formality – Languaged Life

Formality in the UCLA Community: Communication and Self-Expression in the Digital Age

Online communication has undoubtedly brought on more opportunities for misunderstanding. However, the use of linguistic elements such as internet slang and emojis represent the myriad ways that humans expand our linguistic toolbox. Through our research, collected through online surveys and interviews with several members of the UCLA community, we found that formality is shaped by many complex factors, including similarity or difference in age, gender, and power dynamics between interlocutors. The prevalence of concepts such as mirroring suggests that maintaining appropriate levels of formality in these evolving communication mediums is an intuitive process which calls upon participants to be more attentive and creative communicators. Additionally, we found that these processes reveal that, although traditional notions of formality and politeness continue to shape our ways of interacting, the very definitions of these concepts are ever-changing.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction

The rapid evolution of virtual communication technology is changing the way language is used, allowing interlocutors to use a vast range of tools such as visual elements and online slang, changing the way we come to know language. This results in the creation of a new set of language practices specific to online interactions. Naomi Baron delves into the pervasive influence of digital communication has led to a shift in language structure from traditional, standardized language to one that is more fluid and de-standardized (Baron, 2012), which is what we are aiming to look at. In our research, we investigate the nuances of formality and politeness through surveys and interviews with members of the UCLA community, allowing them to explain the nuances of their own communication habits – calling into question how concepts of formality and politeness may change over time.

Kadar and Mills discuss this in their work where they delve into politeness theory; culture is sometimes treated as rigid rules, potentially portraying individuals as passive recipients. The alternative perspective views culture as “embodied practices,” emphasizing the dynamic manifestations in individuals’ daily lives. (Kader & Mills, 2011.) We seek to understand how UCLA students navigate the world of virtual communication in an academic setting. Furthermore, we aim to gain a stronger grasp on our focus group’s subjective views regarding notions of formality and politeness. Our hypothesis suggests that UCLA students adopt more formal language when communicating with authority figures, such as older individuals or those in higher positions. This implies a tendency to avoid informal tools like slang or emojis. Despite evolving social norms, traditional notions of formality and politeness continue to influence how students speak.

Our focus group, members of the UCLA community, depend heavily on digital mediums for most interactions. When it comes to messaging, emails, and social media, students’ attitudes toward formality have a large impact on their interactions. In essence, our research looks at the variety of linguistic behaviors at UCLA, the opportunities and challenges presented by digital communication, and the effects these may have on academic connections and social relationships.

Methods

We employed a combination of qualitative and quantitative methodologies to gather data across the diverse sprawl of the UCLA community. This included participants ranging from professors and students to teaching assistants and other faculty members. The data collection process was executed through in-person interviews as well as a Google Form Survey. Our dataset consisted of 10 in-person interviews and 42 survey responses, providing a comprehensive basis for an in-depth analysis of participant responses.

The in-person interviews were approximately 15-30 minutes, while the 8-question survey was designed with efficient qualitative analysis in mind. Furthermore, the in-person interviews consisted of open-ended queries addressing a range of themes related to informal vs. formal communication and touched on aspects including abbreviations, emojis, non-verbal cues, body language, tone, familiarity, time sensitivity, and slang. The online survey consisted of predetermined response options, whereas the interviews were designed to facilitate open responses. After data collection, interview transcriptions were analyzed to identify patterns of similarity and difference between the interviews and the survey responses.

Throughout the data acquisition phase, our project encountered a few challenges. One notable limitation: our data exclusively relied on self-reported behaviors, perhaps resulting in a lack of impartiality that an observation-based method, such as conversational analysis, may have provided. (Meredith, 2020.) Moreover, the authenticity of responses generated from both interviews and the survey responses were contingent upon the honesty of the interviewee or respondent. However, the online survey was anonymous, which may have generated more genuine results from the respondents, as the perceived risk of judgment is mitigated. Lastly, the data was thoroughly analyzed to identify patterns of evidence that would either support or deny our hypothesis.

Results and Analysis

The findings suggest that in most forms of communication, people tend to mirror the habits of those they interact with. There was a tendency to adapt levels of formality based on context, such as being more formal in professional or educational settings, and less formal in casual conversations or on social media. This was also influenced by the medium of communication as well as the relationship with the individual, with more formal language used in emails and with superiors, while informal language is reserved for friends or family. Many interviewees stated that they often “mirror,” or match the communication style of the person they are addressing. This could involve adopting similar speech patterns, gestures, or even body language. Furthermore, “matching energy” involves adjusting one’s approach, such as using emojis or punctuation, to align with the other person’s formality level.

