A. DIGLOSSIA
Issues
regarding bilingual would seem closely with the development of the Indonesian
language. This is because the Indonesian people use more than one language, the
language of their mother (the local language) and the Indonesian language as
the national language. The use of local language is also called the use of the
first language, while the use of Indonesian is also known as a second language
use. The use of such language is referred to as diglossia (Aslinda, et al.,
2007:26). The word comes from the French
“diglossie”, which was used by Marcais, a French linguist but the term has
become popular in the study of linguistics was used by scholars from Stanford
University, the CA Ferguson in 1958 in a symposium on "Urbanization and
standard languages" organized by the American Anthropological
Association in Washington DC.
Diglossia
is relatively stable language situation in which, in addition to the primary
dialects of the language (which may include a standards or regional standard),
there is a very divergent, highly codified (often grammatically more complex)
superposed variety, the vehicle of a large and respected body of written
literature,. Either of an earlier period or in another speech community, which
is learned largely by formal education and is used for most written and formal
spoken purposes but is not used by any
sector of the community for ordinary conversation.
Diglossia
has three crucial features:
1.
Two distinct varieties of the same language are used
in the community, with one regarded as a high (or H) variety and the other a
low (or L) variety.
2.
Each variety is used for quite distinct functions; H
and L complement each other.
3.
No one uses the H variety in everyday conversation.
A key defining characteristic of diglossia is that the
two varieties are kept quite apart in their functions. One is used one set of
circumstance s and the other in an entirely different set. For example, the H varieties may be used for
delivering sermons and formal lectures, especially in a parliament or
legislative body, for giving political speech, for broadcasting the news on
radio and television, etc. in contrast, L varieties may be used in giving
instructions to workers in low prestige occupations or to household servants,
in conversation with familiars, in popular programs on the radio and in folk
literature.
Diglossia was described by Ferguson to summon the nine
topics, namely the function, prestige, literary heritage, acquisition,
standardization, stability, grammar, lexicon, and phonology.
1.
Function: diglossia is a very important criterion.
According to Ferguson in diglosis society there are two variations of the
language: first language variation called high dialect (dialect abbreviated H
or H range) and the second is a low dialect (dialect abbreviated L or range L).
Functional distribution of dialects H L means that there are situations where
only H dialect suitable for use, and in others only the L dialect that can be
used. The function of H only on official or formal situations, while the L
function only on an informal and relaxed situations.
2.
Prestige: In a society diglosis speakers usually
considered more prestigious dialect H, more superior, more respected, and is a
logical language. While L is considered inferior dialect, instead there is a
deny its existence.
3.
Literary heritage: In three of the four languages used
Ferguson as an example there is literature in a variety of H used and respected
by the community language. If there are also works of contemporary literature
by using a variety of H, then it is perceived as a continuation of that
tradition, the literary work should be in the range of H. Literary tradition
that is always in the range of H is causing foreign literature it became
public.
4.
Acquisition: Variations of H obtained by learning in
formal education, while regarded L obtained from the association with family
and peers. Therefore, those who have never entered the world of formal
education will not know the range of H at all. Those who study the range of H
is almost never hang smoothly, surfing mastery of various L.
5.
Standardization: Since the range of H is seen as a
prestigious variety, it is not surprising that the range of H standardization
done through formal codification. Dictionaries, grammar, pronunciation guide,
and books for the use of the correct rules written for a variety of H. In
contrast, the range of L was never taken care of and addressed.
6.
Stability: Stability in the long-running diglosis
usually where there is a variation of a language that maintained its presence
in the community. Discrepancy or difference between the range and variety of H
L in the diglosis always highlighted because of the development in mixed forms
have characteristics H range and variety of L.
7.
Grammar: Ferguson argued that the range of H and L in
the range of diglossia are forms of the same language support, but in
grammatical apparently there is a difference.
8.
Lexicon: Most of the vocabulary in the range of H and
L are the same variety. however, there is a vocabulary in the range of H is not
no mate the range of L, or vice versa, there is a vocabulary in the range of L
that there is no partner on the range of H.
9.
Phonology: In the field of phonology there are
structural differences between the various kinds of H and L. This difference
could be too much close. Ferguson stated range sound system and a variety of L
H is actually a single variety, but phonological H is a basic system, while
diverse phonological L-variety, a subsystem or parasystem.
