TABLE OF CONTENT

Declaration……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ii

Dedication…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… iii

Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. iv

Table of content………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. vi

List of abbreviations and symbols………………………………………………………………………………… xi

List of tables and diagrams………………………………………………………………………………………… xiii

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… xiv

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………. 1

1. AIM AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY………………………………………………………………………… 1
   1. AN OVERVIEW OF CODE-SWITCHING………………………………………………………………. 2
   1. THE STRUCTURAL PERSPECTIVE OF CODE-SWITCHING…………………………………. 4
   1. CODE-SWITCHING WITH ENGLISH IN GHANA…………………………………………………. 7
      1. Ga-English CS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8
      1. Problem statement and research questions…………………………………………………………………… 9
      1. Purpose and significance of the study…………………………………………………………………………. 9
   1. THE GA LANGUAGE – A BRIEF SOCIOLINGUISTIC HISTORY……………………….. 11
      1. The formation of the Ga language…………………………………………………………………………….. 11
      1. European influence…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13
      1. Ga-English contact………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13
   1. NATURE OF GA-ENGLISH CODE-SWITCHING…………………………………………………. 15

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………………………………………… 17

1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 17
   1. EARLY STRUCTURAL CONSTRAINTS PROPOSALS………………………………………… 17

2.2.1. Timm (1975)……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 18

2.2.2. Poplack (1980)……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 20

• THE SEARCH FOR UNIVERSAL GRAMMATICAL CONSTRAINTS………………….. 23

2.3.1. Myers-Scotton (1993; 2002)………………………………………………………………………………… 23

• CS STUDIES IN GHANA……………………………………………………………………………………. 25

2.4.1. Forson (1979)…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 25

2.4.2. Nartey (1982)…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 26

• GRAMMATICAL STUDIES OF CS IN GHANA…………………………………………………. 27

2.5.1. Amuzu (1998; 2005b)……………………………………………………………………………………….. 28

2.5.2. Quarcoo (2009)…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 28

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK… 29

• METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………………………………………. 29
  • Data collection………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 29
  • Data processing………………………………………………………………………………………………… 31
  • The transcription……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 32
  • Jefferson System of Notation…………………………………………………………………………… 32
  • THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK……………………………………………………………… 33
    • The 4-M model………………………………………………………………………………………………… 34
    • The 4-M morphemes…………………………………………………………………………………………. 38

CHAPTER FOUR: THE CODE-SWITCHED NOMINAL GROUP……………………… 44

1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………………….. 44
   1. FUNCTION AND STRUCTURE OF THE NOMINAL GROUP………………………… 44
   1. THE NOMINAL GROUP IN GA…………………………………………………………………….. 46
      1. The determiners………………………………………………………………………………………………… 47
         1. Order of determinatives……………………………………………………………………………………… 53
      1. Pre-modifiers…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 54
      1. Post-modifiers……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 55
         1. Order of post-modifiers………………………………………………………………………………… 56
      1. The Head of the Ga NG……………………………………………………………………………………… 56
         1. Plural formation………………………………………………………………………………………………… 57
   1. THE CODE-SWITCHED NOMINAL GROUP…………………………………………………… 58
      1. The head………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 58
         1. Pronouns…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 58
         1. Proper nouns…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 60
         1. Common nouns…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 63
      1. Determiners…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 65
      1. Pre-modifiers…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 68
      1. Post-modifiers………………………………………………………………………………………………… 71
   1. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………………………………… 73

CHAPTER FIVE: CODE-SWITCHING IN THE VERBAL GROUP……………………… 75

1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 75
   1. THE VERBAL GROUP OF ENGLISH……………………………………………………………… 75
   1. THE VERBAL GROUP OF GA…………………………………………………………………………. 78
      1. The Simple VG structure……………………………………………………………………………….. 79
      1. The Extended VG structure……………………………………………………………………………. 81
         1. The modal construction……………………………………………………………………………………………… 81
         1. Serial Verb Construction……………………………………………………………………………………………. 82
         1. The Extended Verb Complex……………………………………………………………………………………… 83
   1. THE CODE-SWITCHED VERBAL GROUP………………………………………………………. 85
      1. CS in the Simple VG structure………………………………………………………………………… 85
      1. CS in the Extended VG structure……………………………………………………………………… 86
         1. The modal construction……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 86
         1. The Serial Verb Construction……………………………………………………………………………………….. 87
         1. The Extended Verb Complex……………………………………………………………………………. 88
   1. CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 89