Emojis and abbreviations are more common in informal settings and less in professional contexts. Frequency of communication and level of familiarity also influence language choice, with increased informal language aligning with an increase in familiarity. Our findings suggest that non-verbal cues such as body language and eye contact allow for easier communication because they create a “live feedback loop,” a term used by several interviewees. A “live feedback loop” occurs when one concentrates on another’s non-verbal cues during an interaction as a signal for understanding their unspoken thoughts and general disposition. This represents a certain level of intuitiveness and a strong attention to detail. In online communication, where non-verbal cues are absent, looking for these cues in word choice. Individuals tend to carefully proofread emails, especially those addressed to professors. In time-sensitive scenarios, certain interviewees default to casual language, while others prefer formal expressions. Additionally, the flexibility to switch between formal and informal language within the same conversation is deemed appropriate depending on the context and relationship with the interlocutor.

We hypothesized that UCLA students adjust the formality of their linguistic patterns when interacting with individuals of superior authority, such as older individuals or those in higher positions. Our findings indicated that people tend to mirror the communication habits of those they engage with, adjusting their level of formality based on context and relationship dynamics. In professional or educational settings, where a higher degree of formality is expected, individuals typically employ formal language. In casual conversations or on social media, a more relaxed tone is used. The utilization of emojis and abbreviations, common in informal settings, diminishes in professional contexts, reflecting the hypothesis that normative ideas of formality continue to influence linguistic behaviors.

Figure 1: Responses to survey question “Do you think abbreviations impact the formality of a message?”

Figure 2: Responses to survey question: “With whom would you feel most comfortable using emojis?”

Conclusion

In conclusion, our research on the formality of linguistic patterns in virtual communication among UCLA students and faculty reveals that individuals adapt their language based on the context, medium, and relationship with the interlocutor. The findings confirm our hypothesis that students increase the formality of their linguistic patterns when communicating with authority figures, such as older individuals or those in higher positions. Emojis and abbreviations, common in informal settings, are used less frequently in professional contexts, indicating a clear distinction in language use based on the perceived formality of the situation. The concept of a “live feedback loop” in face-to-face interactions aids in understanding and adjusting communication, a feature lacking in online exchanges, where careful word choice and proofreading become essential.

Overall, this research provides valuable insights into the dynamics of virtual communication among UCLA students, emphasizing the influence of formality and politeness in linguistic patterns. Furthermore, our results reveal the delicate cooperation and reciprocity which online communication demands from its participants. Future studies could explore the impact of cultural differences on communication styles and the evolving nature of language in the digital age.

References

Baron, Naomi S., (2012). The impact of electronically-mediated communication on language standards and style’, in Terttu Nevalainen, and Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English, Oxford Academic, 6

Lorenzo-Dus, N., & Bou-Franch, P. (2013). A Cross-Cultural Investigation of Email Communication in Peninsular Spanish and British English: The Role of (In)Formality and (In)Directness. Pragmatics and Society, 4(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.4.1.01lor

Kádár, D. Z., & Mills, S. (2011). Politeness in East Asia: Chapter 2, “Politeness and culture” Cambridge University Press

O’Reilly-Shah, V. N., Lynde, G. C., & Jabaley, C. S. (2018). Is it time to start using the emoji in biomedical literature? BMJ: British Medical Journal, 363. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26964183

Meredith, Joanne. (2020). Conversation analysis, cyberpsychology, and online interaction. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, Volume 14, Issue 5.

[/expander_maker]

Professor-Student Register Differences

Something students are conditioned to do is change the way they speak to people in power, specifically their professors. They want to sound knowledgeable and inquisitive, refraining from using slang, meme speaks, and overuse of filler words. One difference we were intrigued by was register changes in lectures. Register is defined as the style of speaking and writing distinguished by its formality, purpose, or audience. Key aspects include vocabulary/jargon, tone, or grammar complexity. This research explored how university students linguistically interact with their professors and classmates in upper and lower-division courses, focusing on register changes. Previous research in this field of study found that students who are fluent in two languages (English and French) use control processes to produce speech registers that are either formal or informal (Declerck et al., 2020). Our null hypothesis was that no difference in the register formality occurred between upper and lower-division courses. Our alternative hypothesis was that register changes were more significant, including the formality in upper-division courses through primarily observational methods and a supplemental survey. This research is important to analyze the way register changes can be impacted by a student’s conditioning and how professors can use this impact to reframe their lecture approach.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Background

Linguistic registers are characteristics of speaking or writing that can change situationally. These registers can reflect the speaker’s identity and the relationship between the speaker and the person they are speaking to (Agha, 2005). The observations made in upper and lower-division courses will let us know how students change their register formality and if this change is dependent on whether the class encourages a more formal register when responding to questions or communicating with one another.