In
the situation of diglossia we will find the diglossia levels in several
regional languages in Indonesia such as Javanese, Sundanese, Balinese, etc.
which hasa name. In Sundanese people are
known “undak usuk basa” which there are grammatical rules governing low-level
language diversity and high diversity of languages such
as basa cohag (coarse variety), basa loma (range for others), basa sedeng
(medium range or middle), basa lemes (fine variety). In Java there are ngoko
language (the lowest level), krama (middle), krama inggil (high level). Both
have a standard size of each and recognized by the wearer.
The Relation between Bilingualism and Diglossia
Diglossia
is defined as a function of differences in the use of language (especially the
function of H and L) and bilingualism is a state of the use of two languages interchangeably
in the community, Fishman (1977) describes the relationship diglossia and
bilingualism were as shown in the chart.
There
are four types of relationships between Bilingualism and diglossia;
1.
Bilingualism
and Diglossia
Bilingualism
– two languages of an individual
Diglossia
– two language in society
The
relationship between societal diglossia individual bilingualism is not
necessary or causal.
Examples
:
a. Javanese people in formal situation (Hv – Bahasa Indonesia: Lv – local dialect or languages)
2.
Bilingualism
without diglossia
Unstable
and likely to lead to creolisation
Examples
:
a.
Javanes people in formal
situation : (javanese people who could
speak Bahasa Indonesia with correctly ‘Ejaan Yang Disempurnakan’ and English language without their local language )
Diglossia without bilingualism
Diglossia
without bilingualism tend to be relatively stable, long-term arrangements.
example a. the people who just know their local language. just one langugae.
example a. the people who just know their local language. just one langugae.
3.
No bilingualism
and no diglossia
Monolingual
states – political fiction
Examples
:
a.
Cuba (forced monolingual state by
exterminating minority languages)
b.
The dominican Republic
c.
Natural ones
d.
In Indonesia there is no
bilingualism and no diglossia
B. BILINGUALISM
The
term bilingualism (Indonesian: Kedwibahasaan), mean two languages are commonly
used and understood in day-to-day use in that society. First, their own mother
tongue or first language, and the second are another language.
Finally,
bilingualism start from dominate the first language (as mother tongue) and know
a little about second language, and then can dominate the second language and
make the second language as well as with the first language in
communication.
According
to Bloomfield (1933:56), “Bilingualism is speaker’ ability use two languages as
well as.” So, it mean that a person called bilingual if the speaker use the
first language and the second language as well as.
Example:
Anahina
is a bilingual Tongan New Zealander living in Auckland. At home with her family
she uses Tongan almost exclusively for a wide range of topics. She often talks
to her grandmother about Tongan customs, for instance. With her mother she
exchanges gossip about Tongan friends and relatives. Tongan is the language the
family uses at mealtimes. They discuss what they have been doing, plan family
outings, and share information about Tongan social events. It is only with her
older sisters that she uses some English words when they are talking about
school or doing their homework.
Certain
social factors ¾ who you are talking to, the social context of the
talk, the function and topic of the discussion ¾ turn out to be important in accounting for language
choice in many different kinds of speech community.
Bilingualism is defined as the use of two languages
by the speakers in the interaction with other people, Mackey (in Chaer and
Agustina 2004:84). Additionally, according to Meckey there are four aspects to
facilitate discussions about bilingual, is as follows:
Level of Ability
The language ability will appear on the four
skills, namely listening, reading, speaking, and writing.
Function
Proficiency level depending on the function or use of the language. It
can be said that the more often the language used, the level depending of
speakers. The factors that influence the internal and external factors.
Internal factors include:
1. Internal usage such as counting, estimation, praying, cursing, a
dream, a diary, and record
2. Aptitude: talent or intelligence, and is influenced by: Sex, Age, Intelligence, Memory Attitude discuss and Motivation.
Influenced by external factors:
1. Contacts, means speaker’s contact with their language at home,
language in society, language at schools, language in mass media, and
correspondence.
2. Variable means of speaker’ contact is determined by: 1. Length of exposure, 2. frequent contacts,
3. Pressure, meaning that influence speakers in the field of language usage,
such as the economic, administrative, cultural, political, military, historical,
religious, and demographic.
Substitution between
languages (alternation)
Substitution between language fluency and also depends on the external
and internal functions. Conditions speakers switch languages invented by at
least three things: topic of conversation, people involved, and tension.
Interference
Interference is an error that caused entrainment habits of speech or
language into the language of maternal dialect. Interference bias occurs in
pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and meaning even culture. Description
interference with such individual, so it is idiosyncratic and parole speakers.
