Code-switching for newcomers and veterans: A mutually-constructed discourse strategy for workplace...

Code-switching for newcomers andveterans: a mutually-constructed discoursestrategy for workplace socializationand identification

Hin Leung Chui The Hong Kong Institute of EducationYiqi Liu The University of Hong KongBernie Chun Nam Mak The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Socialization into the workplace is a challenge faced by new foreign workers inmultilingual societies. One underexplored factor in the process is code-switching. We presented a case study of how a Filipino migrant integrated intoher Hong Kong workplace where the local veterans used code-switching atwork. Conceptualizing the workplace as Communities of Practice (Wenger1998), we employed Gee’s (2011) model of discourse analysis to examineempirical workplace discourse. Our analysis suggests that for a newcomer,code-switching indicates desire of socialization, negotiation of membership,linguistic competence, and professional abilities, and that for a veteran, code-switching reveals situated identities, instantaneous relationships, openness tonewcomers, and encouragement to them. We argue that code-switching isperformed by foreign newcomers and local veterans for workplacesocialization and mutual identification.

Keywords: code-switching, Hong Kong, socialization, workplace discourseanalysis, adult learning

融入多語社會的新工作地方，對非本地雇員來說，往往是一大挑戰。語碼轉換（code-switching）正是其中一個難題。有見及此，本論文旨在研究一名由菲律賓移居中國香港的女性商業專才，如何在同事及自己的語碼轉換過程中，融入該新工作及社交環境。我們先以Wenger（1998）的實踐群組（Communitiesof Practice）作理論框架，再用 Gee（2011）的語篇分析法，探討她與同事的日常對話及工作。結果發現，對（非本地）新人來說，語碼轉換能顯示其渴望融入的心理、與舊同事的進退關係、本身的語言溝通能力、本身的專業技能；對（本地的）舊人來說，語碼轉換可展現其身分認同、短暫情感關係、對新人的接納程度、對新人的鼓勵與支持。研究結論指出，語碼轉換是新晉外地雇員和本地舊有員工的溝通橋樑，在社會化過程中擔當著重要角色。

關鍵詞：語碼轉換,香港,社會化,職場語篇分析,成人學習

bs_bs_banner

© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd doi: 10.1111/ijal.12078

International Journal of Applied Linguistics � Vol. 26 � No. 1 � 2016

bs_bs_banner

Introduction

The process through which people integrate into the workplace is whatscholars (e.g. Bauer et al. 1998) called organizational socialization or what wepreferably call workplace socialization. Through formal settings like pre-service training sessions and informal circumstances like tea breaks,newcomers acquire the knowledge which characterizes the workplacewhereby they change themselves from being new to being integral (see vanMaanen and Schein 1979). The informal circumstances are crucial when itcomes to the acquisition of normative communicative behavior, such ashumor (Mak et al. 2012) and small talk (Mak and Chui 2013). Over the pastfew decades, bilinguals speaking different (first) languages have beenclosely-tied, so code-switching also becomes common at work. However,code-switching is challenging to a newcomer in that it requires the linguisticcompetence of a code and the understanding of how socio-culturalbackground can influence the time for switching and the choice of codes in awork conversation (see Schein 1984).

This paper presents a case study of how a new migrant worker interactswith the code-switching within her workplace, and how her colleaguesnegotiate with her through different initiatives and responses. While we touchon the role of code-switching from the socialization perspective, we focus onhow her participation embodies different types of social identities andrelationships.

Socialization into the workplace

Workplace socialization includes the acquisition of professional knowledgefor finishing tasks and the relational skills for developing relationships (e.g.Taormina and Bauer 2000). According to Drew (2002), “how to talk” inclines tothe relational domain. Yet recent studies (e.g. Blaka and Filstad 2007) haveconsidered the transactional- and relational-related aspects overlapping andcomplementing each other. Workplace socialization usually starts from someformal training settings, but gradually goes beyond it towards other informalcircumstances (cf. Matthews 1999). Therefore, it is difficult to demarcate aclear line between them (Billett 2002). We choose Wenger’s (1998) framework,Communities of Practice (CofP), which emphasizes workplace socializationvia informal interactions but embraces a holistic view of settings, to form thesocialization dimension of this study.

Communities of Practice in the workplace

The CofP framework was introduced into organizational studies by Laveand Wenger (1991). According to Eckert and McConnell-Ginet’s (1992: 464)interpretation, a CofP is:

◆ Hin Leung Chui et al.

© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

26

an aggregate of people who come together around mutual engagement inan endeavor. Ways of doing things, ways of talking, beliefs, values, powerrelations – in short, practices – emerge in the course of this mutualendeavor.

This interpretation has been widely used in the literature. Yet, Wenger (1998)further proposed that a workplace CofP is constructed by and constructive tothree interlinked, continual processes:

1. joint enterprises – the short- and long-term goals which make colleaguesunited and accountable to the workplace;

2. mutual engagements – the regular or irregular ties and gatherings forachieving the joint enterprises; and

3. shared repertoires – the symbolic and behavioral norms cultivated in theprocess of mutual engagement.

When accomplishing a joint enterprise, the members of a CofP will formmutual engagements, and such engagements will allow them to develop andpractice their shared repertoires as a proof of membership. Hence, a CofP is amotivational setting for socialization and collective learning. As Blaka andFilstad (2007) summed up, a newcomer who participates in everydayinteractions in the workplace will partly (or sometimes largely) understandand practice the workplace norms shared by the integrated members. Wespecifically propose that when a newcomer enters a CofP, the negotiation oflanguage use becomes an acknowledgment of membership between the newand the integral. Code-switching is an important way of understanding suchmembership.

Code-switching at work and code-switching in Hong Kong

Employing the CofP framework to conceptualize the workplace explains whycode-switching at work can be considered to be goal-directed and open tonegotiation. Since code-switching normally involves identity construction(e.g. Chen 2008), we choose this phenomenon to articulate the identitydimension of this study.

Code-switching at work

There have been different categorizations of code-switching across differentsubfields of linguistics (see Ennaji 2005 for a general discussion). To avoidthe debate about the terms “code-switching” and “code-mixing” (e.g.Myers-Scotton 1988), we employ Poplack’s (2004: 589) definition, referringcode-switching to the:

Code-switching for newcomers and veterans ◆


27

utterance-internal juxtaposition, in unintegrated form, of overt lin-guistic elements from two or more languages, with no necessarychange of interlocutor or topic . . . [S]witched sentences are madeup of concatenated fragments of alternating languages, each of whichis grammatical in the language of its provenance . . . The boundarybetween adjacent fragments occurs between two constituents that areordered in the same way in both languages, ensuring the linearcoherence of sentence structure without omitting or duplicating lexicalcontent.

Code-switching is the oral or written switching between distinct varietiesacross sentential, clausal, phrasal, or lexical boundaries. The determination ofcode choice in a conversation depends on the socio-cultural background ofparticipants. As Myers-Scotton (1988) proposed, switching towards anunmarked code is to observe social regulations, whereas switching towardsa marked code is to divert from normal obligations. In everyday settings,code-switching can be motivated by ideational goals and emotional needs(Blom and Gumperz 1972; cf. Auer 1984), linguistic competence orincompetence (Baoueb 2009), aesthetic and rhetorical concerns (Li 2000;Chan 2009), hinting and hedging (Li and Milroy 1995), to name a few. Froma code-switcher’s perspective, code-switching is a tool for showingsomething meta-discursively; from an interlocutor’s perspective, it is anindex for inferring the code-switcher’s intentions (Myers-Scotton 1993).Code-switching at work is found in settings which involve bilingualstakeholders speaking different (first) languages (Baoueb 2009). It isparticularly triggered by topic transition in meetings (Auer 1995; Pan 2008),gains of prestige in business (Wodak et al. 2012), stance-taking in arguments(Baoueb 2009), and more.