Methods

Using Biber and Conrad’s guide on register analysis in Register, Genre, and Style as a reference, we approached analyzing linguistic register changes in university classrooms with the following steps:

Note the environment and situation of the research setting and how these can affect the characteristics of observed registers.
Record any register features that can be considered ‘normal.’
Compare and contrast the average features of the register with features of the register that were observed to be situational.

To distinguish between formal and informal register in the courses we observed, we classified formal language as any language that had proper grammar, included references to some sort of study or concept, utilized terms that are appropriate to the subject matter, and language that demonstrates respect and formality through the use of a professional tone. An informal register was classified as any language that seemed more conversational or less structured, personal or subjective, did not include terms indicative of the class material, explained certain concepts in simple language, and used a more relaxed tone when participating in discussions.

Considering this method and understanding of registers, researchers attended in-person and recorded lectures at the University of California, Los Angeles, and office hours for select courses, accumulating data from twenty lectures. The lectures were chosen based on their lower or upper division status, two lower and two upper courses. In these settings, we expected to observe a difference in the linguistic register, with the hypothesis that students in upper-division courses had a more formal register because they were experienced and ready to enter the workforce.

The classrooms of the lectures we researched were situated with the speaker at the front, usually on a stage or near some podium with many seats facing forward. This arrangement establishes a sense of hierarchy, control, and power. However, the practice and enforcement of this hierarchy depended on how the professors taught and carried themselves along with the room. Some professors encouraged students to speak and contribute to the discussion, while others preferred to control the conversations to remain on schedule. Student-to-student conversations were minimal but still observed.

Our goal was to observe intently during lectures how students interacted with the professor and how that differed from the conversations amongst fellow students. Also, why was this difference significant, and what factors could influence this conditioned shift in speech behavior? To supplement our observational research, we asked students and professors a 5-question multiple choice survey to gauge how they felt about their register or how aware they were of it. The questions and choices were as follows:

Do you know what a linguistic register is? (Yes/Somewhat/No)
Do you notice differences in speaking in upper and lower-division courses? (Yes/Somewhat/No)
Do you notice how your speech changes when discussing or conversing with your peers and professors? (Yes/Somewhat/No)
Do you think factors like professor approachability, classroom size, and course subject influence how you adjust your language in an academic setting? (Yes/Somewhat/No)
Are there words or phrases you use more frequently in an academic setting that you would not use elsewhere or vice versa? (Yes/Somewhat/No)

Results

Through careful observation, we noticed a significant change in the linguistic register in ten lower and ten upper-division lectures. This is in addition to the results of our supplemental survey, which revealed that students did notice a difference in their registers in their upper—and lower-division courses, noting that they indeed use a more formal register within their upper-division courses.

In upper-division courses, we noticed that students had more formal vocabularies and tended to express their ideas more structured and logically by referencing past concepts and citing where they got their answers or supporting evidence. As for lower-division courses, students used a more informal register, which led to students just trying to get their point across and ending their sentences in a way that made it seem as if they were unsure about their response. Students in lower-division courses also appeared to use words such as “um,” “uhh,” and “I think” more often than students in upper-division courses.

In a particular upper division course, the professor began every lecture by yelling “GOOD AFTERNOON” and expected a loud response, often requesting a redo if it was unsatisfactory. In an informal interview with this professor, she said it was to encourage students to have a voice in a large classroom. She stated that she would prefer a smaller classroom where they could be sitting in a circle. She often ended her lecture 30 minutes before class ended because she saw great importance in students discussing with each other and listening to different perspectives. This engagement was an attempt at breaking the hierarchical barrier of the class setting.

Graph 1 shows the difference in formality observed in the upper-division courses we observed throughout the ten lectures. Graph 2 shows the difference in formality observed in the
lower-division courses throughout ten lectures.

The graphs provided show the difference in formality between the upper- and lower-division courses we observed. Upper-division courses, for the most part, had formal register/language, while lower-division courses mostly had informal register/language.

Another interesting observation we noticed in both upper- and lower-division courses is that students who speak two languages and have a particular accent when talking to another student who may or may not share similar cultures seem to turn their accent off whenever they talk to an individual in a position of power, such as a professor or teacher assistant.

Analysis

These conclusions rejected our null hypothesis and supported the alternative hypothesis that there is a significant difference in the register used in upper-division courses versus those used in lower-division courses. Worth noting is that the reason for a more formal register in upper-division courses is the fact that upper-division courses necessitate the development of critical thinking, which requires students to express their ideas and responses in a more structured and logical manner, which further goes to show the complexity within the concepts seen in these courses. As shown in the graphs within the results, upper-division courses mainly used formal language, while lower-division courses used informal language. The bars on the graph that showed minimal informal or formal language in each respective course resulted from some days in the upper-division courses being relatively easygoing and not necessitating much discussion, while the formal register occurrences in lower-division courses happened as a result of professors making the student think critically about their answer and add to the discussion of the class on a specific complex concept.