Shifting language (Language
shift)
When a new group comes to other places and mingled with the local group
then it will pass the language shift (language shift).
Convergence (convergence)
Convergence is met activities and mainly move towards unity and
uniformity.
Bilingualism in Indonesia, namely:
1. Local language and
Indonesian language
Bilingualism in
Indonesia (Local language and Indonesian language). Use bilingualism, this can
happen because:
a.
When
Sumpah Pemuda on 1928 using the Indonesian language (at the time called Maleis)
associated with the struggle for independence and nationalism.
b.
Language
- the language of the area has a natural addition to coaching and development
of the language and culture of Indonesia.
c.
A
mixed marriage between tribes
d.
Transfer
of population from one region to another due to urbanization, internal
migration, mutation of the employee or employees, and so on.
e.
Interaction
between ethnic groups: that in trade, socializing and business office or
school.
f.
Many
motivation is driven by the interests of the profession and the interests of
life.
C.
MULTILINGUALISM
Multilingualism
is a society that has several languages. Such communities occur because some
ethnic communities that helped shape an ethnically plural society can be
regarded as (plural society). (Sumarsono and Paina Partana, 2002: 76).
The development of monolingual language became
bilingual and multilingual eventually be caused by many factors. The
development of communication technology, globalization, rapid education cause
needs of the community led to a shift of the language as well as the progress
of time indirectly confound between languages.
Multilingualism
refers to the depiction of a speaker who controls more than two languages,
three languages, or four, even five languages. Its use similar to
bilingualism, mean that know when and where the language is used.
Example:
The
Javanese, even they can speak Java language (as mother tongue), as well as can
speak Indonesian as second language, and English as third language, even some
who can speak Japanese, Dutch, and so on.
In the history of the formation multi-language, a
language that we look at - least there are four patterns is through migration,
colonization, federation and various language at border region.
1. Migration
Migration or displacement society which have
problematic nature of language can be divided into 2 types. The first type is a
large group of the population to expand to other areas already inhabited by
other groups. The second type occurs when a small number of ethnic members into
areas already under national control.
2. Colonization
In the process of colonial control was held by a
relatively few number of people from the region of the new controller
nationality.
3. Federation
Federation is the union of different ethnic or
nationality under the political control of the country.
4. The Various Language in the Border Region
In the border region sometimes the society become
citizen A, but as socio cultural become citizen B. Complications border regions
usually associated with war. Vanquished people forced to give up some of its
territory to the win.
D. CODE
CHOICE
1. Choosing
Your Variety or Code
The code we choose to use on a particular
occasion is likely to indicate how we wish to be viewed by others. If we can
comfortably control a number of codes, then we would seem to have an advantage
over those who lack such control. Speaking several of the languages can
obviously be distinctly advantageous in a multilingual gathering.
Code-switching may be a very useful social skill. The converse of this, of
course is that we will be judged by the code we choose to employ on a
particular occasion.
Example
1
Kalala
is 16 years od. He lives inBukavu, an African city in eastern Zaire with a
population of about 220,000. It is a multicultural, multilingual city with more
people coming and going for work and businessreasons than people who live there
permanently. Over forty groups speaking different language can be found in the
city. Kalala , like many of his friends is an employed. He spends his days
roaming the streets, stopping off periodically at regular meeting places in the
market place, in the park, or at a friend’s place. Dueing a normal day he uses
at least three different varieties or codes, and sometimes more.
Kalala
speaks an informal style of shi, his tribal language, at home with his family,
and he is familiar with the formal shi used for wesddings and funerals. He uses
informal shi in the market-place when he deals with vendors from his own ethnic
group. When he wants to communicate with people from a different tribal group,
he uses the lingua franca of the area,Swahili. He learned standard zairean
Swahili at school but the local market-place variety is title different. It has
its own distinct linguistic features and even its own name-Kingwana. He uses
kingwana to younger children and adults he meets in the streets, as well as to
people in the market-place.
Standard Zalrean Swahilli, one of
the national languages in bukavu for most official transactions. Despite the
fact that French is the official language of Zaire, Kalala uses standard
Zairean Swahili with officials in government offices when he has to fill in a
form or pay a bill. He uses it when he tries for a job in a shop or an office,
but there are very few jobs around. He spends most of his time with his
friends, and with them he uses a special variety or code called indoubil.
