic superimposition through colonization, linguistic

juxtaposition, military conquest or invasion, diglossia and triglossia, religious conversion,

migration and trade.

Of all these processes of being bilingual, two stands out for consideration in relation to

say for instance Hausa and the English language: linguistic imposition and trade:

“Linguistic juxtaposition is a situation where two language groups live in proximity or

side by side in the same geographical location. Their interaction will certainly bring about

societal bilingualism”. Ogunloye (1998:1190. This view is not unconnected to the fact

that the Hausa language because of its dominance in the north and sub-Saharan Africa

has created a sort of linguistic imbalance and hence the allusion to linguistic imposition.

Besides, because it is the language of buying and selling, it has further eroded or better

still encroached into the linguistic structure of smaller languages.

Olateju and Oyeleye (2005:189) are of the view that multilingualism is simply

bilingualism at a higher level because it is the addition of one or more languages to the

ones the bilingual already has. In other words, multilingualism is the ability of an

individual to speak multiple languages. Multilingualism is another form of language

contact. Nigeria is a good example of a multingual society. A famous linguist called

Stewart (1968) identifies four attributes for classifying multilingual societies: (1)

Standardization, (2) Autonomy, (3) Historicity and (4) Vitality.

16
These four attributes are used to know the quality of a language. That is, whether it is

standard, classical, vernacular, artificial, dialect, creole, or pidgin. A language can be

vital with regard to how useful it is to the community. Vitality of any language depends

on the function of that language. The more plus (+) the language has, the more the

importance or vitality it has, and many people have different attitudes towards these

values:Standard language (S), Dialect (D),

Creole (C), Pidgin (P).Be that as it may, the use of two or more languages is a welcome

phenomenon particularly in the light of the submission below:

However in many parts of the world an ability to speak more than one language is
not at all remarkable. In fact, a monolingual individual would be regarded as a
misfit, marked as lacking an important skill in society, the skill of being able to
interact freely with the speakers of other languages with whom regular contact is
made in the ordinary business of living. In many parts of the world is is just
normal requirement of daily living that people speak several languages: perhaps
one or more at home, another in the village, still another for purposes of trade, and
yet another for contact with the outside world of wider social or political
organization. These various languages are usually acquired naturally and
unselfconsciously, and the shifts from one to another are made without hesitation.
2.3.1. Advantages of bilingualism/multilingualism

1. Bilingualism and multilingualism are often held in high esteem because of their

linguistic versatility.

2. It facilitates interpersonal, interethnic or interracial communication, and enhances

close relations among different people of the world.

3. It gives individual advantages or opportunities in sharing other people’s cultures

17
4. It enhances general understanding of people whose languages one can speak.

5. It tends to remove ethnocentrism and ethnic phobia or even ethnic chauvinism

6. It makes an individual more cosmopolitan in outlook

7. It enhances friendship

8. It facilitates trade relation

9. It facilitates learning. A bilingual/multilingual has access to the world of

technology and educational advancement through his languages-especially world

languages

10. It helps faster thinking

2.3.2. Disadvantages of bilingualism/multilingualism

It is believed that mental confusion can be caused although this has not been empirically

proved

1. Bilinguals are sentences sometimes seem with suspicion and people thus tend to

keep them at arm’s length

2. It creates some problems in learning in a bilingual multigual setting

18
3. It leads to dominance in one language and a progressively decreasing efficiency

or proficiency in the other language. Consequently, it can lead to the death of the

other language.

4. Individual integration in the community may be difficult at early stage of

bilingualism.

2.4. Theoretical Framework

Sociolinguistics

There are many definitions that have been given by scholars with regard to the definition

of sociolinguistics. One of such is the definition given by Schmitt (2002:150) below:

The most obvious definition of sociolinguistics is that it is the study of language

in society. However, if it was as that, then almost every language event would
form part of the field of sociolinguistics. After all, there is a social and contextual
dimension to every naturally occurring use of language, and it is always these
social factors that determine the choice of what is written or said or understood. If
sociolinguistics is not to encompass all linguistics, psychology and social theory,
then we need a more precise and complex definition.
It is based on this submission by Schmitt (2002: 150) himself that he further goes ahead

to give a more tentative definition of the term thus:

So sociolinguistics, this is the study of the linguistic indicators of culture and

power. This is much more specific. This allows us to focus on language but also
to allow us to emphasize the social force of language events in the world of
linguistics… (Grammar, vocabulary, corpus linguistics, discourse analysis and
pragmatics) as well as phonology, but also encourages us to see the influences of
ethnicity, gender, ideology and social rank on language events

19
Yule (1996:239) agrees with the claim above when he remarks that “A speech

community is a group of people who share a set of norms, rules and expectations

regarding the use of language”. It therefore means that many societal factors play a

dominant role in describing a community as a speech community and not just linguistic

events. Perhaps this is what he further captures more succinctly below:

In general terms sociolinguistics deals with the inter-relationship between

language and society. It has strong connections to anthropology, through the
investigation of language and culture, and sociology, through the crucial role that
language plays in the organization of social groups and institutions. It is also tied
to social psychology, particularly with regard to how attitudes and perceptions are
expressed and how in-group and out-group behaviours are indentified. All these
connections are needed if we are to make sense of what might be described as
“social dialects”.
Besides, Schmitt suggests that the apt way of looking at sociolinguistics makes the study

descriptive in nature: “above all, this definition allows sociolinguistics to be descriptive

of pieces of language in the world, whilst encouraging us to recognize that we all

included in that world too. It could even be argued that the sociolinguistics have a special

responsibility to use their privileged knowledge to influence the direction of, for example,

government, language policies, educational practices, media representations, and so on”

This therefore sums up as “ethically-involved position and so on” (Schmitt 2002:151).

Nevertheless since sociolinguistics is dynamic in nature and an ever changing linguistic

phenomenon, and he further subscribes to the view that a more plausible definition is to

define it thus: “sociolinguistics is the study of language variation and language change”.

20
2.4.1. Sociolinguistics or Micro-sociolinguistics and Sociology

Wardhaugh (2010:12) also makes a distinction between sociolinguistics or micro-

sociolinguistics and the sociology of language:

The former is concerned with the investigating the relationships between language
and society with the goal being a better understanding of the structure of language
and how language and how languages function in communication; the equivalent
goal in the sociology of language is trying to discover how society structure can
be understood through the study of language, e.g.; how certain linguistic features
serve to characterize particular social arrangements
Hudson (1996:4) has described the difference between the two concepts as follows:

“sociolinguistics is the study of language in relation to society whereas the sociology of

language is “the study of society in relation to language”. Wardhaugh (2010:12) sums up

this view when he remarks thus “in other words, in sociolinguistics we study language

and society in order to find out as much as we can about what kind of thing language is,

and in the sociology of language we reverse the direction of our interest”. But then

Coulmas (1997:2) is of the view that:

Micro-sociolinguistics investigates how social structure influences the way people

talk and how language varieties and patterns of use correlate with the social
attributes such as class, sex and age. Macro-sociolinguistics, on the other hand,
studies what societies do with their languages, that is, attitudes and attachments
that account for the functional distribution of speech forms in society, language
shift, maintenance, replacement, the delimitation and interaction of speech
communities.
Hudson (1996:4) has described the difference as follows: “sociolinguistics is the study of

language in relation to society; whereas the sociology of language is the study of society

in relation to language. Wardhaugh (2010:12) sums up this view thus “in other words, in

21
sociolinguistics we study language and society in order to find out as much as we can

about what kind of thing language is, and in the sociology of language we reverse the

direction of our interest.

Wadhaugh (2010:118-9) is also suggestive that speech communities constitute a group of

people who use the same language. Nevertheless, he further remarks that the term group

can be misleading hence he argues that “ a group is a difficult notion to define…people

can group together for one or more reasons: social, religious, political, cultural, familiar,

vocational, a vocational etc. the group may be temporary or quasi-permanent and the

purposes of its members may change…”.

As a matter of fact there are several ways to look at a group and there are many reasons

that can be accounted for even for the formation of a group. It is all these assumptions

that lead Wardhaugh to come to the conclusion that “the kind of group that

sociolinguistics have generally attempted to study is called the speech community”.

Besides, Gerrard and Katamba (2011:158) underscores this submission about what a

group should be before it can be designated or labeled as a speech community: “a group

of people who share social conventions, sociolinguistic norms, about language”. This

description of a group makes its application to a speech community more precise and

thereby seems to disambiguate what the notion of group may suggest in varying context

as earlier suggested by Wardhaugh above.