Through this research, the discussion opens about how professors can facilitate change that empowers students to speak in their classrooms. With this knowledge, an improvement will likely create a better learning space while maintaining a professional register. The power dynamics do not have to be so stark that they intimidate students to not participate in lectures. However, professors should teach in a way that their course will introduce students to a more formal register early on in the course and gradually increase the emphasis on formal language as the course progresses. Especially in lower-division courses where informal linguistic register is standard, these changes will benefit students (more than likely first- and second-year students) in the long run, where future professional and academic environments will necessitate the use of formal language to express their critical thinking.

References

Agha, A., Duranti, A. (2005). Registers of Language. In A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology (pp. 23–45). https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/web.sas.upenn.edu/dist/1/494/files/2018/08/19Agha2004RegistersOfLang-13dji2r.pdf

Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2019). Register, genre, and style / Douglas Biber, Susan Conrad. (Second edition.). Cambridge University Press.

Declerck, M., Ivanova, I., Grainger, J., & Duñabeitia, J. A. (2020). Are similar control processes Implemented during single and dual-language production? Evidence from switching between speech registers and languages. Bilingualism (Cambridge, England), 23(3), 694–701. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000695

Goulart, L., Gray, B., Staples, S., Black, A., Shelton, A., Biber, D., … & Wizner, S. (2020). Linguistic perspectives on register. Annual Review of Linguistics, 6, 435-455.

Washington-Harmon, T. (2024, January 5). Code-switching has benefits and risks-but why do we do it? Health. https://www.health.com/mind-body/health-diversity-inclusion/code-switching

[/expander_maker]

CODE SWITCHING!: A phenomenon among bilinguals and its deeper role in identity formation

Leon Kaprielian, Octavio Santana, Sahil Sadiq

In an era marked by globalization and multiculturalism, the phenomenon of code-switching has emerged as a crucial aspect of language dynamics and identity formation among bilinguals. The complexities of code-switching, its popularity, and its deeper ramifications for people navigating many linguistic and cultural domains are explored in this research. We examine how code-switching is used in immigrant communities as a tool for social interaction, identity negotiation, and effective communication through a multidisciplinary lens that takes into account linguistic, cognitive, cultural, and social factors. Based on naturalistic observations and interviews with Farsi, Spanish, and Arabic bilingual speakers, we investigate the complex patterns of code-switching in various age groups and social circumstances. Our research shows that code-switching is a reflection of complex social dynamics, such as social hierarchy, respect for elders, and the maintenance of cultural identity, rather than just a linguistic issue. This study emphasizes how crucial it is to comprehend language practices in a multicultural and globalized world by shedding light on the significance of code-switching in forming people’s identities and social structures.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction

Code-switching was formerly thought to be a linguistic oddity, but research has since shown that it is a regular aspect of language use. It illustrates the intricate interactions between linguistic, cognitive, cultural, and social elements that influence social interaction and identity formation. Determining the mechanics of bilingualism and multiculturalism, illuminating the complex ways language influences social structures and human interaction requires an understanding of code-switching.

What is code-switching?!

Code-switching is the fluid transition between two or more languages in a single discourse and is an effective communication and identity-negotiation technique for immigrant communities. Moreover, it is a great way for individuals to build rapport with members who speak the same language. The informal aspect of this will lead to a higher frequency of code-switching and a willingness to express one’s cultural identity, as opposed to a formal environment. In terms of the types of code-switching, it comes in three forms, intrasentential, intersentential, and tag switching.

Figure 1: Types of code-switching: intersentential, intra-sentential, and tag-switching

New to code-switching? Here are the methods we used and how you can do it too!

In this post, we’ll discuss methods used for collecting the data that include studying code-switching in a natural environment, and with the authentic use of language by bilingual or multilingual speakers. One of the ways we are going to collect the data is by naturalistic observation. This involves observing naturally occurring conversations in its most pure form, which is essentially the most authentic form of data collection by bilingual and multilingual individuals. To give an extra set of diversity and universality in this regard, there are going to be 3 languages discussed: Farsi, Spanish, and Arabic.

Results

Farsi (Dari)

There is a difference in the amount of code-switching in regards to whether a Gen Z immigrant is speaking with their own age group or with elders. In Farsi, when one is speaking with elders, it occurs at a much higher frequency and it is more on the “Intersentential” level. The reasoning is due to 1) Innate understanding that the elders prefer the native language 2) The elders’ proficiency in English is not as advanced.

In regards to when the Gen Z bilinguals speak amongst themselves, there is more English spoken, and during the naturalistic observation, the ratio was 80% English to 20% Farsi. When the code-switching did occur, unlike with the elders, which (was usually intersentential), it was intrasentential and tag-switching.