Thanks to different reasons, code-switching plays a transactional rolein the workplace. Furthermore, code-switching itself is closely linked tosocial life (e.g. Gardner-Chloros 2009), identity construction (e.g. Chen2008), and relationship establishment (e.g. Pan 2008). Switching to a codealways goes beyond the linguistic fact to implicate different attempts tocommunicate, different degrees of inclusion or exclusion, and differentsocio-cultural background of participants (see Auer 2005 for a generaldiscussion). This can be seen from the location of our research site,Hong Kong.

Code-switching in Hong Kong

Hong Kong used to be a British colony, and its linguistic situation wasseparated from Mainland China (see Li 1999; Chan 2009). Owing to thispolitical-historical background, Hong Kong is developed into a metropoliswhere English has been a primary language of higher education and



28

business (Yau 1993; Lin 1999), in other words, a dominant symbolicresource (see Bourdieu 1982). It is widely used in most white-collar,professional settings, especially in workplaces where both expatriates andforeign bosses exist all the time (Lai 2001). Nonetheless, English has neverdominated over or had the same status as Cantonese, the first language ofthe majority of Hong Kong locals. A hybridity of using Cantonese andEnglish is valued in many fields in Hong Kong (see Luke 1998). Despitethe criticism from a few purists (see Li 1998; Lee 2000), Hong Konglocals frequently switch between Cantonese and English at a phrasal andclausal level, for avoidance of Chinese taboos (e.g. Li and Tse 2002),conveyance of overseas experience (see Luke 1998), syntactic versatility ofEnglish, specific reference of English terms (see Li 2000), and many others(see e.g. Li 1996).

Research questions

Code-switching at work is a common scenario in a multicultural society. Thepoints of switching and the choices of codes involve consideration of thework-related goals, desired identities, and relationships of interlocutors in aparticular context. Learning to face the code-switching in a workplace can bea paramount socialization domain for a new employee. Thus, we aim toaddress two research questions:

1. The socialization dimension: What are the functional and dysfunctionalroles of code-switching during workplace socialization?

2. The identity dimension: How identities and relationships are enacted in theprocess?

Methodology

Our excerpts were extracted from a database of about 30 interactionsemanating from 24 hours of audio-recordings collected in three Hong Kongworkplaces over a period of five months. It was built for investigating variousdiscourse strategies during workplace socialization. Here we use part of it toform a case study on code-switching.

Audio-recordings

Our primary data are audio-recordings of everyday interactions collectedfrom a company, Flower Holdings Limited (FHL), which was engaged inexport of plastic flowers. It was owned by several Chinese Americans whohad migrated to the United States in the early 1990s, and its head office was



29

located in the United States. Because of the business developed in Asia, ithad a middle-sized office in Hong Kong, which was our focus. While weselected it through convenient access, it was believed to be a suitableresearch site in that code-switching (among Cantonese, English, andsometimes Mandarin) occurred in its employees’ business discussionswith different stakeholders. There were approximately 15 colleagues inthe Hong Kong office. All were Hong Kong locals speaking Cantoneseas their first language, except a Filipino newcomer, Emma, who hadmigrated to Hong Kong for a few months. Emma was an assistantmerchandiser; she was a bilingual of Tagalog and English. She possessed aBachelor of Business Administration, but she was unfamiliar with thebusiness norms in Hong Kong and China. She could understand (simple)Cantonese, but her production of Cantonese was limited. She was assignedtwo mentors, Gavin and David, during the entry period. They were expectedto use English, their second language, to mentor Emma. Whereas officiallyshe did not need to use Cantonese, she attempted or tried to use it wheneverpossible.

The audio-recording of authentic discourse in FHL (HK) was conductedover a ten-week period. Because Emma had not been accustomed to workingin Hong Kong until the second month of her arrival, our data collection beganfrom the seventh week of her employment (the first week of March) andended in the seventeenth (the third week of May). In total 11 recordings weremade. Recording lengths were on average one-hour in length; the length ofeach recording ranged from 30 minutes to two hours. Subsequently, weremoved any parts of recordings which were confidential or not analyzabledue to lack of sufficient clarity. After screening, four hours of discourse fromten recordings were transcribed for in-depth analysis. This yielded fourrecordings from the first month (i.e. March), four from the second (i.e. April),and two from the final half month (i.e. May) of the data collection period.The excerpts used in this paper include four participants, Gavin, David,Rebecca, and Emma being the focus. A summary of their roles is shown inAppendix A.

Follow-up interviews

Our supporting data are follow-up interviews consisting of open-endedquestions. They were aimed at providing contextual information to theselected excerpts for enhancing our understanding of data and validity ofinferences (see Holmes and Stubbe 2003). For FHL (HK), two to threeinterviews were conducted overall with each participant. Two 20-minuteinterviews were conducted with each participant throughout the ten-week-recording period. At the end of the ten weeks, a one-hour interview wasfurther conducted with each of them, except Rebecca who was working in



30

Mainland China at that time. In sum, six hours of interview data werecollected.

Data analysis

Presentation of representative excerpts

Our presentation of transcribed data is based on Holmes and Stubbe’s (2003:181) conventions. For a Cantonese utterance, the original Cantonesecharacters are transcribed one by one, followed by their transliteration intothe English alphabet with intonation, and then the corresponding Englishmeaning of the whole utterance. The transliteration and the intonationnumber of each Cantonese character follow the dictionary published byLinguistic Society of Hong Kong (2002) (also see Appendix B). Directquotations from follow-up interviews are marked by double open and closequotation marks; square brackets in the direct quotations indicate additionalnotes or grammatical correction from the authors. All names are pseudonyms.

Analytical framework of discourse analysis

According to Stubbe et al. (2003), there have been different language-orientedapproaches to analyze workplace discourse, such as the conversation analysisand the politeness approaches. They suggested that depending on analyticalneeds, researchers could analyze a workplace interaction by using more thanone approach. We employ Gee’s (2011) model of discourse analysis, which ispositively responsive to this recommendation.

Gee (2011) proposed that language use constructs the reality in sevenareas. We summarize and interpret them as follows:

1. significance – language is used to make some outcomes important;2. practice – language is used to achieve transactional or relational goals

socially;3. identities – language is used to highlight colleagues’ characteristics;4. relationship – language is used to construct colleagues’ tentative

relationships;5. politics – language is used to display asymmetries and inequalities;6. connection – language is used to dis/connect work which is ir/relevant by

nature; and7. sign system and knowledge – language is used to dis/privilege symbolic

forms

Gee (2011) further proposed that each of these areas can be analyzed by one ormore of the following six tools:



31

1. social languages – investigating different registers developed by broadsocio-historical practices which represents the values and interests of acommunity;

2. discourses – investigating the broader communication process, participants’affectionate process, and their cognitive process of achieving the intendedgoals;

3. conversations – investigating the themes, debates and motifs which occurhistorically and are dominantly recognized by the members of acommunity;

4. intertextuality – investigating the in/direct, un/marked, in/visible link ofan interaction to other surrounding interactions;

5. situated meanings – investigating the specific meaning of an utterance in aparticular context which is continually transformed in the communicationprocess; and

6. figure worlds – investigating the folk theories and cultural models throughwhich people understand the world, form judgments and guide their ownbehavior.