22
Labove, however, disagrees with this view (1972b, 120-1) when he remarks thus “the

speech community is not defined by any marked agreement in the use of language

elements, so much as by participation in a set of shared norms; these norms may be

observed in overt types of evaluative behavior, and by the uniformity of abstract patterns

of variation which are invariant in respect to particular levels of usage”.

In Gumpez (1997:101) submission, having preferred the term linguistic community to

speech community, remarks thus: “a social group which may be either monolingual or

multi-lingual, held together by frequency of social interaction patterns and set off from

the surrounding areas by weaknesses in lines of communication. Linguistic communities

may consist of small groups bound together by face-to-face contact or may cover larger

regions, depending on the level of abstraction we wish to achieve”.

Gumpez (1971:114) further defines a linguistic community thus “any human aggregate

characterized by regular and frequent interactions by means of a shared body of verbal

signs and set off from similar aggregates by significant differences in language usage.

McGregor (2009:158) “a speech community is a coherent group of people who share the

same language or languages and more or less the same norms of language use. The

members of a speech community form a network of interacting individuals who

communicate linguistically with one another frequently and more intensively than they

engage with the outsiders”.

23
From the submission above, it is quite obvious that a speech community could have more

languages in use. Also, other unique features of a speech community as proposed are that

there must be interaction. This interaction could in this case means communication by

virtue of one being a member of a particular speech community. Thus one may not be

considered as a bonifide member of a particular speech community in the event that one

is not linguistically active in the languages in use.

Moreover the frequency of use is another matter to consider from the submission above.

Thus it is another significant factor to consider in the designation of a speech community.

Thus interaction must be in place or expected to occur frequently among members of the

said speech community. This last submission seems to suggest that a speech community

can be likened to an in-house membership but certainly not like the type suggested by

“secret societies”. McGregor (2009:168) corroborates this view in his remark below:

A speech community is not always made of speakers of just a single language.

Many speech communities around the world are constituted of individuals who
speak two or more shared languages. I use the term bilingualism to refer to such
situations, allowing that more than two languages may be involved; sometimes
the term multilingualism is used instead as the convention
Based on the submission above, McGregor seems to opine that the term bilingualism and

multilingualism can be used interchangeably.

Similarly, Awolaja and Awolaja (2012:1) define sociolinguistics as “the study of the

relationship between language and social structure”. He therefore seems to suggest that

there is a correlation between how the society is structured and how language is used.

24
Ultimately, therefore, language is supposed to be a reflection of this social structure of

society. Furthermore, Kristin and Lobeck (2010:400) describe sociolinguistics as “the

study of how language varies over space (by region, ethnicity, social class, etc.)”. Thus

the emphasis here is on language variation according to certain societal factors like

religion, ethnicity, social class, sex or gender and so on.

In addition, McGregor (2009:158) describes a speech community thus “A speech

community is a coherent group of people who share the same language or language and

more or less the same norms of language use. The members of a speech community form

a network of interacting individuals who communicate linguistically with one another

frequently, and more intensively than they engage with outsiders.

From the submission above, it is quite obvious that a speech community could have more

than one language in use. Also another unique feature of a speech community as

proposed is that there must be interaction. Interaction could in this case mean

communication that must be regular and consistent. Thus by virtue of one being a

member of a speech community he or she must use the language variety in use to

communicate with other members of the same speech community.

The implication is that one may not be considered a bonifide member of the said speech

community in the event that one is not linguistically active. Thus passivity is not a

welcome trend and therefore highly discouraged. Moreover the frequency of interaction

is another matter all together. Consequently, engaging other members regularly in

25
communication is a prerequisite for say admittance or membership of a speech

community. The last part of the quotation above therefore seems to suggest a sort of in-

house membership and therefore suggestive of a close group of people but certainly not

the meaning covered by a language group called “secret varieties”.

Furthermore, McGregor (2009:168) opines that “A speech community is not always

made up of speakers of just a single language. Many speech communities around the

world are constituted of individuals who speak two or more shared languages. I use the

term bilingualism to refer to such situations, allowing that more than two languages may

be involved; sometimes the term multilingualism is used instead as the cover term”.

Based on this submission, McGregor seems to suggest that the two terms bilingualism

and multilingualism are not only synonymous but can also be used interchangeably.

Wardhaugh (2010:118-9) says that “speech community constitutes a group of people who

use the same language … the term group is a difficult notion to define…people can group

together for one or more reasons: social, religious, political, cultural, familial, vocational,

a vocational etc. the group may be temporary or quasi-permanent and the purposes of its

members may change…” as a matter of fact there are several ways to look at a group and

there are many reasons that can be accounted for the formation of a group.