Figure 2: Frequency of code-switching among Farsi speakers (Example: “Bro he’s extremely نابغه (genius) when he explains things. – this is an example of tag-switching)

Lastly, although naturalistic observation was the main method to keep the results as organic as possible, interviews with 2 of the Gen Z members were held to articulate and discuss potential biases and limitations. One of the members (20 years old) said the code-switching just happened naturally without much thought. The eldest in the observation (29) said that he does it naturally but also consciously, either due to the fact certain words in Farsi seem articulated better, and also to build rapport with the group culturally, which ties into our main thesis that the phenomenon of code-switching is usually intimately linked to one’s cultural identity.

Spanish

To continue, Spanish and English bilingual speakers tend to gravitate towards an unofficial language, Spanglish. This is when English and Spanish are combined in conversation. Spanglish is a form of code-switching, setting the foundations for forming one’s identity, while simultaneously maintaining their culture.

The method used was a naturalistic observation of a phone call between a bilingual speaker and their parents. They answered the phone in English, just like they do with friends and people of the same age. Spanish was used rarely and the language used had no link to what type of person they were speaking to. The phone then got passed to the speaker’s grandma, and that is when the bilingual speaker started speaking only Spanish. The Spanish the speaker used were easy to decipher that they were speaking to someone of an older age because words like “usted”(you) and “mande”(excuse me) were used. These are formal words and are used when speaking to strangers or elders.

After tallying up the number of formal words used in the phone call, all of them came when speaking Spanish, except one coming from English. The research shows that code-switching can occur within a family and also how a change of language is made to show respect. The same goal could not be achieved with English, since Spanish has an emphasis on formal speaking, causing the speaker to have a complete shift of identity when code-switching.

Figure 2: Frequency of formal words used between Spanish and English from a bilingual speaker

Language is inherently tied to respect when concerning age, class, and gender in Spanish, showing how language can shape the way one thinks.

Arabic

Bilingual Arabic speakers are more likely to use religious jargon (inshallah, mashallah) when interacting with parents and other elders. When speaking to friends, siblings, and cousins they are most likely to speak a 70/30 mix of English and Arabic in contrast to a 20/80 mix when speaking to Elders. Another important consideration is the intonations and accents used for certain words when speaking each language. Because Arabic and English have a very different set of sounds, the same word can be pronounced differently depending on the spoken language. For example, most native speakers of both English and Arabic know that Pepsi – with a p – is the correct pronunciation of the soda, however, they will still pronounce it like Bebsi with a b sound when speaking Arabic. This is done to signal that the speaker is native in Arabic and is part of the Society of native Arabic speakers who do not use the P sound.

Discussion and Conclusions

All three languages investigated truly show just how intricate and complex languages are, especially when it comes to code-switching. Our research shows how code-switching plays an extremely crucial role in forming one’s identity and how it goes beyond just language. It reflects social dynamics like social status, respect for elders, and cultural identity preservation. Our study contributes to the gap of knowledge of understanding how native languages travel down from generation to generation in immigrant families in America, and how code-switching shapes who we are and the social groups we belong to.

References

Albirini, A. (2011). The sociolinguistic functions of codeswitching between Standard Arabic and Dialectal Arabic. Language in society, 40(5), 537-562.

Heller, M. (2020). Code-switching and the politics of language. In The bilingualism reader (pp. 163-176). Routledge.

Kachramanian, C. (2021). Bilingual Interactions: An Investigation into Code-switching and Its Purposes among Armenian-Dutch Bilinguals.

Klavans, J. L. (1985). The syntax of code-switching: Spanish and English. In Proceedings of the Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (Vol. 14, pp. 213-231). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Martin-Jones, M. (1995). Code-switching in the classroom: Two decades of research. One speaker, two languages: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on code-switching, 90-111.

Myers‐Scotton, C. (2017). Code‐switching. The handbook of sociolinguistics, 217-237.

[/expander_maker]

Code Switching Across Generations in Bilingual Families

Paulina Martirossian, Veronica Rojas, Itxhel Lozoya, Cambrya Melendez, Ashlyn Claustro

Have you ever wondered how code-switching and bilingualism can differ depending on the person you are communicating with? Do you feel that it can have an impact on relationships that are formed between people among different generations? This study explores how bilingual individuals across many generations who speak Armenian and English or Spanish and English may alter their approaches to communication when interacting with certain people. Additionally, we were curious to find out whether or not the closeness of people’s relationships affects their formality when communicating and code-switching. In order to find results, we conducted numerous semi-structured interviews and listened in on the conversations between college students and their relatives, while paying attention to word choice, syntax, and grammar when speaking. We concluded that (87%) of our interviewees believe that their relationship with their elders determines the formality of their communication style, often leading to difficulty when expressing oneself. By studying code-switching and bilingualism, we discovered a relationship between identity and communication that spans across generations.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction and Background