A graphical description of the whole framework is presented inAppendix C. Inthis paper, we examine the areas of identity, relationship, and practice. Theformer two focus on what characteristics and interpersonal status are revealedthrough code-switching, while practice concentrates on what conversationalgoals have been achieved. For tools, we use social languages, discourses, andsituated meanings. The first tool addresses the choices of codes developed bythe social-cultural practices in Hong Kong; the second tool analyzes the broaderongoing process of code-switching in a workplace CofP; the last toolinvestigates the contextual, negotiated meanings in a particular interactionduring workplace socialization. Although these areas and tools are separate inGee’s framework, they mix with each other when we interpret our excerpts,and they weigh differently in different analyses.

Our analysis will focus on each participant (especially Emma) as anindividual and as a member in the CofP (see Gardner-Chloros, 2009). Wewill not look into our data from the structural approach; instead, we dealwith them from the viewpoint of conversational turn (see Chen 2005). Theanalysis will borrow the concepts of markedness and unmarkedness fromMyers-Scotton (1993). Marked code-switching is to switch to a marked codeunexpectedly for highlighting something new or special (e.g. change ininterlocutor relationship); unmarked code-switching is to switch to anunmarked code as expected when the conversation unfolds. In short, ouranalysis of discourse is interpretive, emphasizing linguistic communicationas an action in an institutionalized social-cultural context (see Bhatia 1993),It aims at forming a holistic view about the roles of code-switching inworkplace socialization, namely how this symbolic communication meansinterplays with identity construction, relationship development, and taskperformance.



32

General norms of code-switching in the research site

FHL (HK) is a workplace where code-switching from Cantonese to Englishtypically happens when the local colleagues are talking with the Chinese-American bosses from the headquarters, their managerial team, and otherbusiness stakeholders who are unable to communicate efficiently in Cantonese.But since Emma’s entry, the local colleagues (especially Gavin and David) weremore frequently switching to English as they need to include Emma ineveryday communication. Yet, Cantonese is still the preferred code of themajority. Same as most Hong Kong citizens, all local colleagues of FHL (HK)are unbalanced bilinguals, which means that their English remains non-native.By contrast, according to The Office of the President of the Philippines (1987),Tagalog and English have been the official languages used in most official andsocial settings in Philippines since 1987. Owing to this background, Emma’sEnglish ability is considered to be better than the local colleagues. As none ofthe workers in FHL (HK) are native speakers of English, it does not possessovert prestige in the Hong Kong office, though it is frequently used.

Relatively passive participation in code-switching talk

In total, we documented 19 separate interactions which involved code-switching and Emma’s participation in it. She was considered to behavepassively in 11 of the interactions. Five of them showed how she providedminimal response when other colleagues were joking or engaged in small talkin Cantonese; the remainder showed how she failed to finish her utterances inCantonese and then fell into silence. This section presents one example fromeach category.

Excerpt 1: intentional laughter in response to Cantonese humor

Situated context: in a mentoring session in the second week of March, Gavinand David teach Emma how to search for potential buyers from their database.The two mentors make fun of the transliterated English name of a company.

1 David: okay we need to find the (2) /factory number\2 Emma: /factory number\3 David: yes in the (2) two nine zero (3) Fei Cai

→ 4 Gavin: 飛/仔 hah\fei1 /zai2 hah\<<hooligan>>

→ 5 David: /仔 hah\/zai2 hah\((suffix of “hooligan” in Cantonese which

indicates the gender of male))



33

→ 6 Gavin: 肥仔 ((in a singsong tone))fei4 zai2<<fatty>>

→ 7 David: hah address8 Gavin: J (.) JJ one zero (3) Alight

→ 9 David: hah→ 10 Emma: hah

11 Gavin: Fei Cai (.) all in KFS? ((company name))?12 Emma: ((company name))

((The talk continues in English.))

Excerpt 1 illustrates how Emma deals with code-switched humor throughproducing a non-verbal response, laughter, to retain minimal participation.After David utters the English transliterated name of the company Fei Caiwith the code “290” (line 3), he and Gavin switch to Cantonese to play aroundthe pronunciation of “fei zai” (lines 4–6). Gavin pronounces it in a singsongtone, possibly for the sake of emphasizing his humorous mood. While theyswitch back to English soon (lines 7–8), David seems to laugh at thepronunciation of the company name again (line 9). At this moment, Emmaalso produces laughter (line 10).

For Hong Kong locals, a common anchor of switching between Englishand Cantonese is bilingual puns (Li 1996). When asked what had beenlaughable with the pronunciation, Gavin and David in the interview reportedthat the English translation of the company name, “Fei Cai”, had a similarpronunciation as “飛仔” (hooligan) and “肥仔” (fatty) in Cantonese. They alsoclaimed that they did not intend to exclude Emma. In other words, theirswitching to Cantonese is motivated by a spontaneous goal out of the situatedcontext (Blom and Gumperz 1972), namely performing the wordplay inCantonese. While Cantonese is their unmarked code in general, the jokingwords become marked in this particular context where English is expected tobe used (Siegel 1995).

Just like code-switching in other everyday talk, shifting from English toCantonese here involves negotiation of identity and relationships amongthem. First, the two Hong Kong locals find the English name (i.e. Fei Cai)funny, but such funniness is based on linguistic and cultural knowledgeof Cantonese (which Emma has not yet possessed). As Gardner-Chloros(2009) argued, understanding of code-switched humor heavily relies on thefamiliarity with the culture of the target code. Second, they are at higherofficial ranks and have gained more integral membership. Hierarchicalprestige usually allows speakers to forcefully select the code in the workplace(Wodak et al. 2012). Thus, switching to Cantonese may also extend their ethnicand ranking distance from Emma, who is a foreign worker and an ‘inferior’newcomer to the CofP. Third, the switching constitutes style-shifting frommentoring to humor, through which they transform their formal mentor-mentor relationship into an informal one-to-one relationship. This results in a



34

close relationship between Gavin and David, but widens their interpersonaldistance from Emma, who is a new workmate.

The widened distance from Emma can cause her to misunderstand thatshe is purposefully excluded. After all, she does not possess advancedCantonese knowledge; and as a Filipino, she may orient herself to thecultural preference that the role of a person in a work relationship is veryimportant (see Watkins and Gerong 1997). But still, Emma seems notto be totally excluded. In line 10, Emma does laugh. Laughter is notnecessarily an acknowledgement of receipt of humor (Murata 2007). Whenasked whether she had understood the wordplay, Emma in the interviewadmitted:

I did not know the Cantonese word, but I tried to guess what’s going on bylooking at their facial expressions. When I realize they were joking, I alsolaugh to avoid being excluded.

Having known that her mentors are performing wordplay, Emma chooses tolaugh, despite the exclusionary nature of the Cantonese words. Instead ofexternalizing her enjoyment, her laughter is likely to imply her desire to beincluded in the wordplay, and eases her discomfort due to the lack ofCantonese knowledge. It is what Murata (2007) called “balancing laughter” asa minimal response in an embarrassing moment. From another perspective,this laughter enables her to avoid being misunderstood to distance herselffrom the mentors or the Cantonese language. As Cantonese is the standardlanguage in Hong Kong and the unmarked code in FHL (HK), it carries overtand covert prestige (Meyerhoff 2011). Emma tries to seek such prestige bybehaving as if she understood the Cantonese humor, though her participatorypretention remains marginal.