In Gumpez’s (199:1) submission, having preferred linguistic community to speech

community, he remarks that “a social group which may be either monolingual or

26
multilingual held together by frequency of social interaction patterns and set off from the

surrounding areas by weakness in lines of communication. Linguistic communities may

consists of small groups bound together by face –to-face contact or may cover larger

regions, depending on the level of abstraction we wish to achieve”.

Gumpez (1999:114) further defines a linguistic community thus: “any human aggregate

characterized by region and frequent interactions by means of a shared body of verbal

signs and set off from similar aggregates by significant differences in language usage”.

In the words of Olaoye (1998:98), sociolinguistics is “a collective term used to describe

the application of research techniques, and findings from linguistics and various Social

Sciences, to the study of language in society”. Perhaps this submission is why the likes of

Schmitt (2010:144) consider the field of sociolinguistics as applied linguistics:

Sociolinguistic is a fieldwork-based discipline. Researchers collect examples of

language usage in their naturally occurring environments and study them in
relation to the findings of other sociolinguists’ research work. In this sense it truly
an example of applied linguistics: there is no introspection, nor intuitive
conclusions, nor impressionistic evaluation involved. This means it is relatively
easy for researchers new to the discipline to engage in genuine and valuable
sociolinguistic research at an early stage in their study. Indeed, this sort of
practical investigation would be the best way to develop your own thinking and
knowledge of sociolinguistics.
2.5. Summary

This chapter examined the concept of language contact, borrowing, code switching, code

mixing, bilingualism and multilingualism. These concepts are considered appropriate for

providing the background information for a topic like “THE USE OF LANGUAGE IN

27
DIFFERENT SOCIAL SETTING: A CASE OF 100 LEVEL STUDENTS OF

ENGLISH/SOCIALSTUDIES”. Besides it is imperative to examine these linguistic terms

because of Nigeria’s linguistic pluralism state and the many issues surrounding it.

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0. Introduction

28
This chapter explains in detail how the entire research work is carried out. It presents the

research type, area of the study, sample and sampling technique, the method of data

analysis, research design, analytical procedure and research methodology.

3.1. Area of the Study

The geographical location covered by this research is Department of English, Kaduna

State College of Education, Gidan Waya, Kafanchan, located in southern Kaduna.

3.3. Sample and Sampling Technique

The study employs the simple random sampling technique, and as such, every member of

the school community has an equal chance of being selected and given a questionnaire.

Nevertheless, the students of 100Level of English/Social Studies are the major target

3.4. Method of Data Collection

The method employed in this research is the use of the questionnaire because of its

convenience, simplicity and appropriateness to this research. This has become imperative

because the research samples a definite population of people; hence, the close type or

structured type of questionnaire is employed to elicit responses from the respondents.

This is deliberate in order to avoid too much interpretation of subjective responses that

could be subjected to multiple interpretations.

3.5. Research Design

29
This is study is primarily a qualitative analysis of how language is used in different

domains of social interactions as means to justify the concept of bilingualism or

multilingualism. t

3.6. Analytical Procedure

The percentage method of data analysis is the preferred method of analysis. This is

because it allows the researcher to tally, calculate and give the responses in percentage;

as a result, the tabular method of percentage method is preferred.

3.7. Research Methodology

The languages under review are to be analyzed using simple percentage representation

according to the domains, contexts or settings of use. As stated earlier in the chapter one

of this study, these terms are considered similar or akin to each other and are therefore

used interchangeably to refer to the same thing. Thus they are to be analyzed based on the

domains of Home, Church or Mosque, School, Market and Street.

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA COLLECTION, PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.0. Introduction

30
This chapter examines the use of language in several contexts, domains or social settings.

It is imperative to do so in order to prove that the students of English/Social studies

students use different languages for different reasons and in different contexts or domains

of social interaction.