Throughout our research, our target audience is the diaspora of bilingual individuals of a variety of age ranges, who speak either Spanish and English or Armenian and English. Our main goal is to focus on code-switching and the ways in which people of different generations communicate with one another. From our research, we sought to understand how students’ perspectives on being bilingual play a crucial role in understanding how speaking two languages can have an impact on their daily lives as they socialize with elders and people of their age. Prior to conducting any of our research, we hypothesized that Spanish and Armenian bilingual individuals would speak with more formality when with older family members and switch to speaking with less formality when with those whom they are closer to in age and relationship.

Methods

We looked at bilingual students who spoke English, and either Armenian or Spanish. We wanted to look at interactions between older and younger generations, so we focused on college students, as well as two parents with college children to have a contrasting perspective. Listening to phone calls allowed us to figure out which language was being used and when, although this method only allowed us to listen to one side of the conversation. We did this to see if there was a specific timing or reason that bilingual speakers switched the language being used. Another element we listened for in these phone calls was how formally college students were talking to those who were older than them. We determined formal speech by whether the speaker used slang, curses, or other language that would not be considered proper when speaking to the older generation. For Spanish speakers, the formal ‘usted’ was an indication of formal speech. After listening to phone calls, we also conducted interviews. The interview questions we used were open-ended and the same questions were used for all participants. We decided to use open-ended questions to allow freedom in responses. The questions asked can be found below, but all had to do with the participants’ thoughts on bilingualism as well as how they interact with those of the older generation.

Results and Analysis

Figure 1: Summary of interview questions and answers

Discussion and Conclusions

In conclusion, our research has provided us with valuable insights into the intricacies of code-switching among bilingual individuals within the Spanish-English and Armenian-English speaking diasporas. By focusing on intergenerational communication patterns, we have uncovered the significance of word choice and formality levels in interactions between different age groups. Our findings highlighted that the main influential factor for one’s word choice and formality of speaking was having respect for older individuals with whom they are communicating as such respect is a cultural facet. This evidence sheds light on the intricate connections between language, cultural norms, and social relationships, showing how language use is shaped by both internal and external environmental factors. Overall, our research has given us an extensive and comprehensive understanding of the nuanced ways in which bilingual individuals communicate in various social situations.

References

Babino, A., & Stewart, M. A. (2017). “I Like English Better”: Latino Dual Language Students’ Investment in Spanish, English, and Bilingualism. Journal of Latinos and Education, 16(1), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2016.1179186

Heredia, R. R., & Altarriba, J. (2001). Bilingual Language Mixing: Why Do Bilinguals Code-Switch? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(5), 164–168. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20182730

Hua, Z. (2008). Duelling Languages, Duelling Values: Codeswitching in bilingual intergenerational conflict talk in diasporic families. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(10), 1799–1816. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.02.007

Mata, R. “Bilingualism Is Good but Codeswitching Is Bad: Attitudes about Spanish in Contact with English in the Tijuana – San Diego Border Area.” Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, vol. 20, no. 4, 2023, pp. 386–407, https://doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2022.2136672.

Meisel, J. M. (1994). CODE-SWITCHING IN YOUNG BILINGUAL CHILDREN: The Acquisition of Grammatical Constraints. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(4), 413–439. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44487780

Additional Sources

Mia Nacamulli: The benefits of a bilingual brain | TED Talk: This video discusses the benefits of being bilingual while putting into perspective individuals that navigate the world through two different cultures.

Code Switching in Bilingual Development: a video showing examples of children coded-switching to give readers an audio/visual representation of what code-switching is

[/expander_maker]

The Enigma of Everyday Speech: Why some casual language might be nearly impossible to translate

Eden Amsellem, Anaïs Clancy, Emily MacDonald, Jennifer Padilla Villegas, Summer Xia

Communication in casual contexts appears to be less directly translatable between languages than communication in formal contexts. Several of our group members are bilingual and have experienced difficulties when translating between the different languages they speak. Based on their personal experiences, we wanted to determine whether language in casual or formal contexts tended to be more untranslatable. To do this, we analyzed texts that had been translated between English and French, Spanish, or Mandarin. Our bilingual group members searched each text for instances where the translation was noticeably inconsistent with the original meaning. These inconsistencies came from a variety of language aspects including tone, connotations, idioms, and slang. The translators recorded these inconsistencies as our data. From that data, we found that the casual texts had more instances of untranslatability than the formal texts. We discuss why this might be and why the greater degree of untranslatability in casual language might suggest it carries more cultural meaning.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction and Background

We are building our research first on a foundation of literature that defines untranslatability along with its many different variations. Untranslatability is a phenomenon in which the full meaning of some communication does not have an equivalent in another language (Lomas, 2018). There are different types of untranslatability, distinguished by the reason why translation is not possible. One way of dividing untranslatability is into linguistic untranslatability and cultural untranslatability (Cui, 2012). Linguistic untranslatability occurs when two languages do not share the linguistic features necessary to convey meaning in quite the same way (further explanation of one type of linguistic untranslatability). Cultural untranslatability occurs when there is a cultural gap between two language communities that makes it impossible to convey the same meaning in both languages.