When the wordplay is gone, Gavin and David switch to English. In line 8,Gavin attempts to switch to English, but this attempt is interrupted by David’slaughter (line 9), followed by Emma’s balancing laughter (line 10). Yet, insteadof joining in their laughter, Gavin in line 11 tries to resume the English talk.Even when he utters the name “Fei Cai” again, there is no longer any laughter.Emma also resumes verbal participation in line 12. As English is a prestigevariety for international business (Wodak et al. 2012), Gavin’s switching(back) to English indicates his intention of getting down to business,namely resuming the mentoring session. This switching also displays hisreconstruction of mentor-mentor relationship with David, the mentor-menteerelationship with Emma, and the professional identity as a mentor who stilladheres to work-related goals (Holmes 1997). This switching is whatMyers-Scotton (1993) called “unmarked code-switching” for mutuallypositively-evaluated identities in business.

Excerpt 1 illustrates that code-switching not only demarcates ethnic,linguistic, hierarchical, and interpersonal boundaries in the workplace, butalso shows the differences between the new and the integral as well as the



35

local and the foreign. It suggests that even non-understandable humor caninfluence workplace socialization, and that code-switching can be an indicatorof topic change for a workplace newcomer. Because different culturalpreferences will be oriented to when different colleagues participate in aspeech event (Schnurr and Zayts 2013), and because code-switching itself canbe marked or unmarked, humor involving code-switching is morechallenging to a migrant newcomer vis-à-vis a local newcomer.

Excerpt 2: unfinished response and silence during discussionsin Cantonese

Situated context: In the first week of April, Gavin and David negotiate witha buyer who is interested in a model of Christmas tree. The buyeradditionally wants the normal star (on the top of the Christmas tree) to bechanged to the hexagram. FHL and its factory do not have the hexagramproduction model. If they ask another factory to produce it as specified andbranded by the buyer, namely “original design manufacturing” (ODM), themanufacturing costs will be increased. This will result in reducing marginalprofit.

12

Gavin: then tell ((company name)) we have alreadyfound a lot (.) but still haven’t found the star

34

David: I don’t know (2) they seemed to want to odmthe /star only\

5 Gavin: /we can’t\ odm with this price→ 6 David: 唉如果唔得一係叫佢/寄返過嚟\

aai1 jyu4 gwo2 ng4 dak1 jat1 hai6 giu3 keoi5 /gei3 faan1gwo3 lai4\

<<uh-huh if we cannot make it why don’t we ask them tosend the sample back>>

→ 7 Gavin: /Emma\有咩諗法？/Emma\ jau5 me1 lam2 faat3?<<do you have any ideas?>>

→ 8 Emma: hmm (3) 咁就hmm (3) gam2 zau6<<then er . . .>>

→ ((Two-second silence))9 Gavin: 不如同佢地講講個價先

bat1 jyu4 tung4 keoi5 dei6 gong2 gong2 go3 gaa3 sin1<<Why don’t we negotiate for the price with them first>>

10 你問下((factory name))有冇佢地想要果隻六角星nei5 man6 haa5 jau6 mou5 keoi5 dei6 soeng2 jiu3 gwo2 zek3

luk6 gok3 sing1<<you ask the factory if they have the wanted hexagram>>



36

11 David: 係囉係囉hai6 lo1 hai6 lo1<<yeah yeah>>((The talk ends.))

This excerpt indicates how Emma produces a meaningless response andsilence when her mentors use Cantonese to ask her a question. Gavin andDavid initially discuss the difficult situation of crafting the hexagram inEnglish (lines 1–5), but David switches to Cantonese halfway (line 6). Gavineven uses Cantonese to talk to Emma (line 7). Emma only providesbackchanneling “hmm”, followed by three-second silence, and finally “thener” in Cantonese (line 8). After two-second silence, Gavin and David resumetheir conversation in Cantonese (lines 9–11).

They are engaged in core-business talk without any topic change (seeHolmes 2000). The switching to Cantonese on the way seems irrelevant to anybig changes of situated context (Myers-Scotton 1993, also see Gumperz 1982).When asked what had made him use Cantonese in line 6, David in theinterview said:

We officially used English because we are mentors [and we need] to letEmma know what was happening. But I changed to Cantonese because Iwanted to give personal idea[s].

David switches to Cantonese because he wants to highlight the individualityof his idea. His idea is delivered in a reluctant, giving-up tone, which is shownthrough the content and the paralinguistic clue “uh-huh”. It is possible thathis switching to Cantonese also psychologically distances himself from theunpleasant official situation. As a byproduct, the switching distances Davidhimself from the role of Emma’s mentor who should speak English. It seemsrather intrapersonal to David (see Blom and Gumperz 1972). Nonetheless,when Gavin takes David’s code and asks Emma a simple question inCantonese (line 7), the switching becomes interpersonal. When asked why hehad used Cantonese at that point, Gavin in the interview said:

David used Cantonese, so I used the same. She can hear [Cantonese].Actually I [thought] she responded in English. We [knew] she [could] notspeak well. But she tried Cantonese and seem[ed] to have no opinion.

Surprisingly, Gavin does not expect Emma to take his code. This suggests thathis switching is only an accommodation (see Wodak et al. 2012) to indicate hispersonal, familiar relationship with David. Gavin does not mean to create anydifficulty for Emma. To him, English is still the expected code for Emma,though it is the marked code for himself (cf. Myers-Scotton 1988).Unfortunately, when asked why she had attempted to speak in Cantonesethere, Emma in the interview expressed:



37

I thought it was more close and like a team member to respond inCantonese as they asked me in Cantonese. But my Cantonese competencywas limited.

Emma believes that it is more appropriate for her to take up Cantonesebecause it is the original unmarked code in this CofP. In Filipino culture, senseof belonging and hospitability are significant in many social settings (Selmerand de Leon 2002). Her expression in the interview implicates that thementors’ switching, in her eyes, appears to be an invitation to become “moreclose” by using the team’s unmarked choice, namely Cantonese (cf.Myers-Scotton 1993). Their switching to Cantonese, in other words, ismisinterpreted by Emma, who thinks that there is an opportunity to useCantonese, the marker of social identity and bonding (Gardner-Chloros 2009)in this CofP. This is why she attempts to use Cantonese in line 8.

However, due to her incompetency of Cantonese, she merely provides“then er” and silence; she fails to enact her desired social identity but justsharpens her identity as a foreigner. In other words, their switching toCantonese eventually embarrasses Emma, despite her struggle. Furthermore,the long silence by Emma may be why Gavin thought that she “seem[ed] tohave no opinion” (as quoted in the interview). His use of Cantonese indirectlysilences Emma’s voice in the core-business talk, causing anothercommunication breakdown. Finally, Gavin and David resume the talk inCantonese (lines 9–11). In the interview, they claimed that they hadcontinually used Cantonese just because they had been using it then. Thisanswer reveals an interesting phenomenon in FHL (HK): as a sharedrepertoire, Cantonese may be so natural or unmarked that it sometimesrequires extra or conscious effort not to use it.

Excerpt 2 demonstrates that code-switching may function as a highlighterof individuality, but it can transmit wrong messages to a newcomer whosees the switch as an invitation to join in. In addition, the code choices ofintegral colleagues can subtly influence a newcomer’s participation. Themiscommunication also suggests that code-switching talk in the workplacerequires mutual appropriate interpretation. Yet, this is not an easy task for aforeigner from another culture.