CHAPTER SIX: CODE-SWITCHING OF ADVERBIALS, PREPOSITIONS AND

CONJUNCTIONS…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 90

1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………………………. 90
   1. CODE-SWITCHING OF PREPOSITIONS…………………………………………………………… 90
   1. ADVERBIAL GROUPS……………………………………………………………………………………… 92
   1. CONJUNCTIONS………………………………………………………………………………………………. 93
   1. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 94

CHAPTER SEVEN: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION…………………………………………… 96

1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………………… 96
   1. FINDINGS……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 96
      1. The code-switched Nominal Group………………………………………………………………………………. 98
      1. The code-switched Verbal Group………………………………………………………………………………….. 99
      1. Adverbials, Conjunctions and Prepositions……………………………………………………………………. 99
   1. CONCLUDING REMARKS………………………………………………………………………………. 100
   1. FUTURE RESEARCH………………………………………………………………………………………. 100

APPENDICES………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 101

1. REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………………. 101
2. PARTICIPANTS’ CONSENT……………………………………………………………………. 106
3. THE DATA………………………………………………………………………………………………. 107

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

ADJ   ART	= Adjective   = Definite article
COP	= Copula
CP	= Projection of complementizer, Complement phrase
CS	= Code-switching
CSed NG	= Code-switched Nominal Group
DET	= Determiner
E.g.	= Example
EL	= Embedded Language
EMP	= Emphatic marker
Etc	= et cetera
FUT	= Future
HAB	= habitual/ repeated action marker
INT	= intensifier
ML	= Matrix Language
N	= Noun
NEG	= Negator
NG	= Nominal Group
PL	= Plural marker
P	= Past tense marker
PEF	= Perfect marker

POS PRG PRES	= Possessive marker   = Progressive marker   = Present tense marker
PRON	= Pronoun
S	= Singular marker
VG	= Verbal Group
VP	= Verb phrase
1	= First person
2	= Second person
3	= Third person
?	= Interrogator/ question marker

LIST OF TABLES AND DIAGRAMS

Table 1: The Language Production Model………………………………………………………………………. 35

Table 2: The 4-M morphemes……………………………………………………………………………………….. 43

Diagram 1: The structure of the English NG…………………………………………………………………… 45

Diagram 2: The structure of the Ga NG…………………………………………………………………………. 46

ABSTRACT

This study is a structural examination of Ga-English code-switched utterances among native Ga speakers. It seeks to find out the nature and structure of code-switching as it occurs among  family members within the family setting. As such, data for the study was collected  from selected people within a family. All the participants are balanced bilinguals and literate in both languages.

The analysis involved mainly an examination of the morpheme distribution patterns within the Nominal and Verbal Groups of the code-switched utterances as well as how prepositions perform in the code-switched structures. Adverbial Groups and conjunctions were also briefly examined. The theoretical framework used is the 4-M model of Carol Myers-Scotton (2002) and the grammatical theory of the Systemic Functional Grammar.

It was observed that, per the 4-M model’s assumption, content morphemes are the main English items in the corpus. System morphemes are mostly supplied by Ga and their switch is subject to the principles of the differential access hypothesis.

Secondly, the research sought to find out whether differences exist between the Ga only syntactic structures and the code-switched syntactic structures. The results reveal that there are fundamental differences in both the Nominal Group and the Verbal Group of both structures, as well as within the switching of prepositions and conjunctions.

The structure of the utterances may be predictive, particularly in the Nominal and Verbal Groups as the position of morphemes are easily identified and recur over and over again.

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

              AIM AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY

In West Africa, Amuzu & Singler (2014) report that there is intense intrasentential code- switching. This is mainly because, as Dakubu (1997) observes, polyglottism is a major characteristic of West African cities (Amuzu & Singler, 2014). Moreover, Amuzu & Singler (2014) lament the fact that in spite of encouraging numbers of studies of CS in the region, the studies mostly involve language pairs of a majority language and a colonial language. Studies involving language pairs of a minority language and a majority language are scarce while those of a minority language and a colonial language are scarcer (Amuzu & Singler, 2014).