4.1.0.Section A: Pidgin Usage

Table 1

DOMAIN/SETTING YES (%) NO (%) SOMETIMES (%)

At Home 32 (64%) 00(0%) 18 (36%)

Church/Mosque 12 (24%) 14 (28%) 24(48%)

School 17(34%) 06 (12%) 27(54%)

Market 40 (80%) 05 (10%) 05 (10%)

Street 42 (84%) 00 (0%) 08 (16%)

TOTAL

From the table 1 above, it is quite obvious that Pidgin is used more on the street and at

home, representing 48% and 64% respectively. Nevertheless, the table also shows that

about 48% and 54 % of the sample population also use Pidgin in religious gatherings and

at school where English language is supposed to be the medium of social interaction. As

matter of fact, school represents about 54% of the usage of Pidgin in the sample

31
represented above. Such a development is not healthy for the growth and development of

English as the official language and lingua franca of an institution of learning such as

Kaduna State College of Education, Gidan Waya, Kafanchan. It is also not a healthy

development for Pidgin as a language too. It further shows that both Pidgin and English

are mutually interchangeable given the ease with which the students switch from one

language variety to another regardless of the domain of social interaction.

4.1.1. Section B: English Usage

Table 2

DOMAIN/SETTING YES (%) NO (%) SOMETIMES (%)

At Home 15 (30%) 10 (20%) 25 (50%)

Church/Mosque 30 (60%) 00 (0%) 20 (40%)

School 45 (90%) 01(2%) 04 (8%)

Market 15 (30%) 15 (30%) 20 (40%)

Street 10 (20%) 25 (50%) 15 (30%)

TOTAL

In table 2 above, English language appears to enjoy dominance in formal setting as data

shows that about 90% of the respondents use it at school obviously for communication

with people who speak different languages. But give that another 50% of the sample

population also uses the English language at home is worrying or disturbing. This is

because the home is not an official setting where English language is expected to enjoy

32
such degree of patronage. This is because it has the tendency to make students less

proficient in the use of their Mother Tongue (MT) should they continue to use it in an

informal setting like home. Also with only 30% claiming to speak the English language

in the market place is not encouraging. This is because it is not in consonance with the

use of English language in commerce or business or for the selling and buying of goods

and services.

4.1.2. Section C: Hausa Usage

Table 3

DOMAIN/SETTING YES (%) NO (%) SOMETIMES (%)

At Home 30 (60%) 05 (10%) 15 (30%)

Church/Mosque 28 (56%) 12 (24%) 10 (20%)

School 25 (50%) 05 (10%) 20 (40%)

Market 23 (46%) 00 (0%) 27 (54%)

Street 21 (42%) 19(38%) 10 (20%)

TOTAL

It can be deduced from the responses generated in Table 3 above that Hausa is a more

dominant lingua franca than English. This against the backdrop that it is spoken more at

home, religious places, schools , markets and on the street representing 60%, 56%, 50%,

46% and 42% respectively. It further affirms the linguistic dominance of Hausa over

33
other smaller or minority languages and even English. The fact that 50% of the sample

population also speaks Hausa at school makes it a competing variety too.

Section D: Mother Tongue Usage

Table 4

DOMAIN/SETTING YES (%) NO (%) SOMETIMES (%)

At Home 35 (70%) 05 (10%) 10 (20%)

Church/Mosque 19 (38%) 21 (42%) 10 (20%)

School 15 (30%) 20(40%) 15 (30%)

Market 03 (6%) 32 (64%) 15 (30%)

Street 04 (8%) 36 (72%) 10 (20%)

TOTAL

From Table 4 above, the data show that 70% of the respondents spoke their Mother

Tongue at home while about 30% of the same population claim that they also speak

English at home too. But with another 30% speaking it in school sometimes kind of calls

for worry. Thus it is possible for MT to over shadow English usage in school if the trend

is not checked.

4.2. Summary of Findings

34
It can be concluded from the findings of this research that the use of language can be

analyzed based on the domains of Home, Church or Mosque, School, Market and Street.

Four languages have been sampled to buttress this point:

Pidgin

English language

Hausa and

Mother Tongue

Some of the conclusions drawn from these findings can be summarized thus:

 That Pidgin still remains a dominant lingua franca used by students today
 That English language is still the language of instruction today as it is many years
ago
 That Hausa remains a dominant lingua franca in the north
 That students regardless of the many linguistic codes available to them still use
and speak the mother tongue (MT)
 That these languages can be used interchangeably in the same domain or setting
 That in the long run the issue of proficiency in any of the sample languages may
be a cause of worry or concern

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.0. Introduction
35
This research is basically concerned with summary, conclusion and recommendation.