Relatively active participation in code-switching talk

Emma was found to behave actively in code-switching as well. Eight of theselected interactions revealed how she behaved when she took a progressiveattitude towards code-switching. This particularly happened when othercolleagues explicitly encouraged her to use Cantonese, and when sheresponded to or interrupted the preceding Cantonese talk in English. Theformer generated three uses, while the latter generated five. This subsectionpresents one example from each category.



38

Excerpt 3: encouragement and discouragement to use Cantonese

Situated context: in the last week of April, David negotiates with a buyer foran order of gift boxes with red ribbon. They had an informal agreementregarding the shipping and factory price per item. However, now the buyerwants to add some dots to the red ribbon. This change will increase themanufacturing cost of ribbon and the overall factory price, but the buyerwants to retain the initially-agreed price per item. The abbreviation “moq” inlines 1, 14 and 12 means “Minimum Order Quantity”.

1 Gavin: so for ((factory name)) (.) the moq is2 Emma: five thousand usd per shipment but the /ribbon\

→ 3 David: /if they want\ (2) 加白點/if they want\ (2) gaa1 baak6 dim2<<adding white dots>>

→ 4 Gavin: okay /一係我問\okay /jat1 hai6 ngo5 man6\<<why don’t I ask>>

→ 5 Emma: /我諗\/ngo5 lam2\<<I think>>

→ 6 David: you think /what\→ 7 Gavin: /wait\ let her try cantonese hah→ 8 Emma: 我諗

ngo5 lam2<<I think>>

→ 9 Gavin: 我諗?ngo5 lam2?<<I think?>>

→ 10 Emma: 我地個ngo5 dei6 go3<<our>>

→ 11 David: 我地個?ngo5 dei6 go3?<<our?>>

→ ((Gavin and David produce some laughter.))→ 12

13Emma: I think we (could) increase the moq

to meet the ribbon price1415

Gavin: hah (.) you suggest (.) we adjust the moqto fit the ribbon?

16 Emma: yes hah1718

Gavin: also a choice (.) we have to order eighty (carton)/mix\

19 David: we ask ((factory name))((The talk continues in English.))



39

This excerpt portrays how Emma takes the initiative to switch to Cantonese,and how her mentors (attempt to) encourage her by repeating her utterances.The conversation takes places in English (lines 1–2), but David and Gavinswitch to Cantonese later (lines 3–4). At this point of overlap, Emma interruptsthem by saying “I think” in Cantonese (line 5). Whereas David switches toEnglish to ask Emma what she thinks (line 6), Gavin stops David to “let hertry” Cantonese (line 7). Then, Emma attempts to use Cantonese to express heropinion (lines 8 and 10), alongside Gavin and David’s repetition of herutterances (lines 9 and 11). However, after the mentors laugh, Emma appearsto give up and switches back to English (lines 12–13). The mentors switch toEnglish as well (lines 14–19).

David and Gavin switch to Cantonese at first. When asked why theyhad done so, they stated in the interview that it had not been due to anyspecific reasons. This suggests that, even with Emma, the integral membersmay unconsciously switch back to the unmarked code without a clear goal.As Cheng and Butler (1989) and Kutas et al. (2009) suspected, code-switching does not always occur intentionally. Yet, when Emma utters “Ithink” in Cantonese, an intended goal emerges. Gavin intentionally stopsDavid from using English, for the sake of letting Emma “try Cantonese”.When asked what exactly he had wanted to do there, Gavin in the interviewsaid:

She said she [was] mastering Cantonese so we test[ed] her, you can say weencouraged her, because it is good to ask her [to] speak more Cantonesetoo, if she wants to be part of our team soon.

In Myers-Scotton’s (1993) terminology, Gavin “explores the identity” ofEmma through encouraging her to take their unmarked code; which is anindicator of integration into FHL (HK). As Auer (2005) concluded, speaking alanguage indicates the speaker’s sense of belonging to the group in which thatlanguage is primarily spoken. For Gavin himself, his intention to “test”Emma’s Cantonese competence reinforces his official role as a mentor and hisidentity as a Hong Kong local. He even extends the role and identity to Davidby stopping him from using English. Code-switching, here, becomes stressingthe close relationship of Gavin and David, embodying their mentor roles andethnic identities, and highlighting Emma’s mentee as well as non-Cantonesestatus.

In turn, Emma tries to use Cantonese to spell out her opinions (lines 8and 10); simultaneously, Gavin and David repeat Emma’s Cantoneseutterances (lines 9 and 11) with a raising tone. Their interrogative toneappears to invite her to have more conversational input and to give herpositive evidence to go ahead. At this critical point, the unmarked code forthe CofP (i.e. Cantonese) becomes a socially-inclusive and encouragingdevice of socialization. Unfortunately, Gavin and David laugh (lines 12–13), which somewhat makes Emma suddenly switch (back) to English. In



40

the interview, the mentors said that they had laughed because they had beenhappy to see Emma’s progress; but Emma reported another interpretation:

It was embarrassing and giving me pressure as they laughed as I triedhard to think about Cantonese words. I might look funny on my face sothey laughed.

To Emma, the mentors are laughing at her. This misinterpretation may beassociated with the cultural characteristic that Filipinos are very sensitive tocriticism and evaluation (Mercado 1994). Her switching to English is aimed atavoiding the embarrassment (cf. Li and Tse 2002) and the unnecessary mentalefforts involved (Gumperz 1977). This remarkably reshapes her identity as anewcomer and a migrant worker at a transitioning status to Hong Kong. Herswitching here not only reveals that laughter may be counter-productive to anforeign newcomer who wants to practice the unfamiliar code, but alsosuggests that code-switching can result from psychological reasons (seePoplack 2004). Eventually, Gavin and David follow Emma’s English code toresume the conversation, moving away from the spontaneous “test” to theexisting business (cf. Auer 1995). This reconstructs the relationship betweenmentors and a mentee who are assumed to use English.

Excerpt 3 reveals that code-switching can be a catalyst for a newcomer tosocialize into the workplace, and that repetition may be encouraging to theuse of an unfamiliar code. Still, other members’ laughter can beuncomfortable to that newcomer, and can cause misunderstanding. Thedevelopment of this interaction also suggests that a newcomer is sensitiveabout the integral members’ behavior in code-switching.

Excerpt 4: initiatives of code-switching and indication ofunderstanding Cantonese

Situated context: in the second week of May, there is a long meeting in whichthe colleagues discuss how a problem of potential business loss can be fixed.Emma is the contact person in this matter, and is expected to take follow-upactions. The current topic is how to deal with their Mainland stakeholderX-Top. Emma suggests some colleagues of FHL (HK) go to X-Top to negotiatewith them face to face.