2. Domains
of Language Use
Example 2
Anahina
is a bilingual Tongan New Zealander living in Auckland. At home with her family
she uses Tongan almost exclusively for a
wide range of topics. She often talks to her grandmother about tongan costums
for instance. With her mother she exchanges gossip about tongan friends and
relatives. Tongan is the language the family uses at meal times. They discuss
what have been doing, plan family outings and share information about tongan
special events. It is only with her older sisters that she uses some English
words when they are talking about school or doing their homework.
Certain
social factors-who you are talking to, the social context of the talk, the
functionand topic of the discussion-turn out to be important in accounting for
language choice in many different kinds of speech community it has proved very
useful, particularly when describing code choice in large speech communities,
to look at typical interactions which involve these factors. We can imagine,
for instance a typical family
interaction. It would be located in the
setting of the home; the typical
participants will obviously be family
members; and typical topics would be family activities Anahina’s family’s
meal-time conversation described in
example 2, illustrated this pattern well. A number of such typical interactions
have been identified as relevant in describing pattern of code choice in many
speech communities. They are known as domains of language use, a term
popularized by an American
sociolinguist, Joshua Fishman a domain
involves typical interactions between typical
participants in typical settings.
3. Modelling
Variety or Code Choice
Example 3
Maria
is teenager whose Portuguese parents came to London in the 1960s. she uses
mainly Portuguese at home and to older at the Portuguese chatholic church and
community centre, but English the appropriate variety or code for her to use at
school. She uses mostly English at her after school job serving in a local
café, though occasionally order costumers greet her in Portuguese.
Domain
is clearly a very general concept which draw on three important social factors
in code choice- participants setting and
topic. It is useful for capturing broad generalisations about any speech
community. Using information about the
domain of use in a community it is possible to draw a very simple model
summarizing the norms of language use for community. This is often particularly
useful for bilingual and multilingual speech communities.
The information provided in example
4, for instance, identifies four domains and describes the variety or code
appropriate to each.
Domain Variety/code
Home/family Portuguese
Church/religion Portuguese
Work/employment English
School/education English
4. Other
Social Factors affecting Code Choice
Though
I have used domains as useful summaries of relevant social factors in the model
provided above, it is often necessary to examine more specific social factors if a model is to
be a useful description of code choice in
a community. The components of a domain do not always fit with each other. They are not always congruent. In
other words within any domain individual interactions may not be typical in the
sense in which typical is used in the domain concept. They may nevertheless, be
perfectly normal. And occur regularly, this is illustrated by Oi Lin Tan’s use
of Singapore English to her sisters as
described in example 5. People may select particular variety or codes
because it makes it easier to discuss a particular topic, regardless of where
they are speaking. At home people often discuss work or school, for instance
using the language associated with those
domains rather than the language of the family domain. Some describe this as
“leakage”, suggesting it is in some way irregular-the code associated with one domain is leaking into another. In fact
it is quite normal and very common. Particular topics may regularly be
discussed in one code rather than another, regardless of the setting or
addresses.
The dimensions introduced in chapter
1 illustrate this point nicely. Any or
all of them may be relevant in accounting for the choice of the variety or code in particular situation. When both
participants share more than one variety , then other factors will contribute to the appropriate choice.
The social distance dimensions is relevant,
for instance. How well do they know each other Le what is the social
distance between the participants? Are they strangers, friends, brothers? Kalala, for example, would
use a different code to each.
E. CODE SWITCHING
The term code switching (or code-switching)
refers to the alternation between two or more languages, dialects, or language
registers in the course of discourse between people who have more than one
language in common. Typically one of the two languages is dominant; the major
language is often called the matrix language, while the minor language is the embedded language.
1.
(Code-switching) "occurs when a bilingual introduces a completely
unassimilated word from another language into his speech." (Haugen 1956:40)
2.
"Codeswitching ... is the selection by bilinguals or multilinguals of
forms from an embedded variety (or varieties) in utterances of a matrix variety
during the same conversation" (Myers-Scotton 1993:3).
As we know that people know two languages are the first language(mother
tongue) and the second language. So from this case sometimes people combine
these languages in their communication. So in this problem they have used code
switching.
There are some experts have given definition about code switching. Some of
them are
1.
Appel
( 1976 : 76) code switching” the changing of the using language because of tthe
changing of situation”
2.
Hymes
(1875: 103)state that code switching is not happen between language but also
can happen between variety or styles in the any language. On generally Hymes
state that “Code switching has become a common term for alternate us of two or
more language, varieties of language, or even speech styles”
Studies of the social motivations for
code-switching, such as those discussed above, have demonstrated the following
:
1.