Lomas (2018) and Özgen (2004) discuss how language influences a person’s perception of the world by dictating the ways they are able to categorize ideas and conceptualize their experiences through the language available to them, an idea known as the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis. From this perspective, untranslatability indicates not only barriers in available words but barriers in entire frameworks of understanding. Additional literature also explores the importance of cultural differences as a major factor that contributes to untranslatability (Cui, 2012; Lomas, 2016; Talukder, 2020; Witherspoon, 1980). Related to this, Talukder (2020) even points to untranslatability as important to cultural identity, reasoning that the inability to translate parts of a language can keep certain information and practices exclusive to the cultural in-group.

Originally, we planned to examine untranslatability more generally, but as we read through previous studies, we realized that there was no research we could find that touched on the differences between translating formal language and translating casual language. The bilingual members of our group thought that this was an important topic because in their experience, translating casual language is very different from translating standard or formal language. Because of that, we decided that we should fill that research gap and narrow our focus to comparing untranslatability in formal and casual texts.

We approached our research asking the question: How effective are cross-cultural translations in conveying meaning in language in casual contexts compared to language in formal contexts? In response, we hypothesized that more meaning would be lost when translating casual communication compared to formal communication.

Methods

In order to find instances of untranslatability, we collected data in the form of inconsistencies in translations of texts. We analyzed texts that had been translated from French, Spanish, and Mandarin into English or from English into any of those three languages. We included these languages in our research because three of our group members are fluent in each of them. Because we wanted to explore the differences between untranslatability in formal and casual contexts, we included texts which had contexts of differing levels of formality ranging from governmental speeches (Guterres, 2023; 特朗普就职演讲完整版, 2017), which were the most formal, to conversations between highschoolers in television shows (Andem, 2018; Ipartment, 2014), which were the least formal. In the middle was Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech (Mali, 2008; 马丁·路德·金, n.d.), as it is somewhat formal while also intended to be accessible to the average person.

Our translators recorded any inconsistencies they encountered between the original texts and their translations in a table (examples of potential inconsistencies in translation) They noted what aspect of language caused the inconsistency and how it changed the meaning. This allowed us to compare the frequency and causes of untranslatability between the different contexts and between the different languages.

Figure 1: An example of an inconsistency in translation in a casual context. The text is translated “I would understand if you were mad at me” despite the original French text having more aggressive connotations that do not translate. Andem, J. (2018). Skam France. Season 7. Episode 3.

Results and Analysis

Our results support our hypothesis, as we found more inconsistencies in the translations of casual contexts than we did in translations of formal contexts. In all of the languages we looked at, there were more inconsistencies in the translation of the casual speech from the television show than there were in the translations of the formal governmental speeches. In Spanish, our translator found four inconsistencies in the translation of the casual text, four in the translation of the intermediate text, and none in the translation of the formal text. In French, our translator found nine inconsistencies in the translation of the casual text, one in the translation of the intermediate text, and six in the translation of the formal text. Lastly, in Mandarin, our translator found fifteen inconsistencies in the translation of the casual text, eight in the translation of the intermediate text, and none in the translation of the formal text.

Figure 2: Number of translation inconsistencies by language and formality of context

Figure 3: Two examples of strong emotional connotations being lost in translation (Andem, 2018; Ipartment, 2014)

The two types of untranslatability discussed by Cui (2012) are cultural untranslatability and linguistic untranslatability. If the greater degree of untranslatability within casual contexts of speech is caused by cultural untranslatability, that would suggest that there are more concepts discussed in casual speech that are culture-specific. Talukder (2020) proposes the idea that untranslatability corresponds with cultural identity, while Cui (2012), Lomas (2016), Talukder (2020), and Witherspoon (1980) cite cultural knowledge as one of the main causes of untranslatability. If cultural meaning is correlated with greater untranslatability as the background research suggests, and our results show that casual speech has more instances of untranslatability, then that might suggest that casual speech tends to carry more culturally specific meaning than formal speech. Talukder (2020) also explains the importance of untranslatability as a mechanism that keeps certain aspects of a culture exclusive to those who belong to that culture. If casual language is less translatable than formal language, it could also be a way of indexing oneself as part of a cultural group and ensuring that the full meaning of what one is talking about is only understood by other cultural insiders. It is also possible, however, that the greater degree of untranslatability we observed within casual speech is due to linguistic untranslatability. In that case, it may suggest that linguistic construction is more standardized, even between languages, in formal contexts.