1 Gavin: 一係你 (.) 一係你教我點做啦/嘿\jat1 hai6 nei5 (.) jat1 hai6 nei5 gaau3 ngo5 dim2 zou6 laa1 /hei1\<<or you teach me how to do /hah\>>

2 Rebecca: /係\廈門啊嘛 (.) 我地去廈門架嘛？我地哩個係去廈門既/hai6\ haa6 mun4 aa1 maa3 (.) ngo5 dei6 heoi2 haa6 mun4 gaa3

maa3? ngo5 dei6 le1 go3 hai6 heoi2 haa6 mun4 ge3<</in\ Xia-men right? we go to Xia-men right? our trip is to

Xia-men>>



41

3 得 (.) 直情同間廠講囉拿住張單dak1 (.) zik6 cing4 tung4 gaan1 cong2 gong2 lo1 naa4 zyu6

zoeng1 daan1<<okay (.) just directly tell the factory with the invoice>>

4 Emma: or why don’t flew to X-Top? a thousand five hundred5 David: fly to X-top Hah6 Rebecca: X-top (.) okay (.) this weekend you go to X-Top7 Emma: oh no ((in a low voice))8 Rebecca: oh no hah oh no9 David: /hah\101112

Rebecca: /the first\ factory (.) in the afternoon on April fifthApril (.) okay first (.) you go to X-Top (.) cancel orderhah ((with a playful modulation in tone))

13 Emma: no /hah\14 Rebecca: /hah\15 Gavin: /hah\

((The talk continues in English until the next code-switch toCantonese.))

Our final excerpt shows how Emma interrupts her superiors, who arecurrently using Cantonese, by switching to English. When Gavin andRebecca whinge over the problem (lines 1–3), their talk is in Cantonese.However, after Emma proposes a face-to-face consultation with X-Top inEnglish (line 4), David and other integral members follow her code andridicule her suggestion (lines 5–15). Instead of maintaining the status quo,they switch to English, the marked code for themselves, to perform humor(cf. Myers-Scotton 1993). In particular, Rebecca mocks Emma’s response “ohno” (lines 7–8), and playfully teases her by confirming that she would be therepresentative to cancel the order, which was made with X-Top last month(lines 10–12).

Excerpts 1–3 focused on how Emma deals with her colleagues’ switchingto Cantonese. By contrast, this interaction suggests that her interruptiveswitching to English implies her enhancing skills in Cantonese listening,which is an indicator of socialization into the CofP. This can be seen fromEmma’s and the integral members’ viewpoints respectively. Emma is able tomake a work-related suggestion based on the previous Cantonese talk; thisimplies that she understands what the integral members have whinged about.As she expressed in the interview:

Although they were discussing solutions in Cantonese, I couldunderstand, so I joined in to give [a] suggestion. They did not talk very fast.And when I listened very carefully I caught their main point[s].

Her initiative of switching to English implicates one domain of integrationinto FHL (HK), namely the comprehension of the unmarked code, an



42

important aspect of linguistic skill in code-switching talk (Ennaji 2005).Equally important is that her switching displays her request to be includedin the core-business talk. She seeks to participate as a merchandiser,which highlights her desired social identity as a member in the CofP,and professional identity as a member who can give an opinion on thematter.

On the other hand, David and Rebecca are unbalanced bilinguals. They areless likely to switch from a more proficient language (i.e. Cantonese) to a lessproficient language (i.e. English) than the reverse (Reyes 2004). Thus,following Emma’s code of English can be understood as consciously signalingtheir intention to include Emma (Ng and He 2004). Besides, they shift fromthe identity as Hong Kong locals (which is different from Emma) to theidentity as English speakers (which is similar to Emma). Code-switching atthis point not only indicates that Emma becomes part of the community (diPietro 1978), but also suggests that the relationship between Emma and theintegral members becomes closer, at least temporarily.

Emma’s request of inclusion by code-switching yields a positive response.Nonetheless, it is equally obvious that her suggestion is ridiculed by otherintegral members. Then, their code-switching has one more function, which isto help to change the tone from being serious to being humorous (Ennaji2005), and from being repressed to being releasing (Siegel 1995). In otherwords, they code-switch to perform humor, so as to mitigate their derisiverecognition of her mistake (cf. Meeuwis and Blommaert 1998; Heiss andCarmack 2011). On the one hand, their making fun of Emma’s mistake signalstheir solidarity including her (Ladegaard 2009), which decreases theirdistance from her. On the other hand, their teasing and laughter are indicativeof her status as an inferior newcomer who does not know the hidden businessnorms. This enhances the distance between the experienced merchandisersand a merchandiser who is inexperienced in business in Mainland China. Theswitching to English, overall, becomes multi-layered.

Excerpt 4 shows that code-switching can be a double-edged sword.When a new foreign worker uses a marked code to interrupt the precedingtalk by the integral members, the code can function as an indicator oflistening competence and a request for inclusion. When the integralmembers take that code, they accept the request for inclusion and thedesired membership of that newcomer. Nevertheless, the overall outcomedepends on the content of the code-switched utterances. If it implies lack ofknowledge, it still embodies the newcomer’s identity as an inexperiencedmember in the CofP.

Discussion and conclusion

Code-switching at work is prevalent in a society where expatriates and migrantworkers exist everywhere. In FHL (HK), inter-speaker code-switching



43

(see Li and Milroy 1995) had increasingly occurred since Emma’s entry. It wasa shared repertoire motivated by the short-term joint enterprises of performinghumor, getting down to business, foregrounding the individuality of an idea,and signaling a newcomer’s transitioning status. Whether the motives wereconscious or not, switching to English resulted in the maintenance of oremphasis on their official roles and professional identity, whereas switching toCantonese highlighted the colleagues’ personal relationships and their socialidentity as Hong Kong locals. We hence propose that on the one hand anewcomer who socializes in a bilingual workplace is faced with difficultiesregarding how to cope with the internal code-switching pattern. On the otherhand, the existing members who socialize that newcomer are attentive to theircode choices and the timing of switching, so as to facilitate his or her integratingprocess.

Code-switching for newcomers and existing colleagues

A bilingual can initiate or respond to either code. However, our focus Emmahad only possessed passive knowledge of Cantonese, which meant that shecould manage her Cantonese only at a listening level. She was unlikely toinitiate code-switching towards Cantonese, but usually responded to hercolleagues in English, whether the preceding code was English or Cantonese.In our database, she sometimes produced laughter purposefully when hercolleagues performed Cantonese humor, she tended to stop trying to useCantonese when she found it difficult or embarrassing, and from time to timeshe interrupted her colleagues’ Cantonese talk in English or Cantonese.Follow-up interviews indicated that she was sensitive to preceding codes. Herparticipation of code-switching not only had a subtle impact on her subjectivefeeling during socialization into FHL (HK), but also indicated her desiredintegration and the actual integration degree, her status as a new arrival andan inexperienced merchandiser, her fluctuating relationships with othercolleagues, and her psychological barriers to Cantonese. Auer (2005) pointedout that speaking a language which is not owned by the speaker construesmixed identities. For Emma, thus, occasionally speaking Cantonese led to theformation of a mixed identity as a person who was new not only to HongKong but also to the workplace CofP. Consequently, we suggest that code-switching can unveil the manner and identity of a newcomer in a situatedcontext during workplace socialization.

The existing members of a CofP play a role in socializing the newcomer. Inour research site, the integral colleagues had adjusted their code-switchingpattern since Emma’s arrival. According to the interviews, their switching toEnglish was usually intentional to include Emma, but their switching toCantonese was not always conscious. But as Auer (1984) pinpointed, manyinstances of switching invite extra assessment by the interlocutor. Thus, theintegral members’ switching often communicated something to Emma. More



44

than once, the colleagues’ switching to Cantonese was misinterpreted byEmma as an invitation to speak Cantonese. Sometimes their switching evensilenced her voice in the core-business talk. To the integral membersthemselves, their unmarked code strengthened their identities as Hong Konglocals and acquainted workmates. It also consolidated their openness to andacceptance of Emma as a newly-joined CofP member. In short, Emma’s entryresulted in their increasing frequency of deviating from the norms. Theincrease implicated that code-switching had became more strategic andnoticeable than it used to be (Gafaranga 2007; Li and Milroy 1995). Thus, wesee code-switching as a speech event with regulating potential for theintegrated colleagues of a workplace.