Bilingual
code switching is meaningful. it fulfils certain function of an
interaction
2.
A
speaker choice of language has to to do with maintaining or negotiating a
certain type of social identity in relation to other; code switching between language allow speaker access to different
social identities.
3.
Particular
switches may be meaningful
4.
Code
switching may switching maybe unmarked, or expected choice, or a marked or
unexpected choice: in this manner it may function as an attempt to initiate a change to
relationships.
5.
Code
switching is useful in cases of uncertainty about relationship; it allows
speaker to feel their way and negotiate identities in relation to
other.
Example :
(The Maori is in
italics. THE TRANSLATION IS IN
A SMALL CAPITALS)
Sarah : I think everyone’s here except Mere.
John : she said she might be abit late but
actually I think that’s her arriving now.
Sarah : you’re right. Kia ora Mere. Haere mai, Kei tepehen koe?
[HI MERE,
COME IN. HOW ARE YOU?]
Mere : Kia ora e hoa. Kei te pai. Have you
started yet?
[HELLO MY
FRIEND. I’M FINE]
People sometimes
switch code within a domain or social situation. When there is some obvious
change in the situation, such as the arrival of a new person, it is easy to
explain the switch. When the local English-speaking priest called, however,
everyone awitched to English. In both cases the switch reflects a change in the
social situation and takes positive account of the presence of a new
participant.
F.
CODE MIXING
Code mixing also called intra-sentential code switching or intra-sentential
code-alternation occurs when speakers use two or more languages below clause
level within one social situation. Muysken (2000) defines three types of code
mixing: insertion, alternation, and congruent lexicalization. In his view,
insertion occurs when lexical items from one language are incorporated into
another. The notion of insertion, according to Muysken (2000), corresponds to
what Clyne (1991) terms as “transference” and Myer-Scotton as “embedding”.
Equating in this instance code of language, there are two kinds of
code-switching: situational and metaphorical. Situational code-switching occurs
when the languages used change according to the situations in which the
conversant find themselves: they speak one language in one situation and
another in a different one. No topic change is involved. When a change of topic
requires a change in the language used we have metaphorical code-switching. In
this point, some topics may be discussed in either code, but the choice of code
adds a distinct flavor to what is said about the topic. The choice encodes
certain social values. Code-switching is often quite subconscious: people may
not be aware that they have switched or be able to report following a
conversation which code they used for a particular topic. Code-mixing occurs
when conversant use both languages together to the extent that they change from
one language to the other in the course of a single utterance.
Metaphorical code-switching has an affective dimension to it: you change
the code as you redefine the situation – formal to informal, official to
personal, serious to humorous, and politeness to solidarity.
Example of code switching English/Spanish
A: The picture looks so cool.
B: Which picture?
A: The one you have in your messenger.
B: Ah…Si, me gusto mucho. (Ah…Yes, I liked it a lot.)
Conversational
code-mixing involves the deliberate mixing of the language without an
associated topic change. Pfaff (1979) provides the following examples of
conversational code-mixing among Spanish and English bilinguals:
§ No van a bring it up in the meeting
‘They are not going to bring it up in the meeting’
§ Todos los Mexicanos were riled up.
‘All the Mexicans were riled up’
Example of code-mixing in English/Indonesian
·
I mean, ganti ke kalimat laen.
‘I mean, change it to another sentence’
Such conversational code-mixing is often used by bilinguals,
primarily as a solidarity marker. A speaker who mixes codes in this way in
conversation with a friend or acquaintance will almost certainly shift entirely
to English when addressing a monolingual English-speaking person or entirely to
Spanish when addressing a complete stranger who is obviously of Spanish origin.
Conversational code-mixing is not just a haphazard mixing of two languages
brought about by laziness or ignorance or some combination of these. Rather, it
requires conversant to have a sophisticated knowledge of both languages and to
be acutely aware of community norms. These norms require that both languages be
used in this way so that conversant can show their familiarity or solidarity.
Gumperz’s analysis of both choice of language and type of code-switching
and code-mixing in the community reveals that the situation is quite complex
because of the number of possibilities that are available with the ‘right’
choice highly depend on the social context and intend of the speaker like which
occurs in Slovenian. Gumperz add that “each communicating subgroup tends to
establish its own conventions with respect to both borrowing and
code-switching, and that factors such as region of origin, local residence,
social class, and occupational niche are involved in defining the norms.
Many other investigators have report results which clearly indicate the
listeners partly judge what is said by the code the speaker choose to use.