5.1. Summary

In CHAPTER ONE, this research was specifically conducted to solve a problem being

that reads thus:

The fact that there are many languages available for use is both a blessing and a
curse. With reference to the latter, the use of many languages by an individual
could affect his/her linguistic competence in the many languages at his or
disposal. On the other hand, the tendency to use one language in an inappropriate
domain or situation or context is likely another issue. For instance, Pidgin can be
used in formal environment where Standard English is supposed to be used or
Standard British English can be used where a Mother is considered most
appropriate. The point is that linguistic pluralism can also be disadvantageous to
the issue of competence in a language or several languages as the case may be.
This was the major premise upon which this study was conducted in line with the

following objectives:

 To find out if the student of 100L English/Social Studies students in the

Department of English, Kaduna State College of Education, GidanWaya,

Kafanchan, Kaduna speak Pidgin

 To show that the student of 100L English/Social Studies students in the

Department of English, Kaduna State College of Education, Gidan Waya,

Kafanchan, Kaduna speak the English language

 To prove that the student of 100L English/Social Studies students in the

Department of English, Kaduna State College of Education, Gidan Waya,

Kafanchan, Kaduna speak Hausa apart from their Mother Tongue (MT)

36
  To investigate whether or not there are instances or situations where a student (s)

use one of these languages in a situation where he/she is not supposed to like

speaking Hausa in a school setting instead of English or Standard British English

These objectives promoted this research visa viz the multilingual nature of Nigeria. By

setting these precedents, the researcher conducted a literature review in CHAPTER

TWO. This chapter also known as the literature review addresses key issues that are

related to this work from the perspectives of numerous scholars. Some of the issues

addressed include the following concepts: language contact, borrowing, code switching

and code mixing, multilingualism and bilingualism.

CHAPTER THREE is concerned with the research methodology. Specifically, it

addressed the following: Area of the Study, Sample and the Sampling Technique, Method

of Data Collection, Research Design, Analytical Procedure and Research Methodology.

Finally, CHAPTER FOUR is concerned with Data Collection, Presentation and Analysis.

5.2 Conclusion

Data was collected from fifty students (50) form English/Social Studies combination of

the Department of English Language, Kaduna State College of Education, Gidan Waya,

Kafanchan, Kaduna. The research tested the use of different languages in specific

37
domains of school, market, street, home and places of worship. The following

conclusions were reached at the end of this study:

 That Pidgin still remains a dominant lingua franca used by students today

 That English language is still the language of instruction today as it is many years

ago

 That Hausa remains a dominant lingua franca in the north

 That students regardless of the many linguistic codes available to them still use

and speak the mother tongue (MT)

 That these languages can be used interchangeably in the same domain or setting

 That in the long run the issue of proficiency in any of the sampled languages may

be a cause of worry or concern

The last proposition was the major crux of this research hence proficiency may be a big

issue considering the different languages available to students at a given point in time.

Thus the assigned roles of each of the languages may impede on the role of others. Thus

this research considered the concept of multilingualism both as a blessing and as a curse.

To put it more aptly, this research rested on the assumption that multilingualism has its

advantages as well as its disadvantages.

5.3. Recommendation

38
Having discussed the linguistic situation of the 100L students of English/Social Studies

students, this study therefore makes the following recommendations:

For Students:

 Immerse yourself to a particular language environment and make the most of it no

matter what

 Learn not panic when using a language that is not your mother tongue (MT)

 Use simple expressions or stick to speak ones to avoid the risk of changing to a

more familiar language like Pidgin or MT

 Know your priority language and how their respective roles and domains.

Meaning students should pay more attention to the priority languages and their

domains or settings of use, and they must do their best to stick to these matters no

matter the circumstances

 Students may need to plan how much time to spend on learning each language if

need be in order to boost proficiency

 Students should the languages they speak separate identities. This way they can

keep them separate yet functional and operational in certain domains and settings.

 Students must devote time to practicing how to be more proficient in the

languages they speak

 Students should be adaptable. This is because the more adaptable they are, the

easier it is to learn languages, and keep them separate.

39
For Teachers:

 Teach students about the different social settings that there are and the

preferable linguistic choices to make given the peculiarity of the Nigerian

linguistic situation

 Always stress the above points when the use of languages is emphasized in a

multilingual setting

 Always make a clear distinction between foreign and indigenous languages and

their role(s) in the present day need for communication

 Another equally important thing to talk about is the fact that there are

indigenous languages, exogenous languages and indi-exogenous language

varieties

 Always it is expedient for the teachers to teach students about the peculiarities

of languages and why they are better suited for a given setting, context or

domain

 Teachers must make it clear that every language is unique in its own right to

avoid the temptation of students placing more priority on some languages above

others

 Teachers must emphasize that the distinction between foreign and indigenous or

local languages is not that of superiority but only for the purposes of easy

classification mostly for academic or scholarly purposes.