The role of code-switching in workplace socialization

To address our research questions, we argue that code-switching is adiscourse strategy for workplace socialization and identification. To (foreign)newcomers, their initiatives and responses to code-switching indicate theirdesire of integration, negotiation of relationship, linguistic abilities, andprofessional knowledge. It is conducive to workplace socialization, though itcan cause embarrassment or other conversational difficulties ifinappropriately interpreted or maladaptively used. To (local) veterans, theircode-switching reveals a newcomer’s integration status, remarks their owninsider identity, and encourages the newcomer to socialize. It symbolizes theirperceived situated relationships with the newcomer in a particular context.Consequently, we further posit that code-switching is a mutually-constructeddiscourse strategy for workplace socialization and identification fornewcomers and existing colleagues. Whereas there is no one-to-onerelationship between any switches and functions (Li and Milroy 1995), code-switching generally provides a gateway to illustrate identities, managerelationships, and continue goal-oriented practices in a workplace, throughwhich a newcomer moves towards a full membership in a CofP, and throughwhich the integral members sustain the CofP.

In conclusion, this study demonstrates that workplace code-switching canbe seen as a shared repertoire which requires new and existing colleagues toparticipate for task accomplishment. On an academic level, our findings areinspiring for researchers who investigate intercultural communication inwhich local versus non-local identities and similar versus different culturalnorms always interplay with one another. On a practical level, code-switchingis challenging to new migrant workers who do not share the same socio-cultural background with the local employees. Therefore, as Marra andHolmes (2007) contended, developing code-switching skills and transferringthe norms of code choice are important in mentoring these new employees.Our analysis also suggests that code-switching is both work- and relational-related, and that the points of switching and the choices of codes can be



45

conscious or even manipulative. Integral colleagues can be more attentive totheir own codes and switching, which provide task- and social-based cues forthe newcomers, to maximize their socialization outcomes.

Acknowledgements

We thank all participants who allowed their workplace interactions to be audio-recorded and agreed to be interviewed. We are also grateful to the editor and a numberof anonymous reviewers for all comments on this article.

References

Auer, P. (1984) On the meaning of conversational code switching. In P. Auer and A. diLuzio (eds.), Interpretive sociolinguistics: migrants – children – migrant children.Tubingen: G. Narr. 87–112

— (1995) The pragmatics of code-switching: A sequential approach. In L. Milroy andP. Muysken (eds.), One speaker, two languages: cross-disciplinary perspectives on code-switching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 115–135.

— (2005) A postscript: code-switching and social identity. Journal of Pragmatics 37.10:403–10.

Baoueb, L. B. (2009) Social factors for code–switching in Tunisian business companies:a case study. Multilingua 28.4: 425–458.

Bauer, T. N., E. W. Morrison and R. R. Callister (1998) Organizational socialization:a review and directions for future research. In G. R. Ferris (ed.), Research in personneland human resources management. vol 16. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. 149–214.

Bhatia, V. K. (1993) Analysing genre. New York: Longman.Billett, S. (2002) Critiquing workplace learning discourses: participation and continuity

at work. Studies in the Education of Adults 34.1: 56–66.Blaka, G. and C. Filstad (2007) How does a newcomer construct identity? A socio-

cultural approach to workplace learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education26.1: 59–73.

Blom, J. P. and J. J. Gumperz (1972) Social meaning in linguistic structure: code-switching in Norway. In J. J. Gumperz and D. H. Hymes (eds.), Directions insociolinguistics: the ethnography of communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart &Winston. 407–35.

Bourdieu, P. (1982) Language and symbolic power. Trans. G. Raymond & M. Adamson.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chan, B. H. S. (2009) English in Hong Kong cantopop: language choice, code-switchingand genre. World Englishes 28.1: 107–29.

Chen, K. H. Y. (2005) The social distinctiveness of two code-mixing styles in HongKong. In J. Cohen, K. T. McAlister, K. Rolstad and J. MacSwan (eds.), Proceedings ofthe 4th international symposium on bilingualism. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.527–41.

— (2008) Positioning and repositioning: linguistic practices and identity negotiation ofoverseas returning bilinguals in Hong Kong. Multilingua 27.1: 57–75.



46

Cheng, L. and K. Butler (1989) Code-switching: a natural phenomenon vs language‘deficiency’. World Englishes 8.3: 293–309.

di Pietro, R. J. (1978) Code-switching as a verbal strategy among bilinguals. In M.Paradis (ed.), Aspects of bilingualism. Columbia, SC: Hornbeam Press Incorporated.275–82.

Drew, P. (2002) Out of context: An intersection between domestic life and theworkplace, as contexts for (business) talk. Language & Communication 22.4: 477–494.

Eckert, P. and S. McConnell-Ginet (1992) Think practically and look locally: languageand gender as community–based practice. Annual Review of Anthropology 21: 461–90.

Ennaji, M. (2005) Multilingualism, cultural identity, and education in Morocco. Boston,MA: Springer Science and Business Media.

Gafaranga, J. (2007) Code-switching as a conversational strategy. In P. Auer & W. Li(eds.), Handbook of multilingualism and multilingual communication. Berlin: Moutonde Gruyter. 279–313.

Gardner-Chloros, P. (2009) Sociolinguistic factors in code-switching. In B. E. Bullock &A. J. Toribio (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic code-switching. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. 97–113.

Gee, J. P. (2011) An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. London:Routledge.

Gumperz, J. J. (1977) The sociolinguistic significance of conversational code–switching.RELC Journal 8.2: 1–34.

— (1982) Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Heiss S. N. and H. J. Carmack (2011) Knock, knock; who’s there? Making sense of

organizational entrance through humor. Management Communication Quarterly26.1: 106–32.

Holmes, J. (1997) Story-telling in New Zealand women’s and men’s talk. In R. Wodak(ed.), Gender, discourse and ideology. London: Sage. 263–93.

— (2000) Doing collegiality and keeping control at work: small talk in governmentdepartments. In J. Coupland (ed.), Small talk. London: Longman. 32–61.

— and M. Stubbe (2003) Power and politeness in the workplace: a sociolinguistic analysis oftalk at work. London: Longman.

Kutas, M., E. Moreno and N. Wicha (2009) Code-switching and the brain. In B. E.Bullock & A. J. Toribio (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic code-switching.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 289–306.

Ladegaard, H. J. (2009) Politeness, power and control: the use of humour in cross-cultural telecommunications. In W. Cheng and K. Kong (eds.), Professionalcommunication: collaboration between academics and practitioners. Hong Kong: HongKong University Press. 191–209.

Lai, M.-L. (2001) Hong Kong students’ attitudes towards Cantonese, Putonghua andEnglish after the change of sovereignty. Journal of Multilingual and MulticulturalDevelopment 22.2: 112–33.

Lave, J. and E. Wenger (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lee, M. (2000) Code-switching in media texts: its implications on society and culture inpostcolonial Hong Kong. In D. C. S. Li, A. Lin and W. K. Tsang (eds.), Language andeducation in postcolonial Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Linguistic Society of Hong Kong.95–127.



