Our Research Question: What are the differences in subjects verbal and non-verbal (text) communication amongst a group of 7 East Asian Chapman students?
After digging deep into the first chapter, Language and Society, from “Because Internet”, our group found something which stood out as something we desired to research. It would be most interesting to dissect and compare different peoples dialogue, in verbal and non verbal communication. We began with a creative process over zoom, sharing different ideas and bouncing between different ways we could conduct our research. We came to decide we would use subjects all which attend Chapman university. After finding our subjects and getting their responses we concluded all information gathered then continued to make more observations about kinds of trends and findings.
In conducting this research, we will use a series of questions, all of which will be asked to each subject. The order of the questions will remain constant, as will the questions. We want to know what is normal for different backgrounds. How the verbal and non-verbal communication differs based on these backgrounds.
We will differentiate the subjects’ response using informal and formal scenarios/prompts. Each subject will have unlimited time to respond and no limit on the length of their response. We will collect information on the subjects in regards to their backgrounds. All information will be categorized and organized on a table. In addition to this, we will look into the different backgrounds of the subjects and further investigate to find similarities or differences.
Subject Information:
All subjects are of the same if not similar ethnicities. All coming from Easrt Asian backgrounds. With a ratio of 3 male: 4 female. Subjects are from different places in California, New York and Greece. The subjects were ages 18–20.
THE QUESTIONNAIRE:
Findings:
(Nonverbal)
Email to Teacher:
When sending an email to a teacher, all participants followed a similar format. They started with a salutation (Dear, Hello, or Hi) followed by addressing them with an honorific (Professor or Dr.). Since a name was not provided in the prompt, the subjects all skipped including the teachers last name. They wrote in a polite and formal manner while explaining the situation and what they needed assistance in. All participants then ended their email with a sign off (thank you, best, sincerely). All emails were free of grammatical errors and were punctuated and capitalized correctly.
Text to Friend:
When texting a friend some participants did not include a greeting and all did not include a name. Many texting abbreviations were used (tomo, def, thoo, b, tmrw). Some texts were typed fully in lowercase or a mix of lower and uppercase.
Abbreviations:
More differences than similarities in the most used texting abbreviations. This shows how every person has their own texting style which could be influenced by how their friends’ text or what they’ve seen on the internet. This also shows how though there are slangs not commonly used by everyone, people still can understand all of these abbreviations.
Comment on Video:
Most comments were short reactions to the video ranging from 2 to 4 words. They were not very specific and focused more on how they enjoyed or appreciated the content. These comments also did not formally address the creator or including their name at the end. This method is more anonymous and does not reveal anything about the character of the participant other than the fact that they liked watching the video.
Findings:
(Verbal)
Slang:
More differences than similarities in slang used. This shows how all people have their own type of friend group with various personalities. Some of these slangs were inside jokes or words their friends found funny.
Spilled Drink Confrontation:
Participants took different approaches when confronting the people behind them. Some took a calmer approach and ordered them to apologize or supported their friend. One person tried to prevent a big issue by politely saying excuse me to interrupt the laughter. Others took a more aggressive approach by yelling at them to evoke fear. One participant even resulted to physical violence because of this situation.
Party Convincing:
Participants gave reasons of why the friend should go focusing on how fun the party would be. Most people first questioned why they did not want to attend the party and then reasoned how exciting it would be. They also used specific words (come on, please) to encourage and plead the friend to come and emphasized how they would miss out if they did not go. Participants used a whinier tone and polite language to not seem overly aggressive, yet still convincing.
A deeper look into Code-switching
Code-switching is a phenomena that has been observed for many years. It has been observed since people started to speak multiple languages. People use code-switching in their everyday life. Whether it be talking to a boss or a friend, code-switching is in most verbal interactions. Code-switching is a very important part of communication. One may ask “what is code-switching anyways?” Oxford dictionary states that code-switching is “the practice of alternating between two or more languages or varieties of language in conversation”. This bit of research is looking at the latter part of that statement. In other words the science or theory behind code-switching in text or conversation speech.
The first article or essay that will be discussed comes from Kristen Hawley Turner. Turner analyzes what she calls “text speak”, which differs from normal speech. Text speak is basically the way people or in this case young people speak on the internet and in text messages. The example she gives is changing the word “you” to just the letter “u”. Mainly Turner is trying to see if there is a problem with young people using text speak or if there is some benefit. She argues that it is kind of beneficial for young people to be aware of the code-switching that they do. Turner shows a way that teachers showed students the contexts and why it matters in terms of code-switching in text speak. This was similar to our own ethnographic research. Which basically involved asking the participants how they would respond in text in certain contexts. People don’t use text speak in everyday language. Obviously they will use it in text, but not to everyone they text. Professional contexts or contexts of respect like to one’s mother changes how one speaks in text. Most people will find that they do something similar. A person would not text their professor bro, but will text their friend that (there are obvious exceptions). This article showed that young people understand for the most part the different contexts in whichthey can use text speech. This does hold true anecdotally. I have only encountered one other student in early high school that used text speech in an essay. Every other peer of mine knows not to use text speech in formal essays. One may ask then, why do people even code switch?
This next article may help answer that question and it is written by Gene Demby from NPR. The article examines how people code switch in their daily lives. It is mainly an informative article which really just tries to show and explain what code-switching is. Demby shows that code-switching happens in the professional and informal contexts. He showed that slang is integral to code-switching. Slang in this context can be interpreted as using “lol” or “u” in place of longer or larger phrases. People code-switch to fit into specific contexts. One may switch their accent when talking to their mom or just use a different form of slang. Code-switching is all about setting the tone and feeling it. It is kind of integral in everyday life and is only exemplified by text messages and nonverbal speech. A person is not going to speak in an academic voice when asking their friend if they want to go to the movies. To fit in with other people especially in text, one has to learn the lingo. I don’t think many people would appreciate it if someone said “laugh out loud” instead of “lol”.