40
 The point above also applies to the distinction made between minority and

major languages

 Similarly, it is expedient that teachers should never discourage the speaking of

languages like Pidgin or those categorized as indigenous languages or Mother

Tongue(s) because it will discourage students from speaking them, and that

alone could spell doom for the language or languages in question.

 It is advisable for students to be taught about the use of certain languages in

certain practical situations whether in real life settings or similar to that,

stressing the role of participants, time, occasion, context and social distance

among others that often affect how people interact mostly in interpersonal

communication

 Teachers must continually encourage proficiency in all the languages that

people speak by maintaining exposure with the native speakers if need be or by

reading books, novels or any recommended publication that can help in the

achievement of this objective(s)

 The need for feedback cannot be left out. Therefore, teachers must ensure that

they create avenues for proper feedback in order to make their instruction more

focus based than it used to be.

 Finally, teachers themselves must serve as the correct or appropriate role

models for the display of language proficiency as this will in no small measure

be a motivating factor for the students.

41
 REFERENCES

Coulmas, F. (1999).The Far East. In J.A Fishman (ed), Handbook of Language and

Ethnic Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Crystal, D. (2008). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Malden: Blackwell.

Goddard, C. (1997). Semantic Analysis. USA: Oxford University Press.

42
Gumpez, J.J. (1997). Language and Social Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Halliday, M.A.K .(1978). Language as Social Semiotics. London: Edward Arnold.

Hudson, R. A. (1996). Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jowitt, D. (2010) .Christianity: A Concise History. Ibadan: Kraft.

Kaplan, R. (2010). The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Longe, V.U, and Ofuani, O. A. (1996).English Language and Communication. Benin

City: Ilupeju.

McGregor, W.B. (2009). Linguistics: An Introduction. New York: Continuum

International Publishing Group.

Olateju, M, &Oyeleye, L. (2005).Perspective on Language and Literature. Nigeria:

Awolowo University Press.

Onah, P. E. (2015). “English Language in Nigeria and the Variety Question”: In Voices a

Journal of English Studies, Kaduna State University, Vol No 2.

Schmitt, N. (2002). An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. London: Hodder Arnold.

43
Simpson, A. (2008). Language and National Identity in Africa. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Ward Haugh, R. (2010). Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Malden: Wilwy-Blackwell.

Yule, G. (1996). The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

APPENDIX

Sample of the Questionnaire

Dear Respondents,

The questions below are meant to test the validity of the proposition captioned “THE

USE OF LANGUAGE IN DIFFERENT SOCIAL SETTING: A CASE OF 100

44
LEVEL STUDENTS OF ENGLISH/SOCIALSTUDIES. Consequently, the data

collected from the responses below are used for the purposes of elucidating data to justify

the topic above as is the practice with most academic exercise and nothing more. Kindly

tick appropriately your preferred answer to aquestion.

NB: You can tick YES and SOMETIMES if you so wish on the same domain or setting

but DO NOT tick NO and SOMETIMES on any. Thank you!

SECTION A: PIDGIN ENGLISH

Tick whether or not you use Pidgin English in the domains/settings that have been

provided below:

DOMAIN/SETTING YES (%) NO (%) SOMETIMES (%)

At Home

Church/Mosque

School

Market

Street

45
TOTAL

SECTION B: ENGLISH USAGE

Tick whether or not you use English in the domains/settings that have been provided

below:

DOMAIN/SETTING YES (%) NO (%) SOMETIMES (%)

At home

Church/Mosque

School

Market

Street

TOTAL

SECTION C: HAUSA USAGE

Tick whether or not you use Hausa in the domains/settings that have been provided
below:

DOMAIN/SETTING YES (%) NO (%) SOMETIMES (%)

At home
Church/Mosque
School

46
Market
Street
TOTAL

SECTION D: MOTHER TONGUE USAGE

Tick whether or not you use your Mother Tongue in the domains/settings that have been

provided below:

DOMAIN/SETTING YES (%) NO (%) SOMETIMES (%)

At home
Church/Mosque
School
Market
Street
TOTAL

47