47

Li, D. C. S. (1996) Issues in bilingualism and biculturalism: a Hong Kong case study. NewYork: Peter Lang.

— (1998) The Plight of the purist. In M. C. Pennington (ed.), Language in Hong Kong atcentury’s end. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. 161–90.

— (1999) The functions and status of English in Hong Kong: A post-1997 update.English World-Wide 20.1: 67–110.

— (2000) Cantonese–English code-switching research in Hong Kong: a Y2K review.World Englishes 19.3: 305–22.

— and E. C. Y. Tse (2002) One day in the life of a “purist”. International Journal ofBilingualism 6.2: 147–202.

Li, W. and L. Milroy (1995) Conversational code-switching in a Chinese community inBritain: a sequential analysis. Journal of Pragmatics 23.3: 281–99.

Lin, A. M. Y. (1999) Resistance and creativity in English reading lessons in Hong Kong.Language Culture and Curriculum 12.3: 285–96.

Linguistic Society of Hong Kong (ed.) (2002) Jyut6 Jyu5 Ping3 Jam1 Zi6 Biu2 (Adictionary of Cantonese romanization). Hong Kong: Linguistic Society of Hong Kong.

Luke, K. K. (1998) Why two languages might be better than one: motivations oflanguage mixing in Hong Kong. In M. C. Pennington (ed.), Language in Hong Kongat century’s end. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. 145–59.

Mak, B. C. N., Y. Q. Liu and C. C. Deneen (2012) Humor – a regulating and copingmechanism in workplace socialization. Discourse and Communication 6.2: 163–79.

— and H. L. Chui (2013) A cultural approach to small talk: a double-edged sword ofsociocultural reality during socialization into the workplace. Journal ofMulticultural Discourses 8.2: 118–133.

Marra, M. and J. Holmes (2007) Humor across cultures: joking in the multiculturalworkplace. In H. Kotthoff and H. Spencer-Oatey (eds.), Handbook of interculturalcommunication. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 153–72.

Matthews, P. (1999) Workplace learning: developing an holistic model. The LearningOrganization 6.1: 18–29.

Meeuwis, M. and J. Blommaert (1998) A monolectal view of code-switching: Layeredcode-switching among Zairians in Belgium. In P. Auer (ed.), Code-switching inconversation: language, interaction and identity. Routledge: London. 76–100.

Mercado, L. N. (1994) The Filipino mind. Washington, DC: Council for Research inValues and Philosophy and Devine Word University Publications.

Meyerhoff, M. (2011) Introducing sociolinguistics. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.Murata, K. (2007) Laughter in Japanese business meetings – a relational perspective.

Wellington Working Papers in Linguistics 19.1: 1–20.Myers-Scotton, C. (1988) Code switching as an index of social negotiations. In M.

Heller (ed.), Code switching: anthropological and sociolinguistic perspectives. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter. 151–86.

— (1993) Social motivations for code-switching: evidence from Africa. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Ng, S. H. and A. He (2004) Code-switching in tri-generational family conservationsamong Chinese immigrants in New Zealand. Journal of Language and SocialPsychology 23.1: 28–48.

Pan, Y.-L. (2008) Code-switching and social changes in Guangzhou and Hong Kong. InK. Bolton and H. Yang (eds.), Language and society in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: TheOpen University of Hong Kong. 300–20.



48

Poplack, S. (2004) Code-switching. In U. Ammon, N. Dittmar, K. J. Mattheier and P.Trudgill (eds.), Sociolinguistics: an international handbook of the science of language andsociety. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 589–96.

Reyes, I. (2004) Functions of code switching in schoolchildren’s conversations.Bilingual Research Journal 28.1: 77–98.

Schein, E. H. (1984) Coming to a new awareness of organizational culture. SloanManagement Review 25.2: 3–15.

Schnurr, S. and O. Zayts (2013) “I can’t remember them ever not doing what I tellthem!”: Negotiating face and power relations ‘upward’ refusals in multiculturalworkplaces in Hong Kong. Intercultural Pragmatics, 10.4: 593–616.

Selmer, J. and C. De Leon (2002) Management and culture in the Philippines. Hong Kong:Business Research Centre, School of Business, Hong Kong Baptist University.

Siegel, J. (1995) How to get a laugh in Fijian: code-switching and humor. Language inSociety 24.1: 95–110.

Stubbe, M., C. Lane, J. Hilder, B. Vine, M. Marra, J. Holmes and A. Weatherall (2003)Multiple discourse analyses of workplace interaction. Discourse Studies 5.3: 351–88.

Taormina, R. J. and T. N. Bauer (2000) Organizational socialization in two cultures:results from the United States and Hong Kong. The International Journal ofOrganizational Analysis 8.3: 262–89.

The Office of the President of the Philippines. (1987) The 1987 Constitution of theRepublic of the Philippines, Article XIV, Section 7. Retrieved 12 June 2014 fromhttp://www.gov.ph/.

van Maanen, J. and E. H. Schein (1979) Toward a theory of organizational socialization.In B. M. Staw (ed.), Research in organizational behavior. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.209–64.

Watkins, D. and A. Gerong (1997) Culture and spontaneous self-concept amongFilipino college students. The Journal of Social Psychology, 137.4: 480–8.

Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. New York:Cambridge University Press.

Wodak, R., M. Krzyzanowski and B. Forchtner (2012) The interplay of languageideologies and contextual cues in multilingual interactions: language choice andcode-switching in European Union institutions. Language in Society 41.2: 157–86.

Yau, M. S. (1993) Functions of two codes in Hong Kong Chinese. World Englishes 12.1:25–33.

email: [email protected]@[email protected]

[Received 25 July 2014]



49

http://www.gov.ph/

mailto:[email protected]



Appendix A

Table A1. Official titles and extra information of main participants

Pseudonyms Official titles Remarks

Emma AssistantMerchandiser(at the rank ofmerchandisingtrainee)

Learning each process of doing businessin FHL (HK)

Communicating with existing distributors

Gavin Deputy Director (atthe rank of seniormerchandiser)

Co-ordinating and monitoring everythingin the Hong Kong office

Mentoring Emma officially (with a focuson tasks in the back region)

David Merchandiser Communicating with existing buyers inemerging markets

Mentoring Emma officially (with a focuson tasks in the front region)

Rebecca SeniorMerchandiser

Working with the senior managerial teamin the head office closely

Moving between the United States andHong Kong a few times in a season

Appendix B:

Transcription conventions (modified from Holmes and Stubbe2003: 181)

can you English speech肥仔 Cantonese speechfei4 zai2 Transliterated Cantonese speech to English (the number

attached indicates the intonation of the Cantonesecharacter)

<<fat guy>> Translated Cantonese speech to Englishhah Clear laughter up to two seconds or above(.) Minor pause of up to one second(3) Longer pause of up to two seconds or above (the number

inside the brackets indicates the pause length). . ./. . .\. . . Overlap due to simultaneous speech. . ./. . .\. . .(okay) Unclear utterance based on transcriber’s best guess? A question or rising intonation((walking sound)) Transcriber’s additional information in double brackets



50

Graphical description of the transcription of Cantonese utterances

Appendix C

Figure A1. An interpretation of Gee’s (2011) model of discourse analysis



51

Code-switching for newcomers and veterans: A mutually-constructed discourse strategy for workplace...

Documents

Transcript of Code-switching for newcomers and veterans: A mutually-constructed discourse strategy for workplace...