This other article also happens to be from NPR and it is by Matt Thompson. It mainly discusses and presents examples of where people usually code-switch. One way of code-switching presented is a sort of automatic one. This form of code-switching was unintentional and would just happen out of the blue. Another example that they gave was to fit in. In other words people code-switch to fit the context that they are communicating in. These two examples kind of go along with each other. This article is showing that code-switching is more about context. No matter what context one may be in they can easily code-switch to fit in. This can be applied to nonverbal communication like text messages also. Text messaging is adifferent context, so people will code-switch in that new context. This article was very interesting and complimented the previous article well. It gives a more concrete understanding of the contexts where code-switching is used. One can argue that it is all due to the greater society. People want to fit in and no one wants to be kicked out of society or shunned. Whether people like it or not, they will learn to code-switch or be at risk of being ignored or ridiculed. Code switching also helps make a sense of community. If one is trying to fit into a new community they will learn their slang to try to fit in. Friend groups also may have their own slang. This article helps to expand the understanding as to why people code-switch.
In Matt Levinson’s article he briefly discusses how code-switching relates to modern teens. He described how teens code-switch all the time and this is due to modern technology. A teen will change the way they speak or their actions based on whether they are in a classroom or not. In the classroom a teen will not send a video to a friend, but at home the teen will do that. When a teen leaves class they immediately code-switch since they can use their phones. Teens have developed an awareness of this code-switching. Most of the time intentionally switching according to Levinson. One example is how teens will text in text speech and write essays in formal text. At home when the parent speaks to their kid, the kid will code-switch to properly communicate to their parent. Code-switching has become very apparent in the modern teen’s life. This doesn’t just apply to teens however, it can easily be applied to anyone that frequently uses technology. I find that this information applies to my peers and I. As discussed in the previous paragraphs, most of my peers won’t speak the same way they do in text during a lecture class. Technology has greatly influenced communication. It has expanded and changed the way that people communicate.
These articles all give a clear view of the purpose and why people code-switch. Code-switching is mainly used when people change contexts. Examples given are when speaking to someone of a different culture or a parent versus a friend. This also occurs when texting someone versus sending a professional email. So code-switching does not necessarily have to be between two different languages it can also happen within one language. In the case of texting a friend versus professional messages, one may text “u” to a friend instead of “you” to a professor. That’s not to say this universally applies to everyone. People code-switch differently and may not even do it.
Code-switching as stated before is a phenomena used by many people around the world. Nowadays people don’t even have to know a different language to code-switch. I personally code-switch daily. I switch from many different forms of speaking. From nonverbal text conversations where I say “lol”, to more formal conversations with my parents where I don’t use those abbreviations. There is a whole new world of non verbal to verbal code-switching. Most of the articles I found touched or barely touched on the code-switching that is happening with technology. The articles mostly discussed code-switching between languages. A study like this one is helpful as it will help find some trends within this new form of code-switching.
Did we successfully answer our research question?
After analyzing all of the findings, we found that our subjects had similar and different answers to the questions that they were given. In the email to a teacher, the answers were mostly uniform. The participants mostly used the same format as one another and they included some variation. The text to a friend question prompt did give a larger variation of results. In this prompt we observed a variety of slangs and punctuation. Some participants used uppercase letters while others did not. There were more slangs used that were different from other participant’s than slang that was the same. It seems in an overall less formal setting the participants will focus less on acknowledging the person they are speaking to and correct grammar/punctuation. The findings for the verbal prompts also have similar results. There is a large variety of slangs used that other participants did not use. Many people had different approaches to confrontation. Though, there seemed to be a consensus of how to approach one’s friend about going to a party. Overall the responses seemed to vary based on context. There wasn’t a single person that spoke or wrote to someone the same exact way regardless of context. There was always some variation due to different contexts.
All of these findings basically confirm the research from the articles that we collected. One can also say that the findings in our own research are bolstered by previous research articles. The research suggested that people code-switch and overall speak differently depending on context. In our study it completely showed that people will code-switch by context. Each participant also had a variety of slang. Meaning that at the micro level of language, it varys more. In a more general sense the participants were similar, like in how they formatted an email. Both the verbal and non-verbal forms of slang were varied. This can help suggest that people develop their own slang based on the people around them and their surroundings.
In conclusion among East Asian Chapman students they tend to all take the same approaches to similar contexts. In more formal contexts people will have a more uniform way of responding. There will be little variation in answers. In less formal contexts where regions and personal experience influences the person there is more variation in responses. Each person’s slang is different than one another’s and this research has proved that.
References:
Demby, G. (2013, April 08). How Code-Switching Explains The World. Retrieved October 28, 2020, from https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/04/08/176064688/how-code-switching-explains-the-world
Levinson, M. (2013, May 01). The Digital Lives of Teens: Code Switching. Retrieved October 28, 2020, from https://www.edutopia.org/blog/digital-teens-code-switching-matt-levinson
Thompson, M. (2013, April 13). Five Reasons Why People Code-Switch. Retrieved October 28, 2020, from https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/04/13/177126294/five-reasons-why-people-code-switch
Turner H. K. (2009). Flipping the Switch: Code-Switching from Text Speak to Standard English. (60–65). Retrieved From: https://cdn.ncte.org/nctefiles/pd/consulting/wheelerejmay2009.pdf