This study seeks to examine the grammatical structure of Ga-English code-switching as engaged in by ‗educated‘ native speakers of Ga. The term educated speakers was first used by Sey (1973). In this study, however, Amuzu (2005a)‘s definition is adopted. Amuzu (2005a) uses ‗educated Ghanaians‘ to refer to Ghanaians who have acquired at least a secondary school education.

The study focuses on code-switching among family members in informal conversations. The rationale behind this is basically to examine the nature of code-switching within the family setting and largely to study the structure of the code-switched utterance among educated Ga speakers.

The analysis involves a description and explanation of the morpheme distribution patterns in the Nominal and Verbal Groups of the code-switched utterances. There are also comments on code-

switching of prepositions, adverbial groups, and conjunctions. The theoretical framework that is used for the analysis is Myers-Scotton (2002)‘s 4-M model.

              AN OVERVIEW OF CODE-SWITCHING

Code-switching (CS) is appraised one of the central issues in bilingualism research; one that has received tremendous attention, and continue to excite scholars in the field (Milroy & Muysken, 1995; Thomason, 2001; Dadzie, 2004, etc). It is defined by Milroy and Muysken (1995:7) as

‗the alternative use by bilinguals of two or more languages in the  same  conversation.  Thomason (2001: 133) similarly defines it as ‗the use of material from two (or more) languages by a single speaker in the same conversation‘. Several manifestations of code-switching exist, such as, switching between turns of speakers; switching between utterances of one‘s turn; and even, switching within a single utterance. These differences have led to distinctions in  descriptive terms for the phenomenon such as codeswitching, code-mixing, code alternation, borrowing etc. The main point however is that it has been discovered that the bilingual uses his/her two codes interchangeably, sometimes moving from one to another, other times substituting words in one for another within the same speech effort (Dadzie, 2004). In this study, code-switching (CS) is used to describe any of the manifestations mentioned above without any distinction.

Interest in the study of CS began in the 1950s when scholars like Weinreich (1953) and Haugen (1953) dwelt on aspects of it in their publications (Milroy & Muysken, 1995:5; Clyne, 2003:70). The term ‗code-switching‘ was however introduced by Gumperz (1964) ‗for switching with a discourse function‘ (Clyne, 2003:70); but with time it has been increasingly used for all kinds of

switching (Clyne, 2003:70). According to Myers-Scotton (1993:19), subsequent studies of CS (Gumperz, 1982; Heller, 1988; Myers-Scotton, 1993b) mainly focused on its social motivations.

However, it soon became apparent that intra-sentential CS is not done haphazardly, but may be structured. The search for structural constraints thus began. Notable among these researchers are, Timm (1975), Pfaff (1979), Gumperz (1982), Poplack (1981) and Myers-Scotton (1993a).

At the moment, studies of CS are generally approached from three main perspectives – Psycholinguistic, Sociolinguistic and Structural.

• Sociolinguistic studies make inquiries into the social aspects of CS. Some of the studies are Blom & Gumperz (1972), Heller (1988), C l y n e ( 1 9 9 2 ) , Myers-Scotton  (1993b), Milroy & Li (1995) and Owusu-Yeboa (2013).

• Psycholinguistic researchers are concerned with the cognitive aspects of CS. Some studies are Grosjean (1982; 1995), etc.

• Structural studies are investigations into the grammatical structure of the CSed utterances. Scholars in this  field  include  Poplack  (1980),  Myers-Scotton  (1993a, 2002) and, Myers-Scotton and Jake (1995). The structural perspective is dealt with in detail in the next section.

              THE STRUCTURAL PERSPECTIVE OF CS

The structural perspective of code-switching studies as mentioned in the previous section is a study of the syntactic structure of the code-switched utterances. Generally, CS utterances are classified as inter-sentential or intra-sentential. Inter-sentential CS occurs when a speaker switches from one language to another at a sentence or clause boundary, such as example (1a, b and c). Intra-sentential is when the switching occurs within the same clause as in (1d, e and f).

DOWNLOAD PROJECT