Certain codes are deemed more appropriate for certain messages than other
codes. Code and message are inseparable. Consequently, when a choice between
code exist, you must exercise that choice with great care since it can affect
what happen to the message you wish to communicate.
The code we choose to use on a
particular occasion is likely to indicate how we wish to be viewed by others.
If we can comfortably control a number of codes, then we would seem to have an
advantage over those who lack such control. Speaking several of the languages
can obviously be distinctly advantageous in a multilingual gathering.
Code-switching may be a very useful social skill. The converse of this, of
course is that we will be judged by the code we choose to employ on a
particular occasion.
Some form of mixed code,
1. insertion of the word, for example, “Ok.
Kalian ujian minggu depan.”
2. Insertion of phrase, for example,
“ Ini namanya reading skill.
3. insertion of word repetition, for
example, “ada banyak souvenir-souvenir dari Cina”
4. insertion of idioms, for example,
“makanya jadi orang itu don’t judge book by the cover”
5. insertion shape baster (native and foreign
joint formation). for example, “saya menunggu transferan uang
dari orang tua saya.”
CONCLUSION
Although most of the world's
population can speak only one language, a sizeable minority is able to
communicate in two or more. Of the world's 750 million speakers of English, for
example, only 300 million use it as their first or native tongue. The remaining
450 million speak it as a second or third language. Whenever speakers of two or
more languages come together, a decision has to be made about which of these
languages is to be used. It may be thought that the factors affecting choice of
language are few and simple, but such is not the case. Often no satisfactory
explanation can be given as to why speakers make the choices they do.
Sociolinguists have long been
fascinated by the phenomenon of bilingualism and the complex language switching
patterns that often accompany it. Many bilingual speakers are able to switch
from language to language with ease, sometimes in mid-sentence. Attempts to
define such patterns have not, however, met with much success. Research reports
on the subject are cluttered with such obscure terms as 'diglossia', 'domain',
'code-switching' and 'ethnolinguistic vitality', but reduced to the level of a
layman's understanding, the less than original conclusion would seem to be that
choice of language is dictated primarily by the milieu in which the speaker
finds himself.
REFERENCE
Abdul Chaedar dan Leonie Agustina. 2004. Sosiolinguistik
Perkenalan Awal. Jakarta : PT. Rineka Cipta.
Alwasilah, Chaedar.
1985. Sosiologi Bahasa. Bandung : Angkasa.
Holmes, Janet. 2001. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics.
London: Longman.
Jimet. 2012. Sociolinguistics: Choosing A Code “Bilingualism,
Multilingualism and code Choices. Available at http://kumpulantugaskita.blogspot.com/2012/03/sociolinguistic-choosing-code.html.
Accessed on March 21, 2013.
Juliana. 2012. Bilingualisme dan Diglosia. Available at
http://julycute07201991.blogspot.com/2012/12/bilingualisme-dan-diglosia.html.
Accessed on March 23,
2013.
Muharam, Luki. 2009. Diglossia. Available at http://anaksastra.blogspot.com/2009/04/sosiolinguistik-diglosia.html.
Accessed on Februari 20,
2013.
Sumarsono dan Partana, Paina. 2002. Sosiolinguistik. Yogyakarta:
Sabda.
ASSIGNMENT
PLEASE GIVE A CASE RELATED TO THIS SITUATION ABOUT INDONESIAN PEOPLE WHO CAN DOING
1. DIGLOSSIA
2. BILINGUALISM
3. MULTILINGUALISM
3. BILINGUALISM AND DIGLOSIA
4. BILINGUALISM NO DIGLOSSIA
5. NO BILINGUALISM AND NO DIGLOSSIA
6. CODE SWITCHING AND CODE MIXING
Present 😊
BalasHapusRiza Alifia (201610401905)
BalasHapusYohana noviyanti (201610401913)
BalasHapusYa Miss, windu hadir.😇
BalasHapusMuhammad Bagas Maulana (201610401897)
BalasHapusArisa Dewi Efendi (201510401776)
BalasHapusPuspitasari Yuliningtyas (201610401903)
BalasHapusMelati F.K. is here (201610401895)
BalasHapusNindy Rezy (201610401899)
BalasHapusFERDIANA HIDAYATI
BalasHapus201610401889
RENI WULANSARI K
BalasHapus201610401917
Puri nimas ayu
BalasHapus201610401902
Dyah Wahyu Kusuma Wardhani (201610401885)
BalasHapusZain Chumaida Arzaqoh (201610401915)
BalasHapus