Another reason why casual contexts hold more meaning than standard contexts of a language can be explained by the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis. As described by Lomas (2018), the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis argues that “language plays a constitutive role in the way people experience and understand life” (p. 478). As we previously stated, standard contexts of a language have a universal aspect to them in that they can be easily translated from one language to another as it is more formal and don’t require too many culture-specific references or words. However, in casual contexts, it is not made to be universally translated and is instead very culture-specific as it holds more untranslatable words or phrases like idioms or slang.

More than formal contexts, casual contexts illustrate people’s perspectives and understandings of life who speak a certain language because it is so unique to that specific culture or language. Indeed, Özgen (2004) researched language and color perception and stated that “Berinmo, a language spoken in Papua New Guinea… has just five basic color terms,” additionally, “these terms seem to have unusual referents, such as the color of dead leaves” (p. 96). If one were to translate colors from Berinmo to English word for word, the meaning would not be understood by an English speaker. Even if the word was translated for the color that it is referring to, significant meaning would be lost as the English speaker would not be aware that the word was translated from a word that does not directly mean the color that it is referring to. Therefore, certain words in certain languages are often hard to translate because they provide a different perspective or insight about the world that itself isn’t easily conveyed to someone who has not grown seeing the world through that perspective.

Discussion and Conclusions

Our research is helpful in that it points to a possible pattern in untranslatability, namely that formal language appears to be easier to translate while casual language presents more instances of untranslatability. This opens the door to possible future research and could help readers and translators be aware of where potential inconsistencies in translation are likely to be found. When people read or listen to a translation, they should be aware that cultural differences might impede their understanding of the original meaning, especially when the translation they are reading is of language in a casual context.

Though our research is an interesting starting point, it is limited by our time and resources. We only looked at three languages, only had one translator per language, and our sample size of texts is small. More research is needed to elaborate on these ideas or to prove or disprove our findings.

References

Andem, J. (2018). Skam France. Season 7. Episode 3.

Cui, J. (2012). Untranslatability and the method of compensation. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(4), 826–830. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.4.826-830

Guterres, A. (2023). UN secretary-general’s remarks to the 52nd session of the Human Rights Council secretary-general. United Nations. Retrieved March 23, 2023, from https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/speeches/2023-02-27/un-secretary-generals-remarks-the-52nd-session-of-the-human-rights-council

https://Agendamagna.wordpress.com/2009/01/20/Discurso-De-Toma-De-Posesion-De-Barack-Obama/, El Comercio Website, 20 Jan. 2009, http://obamaspeeches.com/.

Ipartment. (2014). YouTube. Retrieved March 23, 2023, from https://youtu.be/goQzSuBwBa4

King, M. L. (2023). Martin Luther King, Jr. I Have a Dream. Martin Luther King Jr. I Have a Dream speech – American Rhetoric. Retrieved March 23, 2023, from https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm

Lomas, T. (2016). Towards a positive cross-cultural lexicography: Enriching our emotional landscape through 216 ‘untranslatable’ words pertaining to well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 11(5), 546–558. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2015.1127993

Lomas, T. (2018). Experiential cartography and the significance of “untranslatable” words. Theory & Psychology, 28(4), 476–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354318772914

Mali, U. S. M. (2018, February 8). ” I have a dream ” : Le texte intégral en français du discours de martin luther king. Ambassade des Etats-Unis au Mali. Retrieved March 23, 2023, from https://ml.usembassy.gov/fr/dream-le-texte-integral-en-francais-du-discours-de-martin-luther-king/

Özgen, E. (2004). Language, Learning, and Color Perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(3), 95–98. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20182921

Talukder, B. (2020). Matijaner Meyera in Translation: Cultural Identity Construction Through Untranslatability of Language. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 10(6), 36-40. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.10n.6p.36

“The Complete Text Transcripts of over 100 Barack Obama Speeches.” The Complete Text Transcripts of Over 100 Barack Obama Speeches, http://obamaspeeches.com/.

Witherspoon, G. (1980). Language in Culture and Culture in Language. International Journal of American Linguistics, 46(1), 1–13. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1264442

特朗普就职演讲完整版. (2017). 哔哩哔哩_bilibili. Retrieved March 23, 2023, from http://b23.tv/ZEZpQA6

马丁·路德·金《我有一个梦想》伟大演讲全文（中英文对照）-随笔. 【姚从刚】. (n.d.). Retrieved March 23, 2023, from http://www.yaoconggang.com/post96/96.html

[/expander_maker]