Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
Factors Influencing the Language Choices
of Malay Malaysians
in the Family, Friendship and Market Domains
Hafriza Burhanudeen
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
Abstract
The multilingual and multicultural nature of Malaysians has been the focus of many
scholars in the field of Southeast Asian sociolinguistics. This paper endeavours to
contribute to the development of Malaysian sociolinguistics by discerning the
interaction between the language behavior of the dominant ethnic group in
Malaysia, the Malays, and their unique social and cultural identity. In this paper,
this goal is fulfilled by providing a descriptive account of the language choices of
219 Malay Malaysians in the family, friendship and market domains. The linguistic
and cultural characteristics that emerge from this study will lead to a better
understanding of the ethnolinguistic vitality of the Malay Malaysian community.
1. Introduction and Background Information
Domain analysis is a popular choice for many scholars who choose to investigate a
community's norms of language use. This paper, similarly, endeavours to use domain
analysis to investigate the interactive effects of education, age, role-relationships and
ethnicity on the language choices of Malay Malaysians in the family, friendship and
market domains. Fishman (1972:435) defines domains as classes of situations, in which
individuals interact in appropriate role relationships and discuss topics appropriate to
their role relationships. Fishman (1972) further contends that different kinds of
multilingual speech communities should benefit from domain analysis, whether the
domains are defined intuitively, theoretically, or empirically because it illuminates factors
concerning the circumstances, social or otherwise, in which languages are used "where,"
"when" and "why." In this paper, the domains investigated are defined inituitively by the
writer, a member of the Malay Malaysian community. In addition, assumptions made
about the language behaviour of the 219 subjects are also empirically tested. By
224
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
combining qualitative and quantitative procedures, the paper aspires to firmly document
the language and cultural norms of Malay Malaysians not only in relation to “where,”
“when” and “why” but also the “how,” that is how these languages choices are
communicated in the domains investigated in this paper.
Two criteria serve as relevant background information to the goal of this paper; firstly the
effect of language planning on the role and status of the Malay and English language
before and after independence from British colonialization and secondly, the types of
language choices available to
Malay Malaysians. A description of the former is necessary to provide a framework that
could account for and explain the possible differences in language choices among the
older subjects in this study vis a vis the younger subjects due to the fact that the older
participants of this study were educated entirely in English, or bilingually in English and
Malay while the younger participants are currently being educated entirely in Malay. All
this, plus other factors which will be discussed during data interpretation could influence
the language choices of these Malay Malaysians. The function of the second criteria
mentioned, that is, a description of the types of language choices available to Malay
Malaysians is to highlight the salient features of each type of language choice available.
This is considered important for two reasons; Firstly, as relevant background information
to the goal of this paper and secondly, as reference when each type of language choice is
indicated in the data interpretation section of this paper. Being bilingual, the language
choices would be either English or Malay only.
We begin by providing a general description of the first criteria aforementioned, the
effect of language planning processes on the role and status of the Malay and English
language. The English language was introduced to Malaysia in the 1800s by British
colonialization. During this period, the role and status of English was high being the
language of government and education. English was also regarded as an indispensable
requirement for social and economic mobility. Due to these roles, the learning and use of
English was greatly pursued by members of the local multiracial population comprising
225
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
of Malays, and Chinese and Indian immigrants.
The role and status of Malay, before the British presence in the 1800s was considerable in
its functions as the language of administration, education, culture, literature and arts for
the Malay archipelago since 7 A.D. These roles, however, declined drastically after
British colonization. During this period, the role of Malay was confined to a language of
primary education, daily use among the Malays, and an interethnic means of
communication in several transaction domains such as the market place. These
transaction domains, in diglossic terms, were regarded as low domains. Additionally, the
variety of Malay used here was a sub-standard variety containing many features of the
immigrant languages. Like Malay, the role of Chinese and Indian languages were largely
confined to their respective communities.
Independence in 1957 saw a dramatic change again in the role and status of English and
Malay. After independence, Malay was selected as the national language as a tool of
integration for the different ethnic groups in Malaysia and as an official language for
purposes of nation-building. The selection of Malay was primarily linked to the fact that
it was indigenous to Malaysia, the language of the majority, the Malays, and that it
existed as the language of administration long before the coming of any Western power.
The major vehicle used, however, to ensure the growth and use of Malay was the
selection of Malay as the language of education in addition to its role as national
language. Beginning in 1957, too, English was gradually phased out as medium of
education in favor of Malay. From 1957 to 1983, a bilingual system existed. After 1983,
Malay was the sole language of education. This gradual process meant that Malaysians
who were educated in the 60s and 70s would have had more exposure to English in the
education system compared to those who went through an all Malay-medium education.
Given all this, it is expected that the older participants of this study who were educated in
the 70s and 80s would be more comfortable in English compared to the younger
participants who were eduacted in Malay.
226
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
Next, the four major types of language choices frequently made by Malay Malaysians in
various domains of language use are code-mixing, code-switching and the employment of
different styles within the same language. Here, I use Asmah's (1982) definition of codemixing and code-switching to discuss the language behavior of Malay Malaysians.
According to Asmah, code-switching entails that the language codes are used
intersententially whereas in code-mixing, the language codes are used intrasentially.
Examples of each are given below.
Code-switching among Malays can be illustrated as follows (Asmah, 1982:132). The
English translation is mine.
Speaker A : Tuan Pengerusi, saya pada dasarnya menyokong
pendapat Tuan Pengerusi itu tetapi saya ingin mencadangkan
supaya peraturan ini di-kenakan secara beransur-ansur. We must
be careful not to force the system all at once on the people.They are
sure to reject it.
(Mr. Chairman, I support your views in principle but I would like
to suggest that the implementation of the regulations be carried
out gradually.
(We must be careful not to force the system all at once on the people.
They are sure to reject it).
Speaker B : Yes, yes, I agree with you. Bagaimana pendapat yang
lain?
(Yes, yes, I agree with you. How about hearing other opinions?)
Code-mixing among Malays, on the other hand, usually takes the form illustrated below
(Asmah, 1982:132). The English translation is mine.
1) We are not testing apa yang diperolehi di university.
Knowledgewise, the clerks know better, kerana dia membaca.
(We are not testing what one gains in university. Knowwise, the clerks know better because they read)
227
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
2) Daripada analysis yang dibuat, if we go by faculty, ada
perbezaan.
(From the analysis that was done, if we go by faculty, there are
differences)
The types of code-shifting shown above are appropriate in formal domains such as
meetings and seminars. It is additionally vigorous in semi-formal domains viz. a group of
Malay professionals arguing politics or work related issues over lunch and in informal
domains such as the home and among friends. Here, code-mixing tends to occur at well
defined points in a conversation and the shift in codes is marked by little or no hesitation.
Code-mixing and code-switching among Malays can also take the form of switching
between the standard variety of Malay and a regional Malay dialect. Both types of
switchings are characteristic of informal discourse between Malay speakers who come
from different regions. In the urban area, the Malay bilingual, for example, will rarely
mix the regional Malay variety and the standard Malay variety in a speech situation if he
is overly concerned with his social and regional identity. However, if an occasion arises
where a speaker switches to his regional dialect, both he and his interlocuter could be
from the same region and hence share the same regional dialect, or the interlocuter could
be from a different region, but has sufficient knowledge of the dialect directed at him to
achieve membership and solidarity. I have been in a situation many times when I am with
Malay friends from different regions in Malaysia. I would consciously switch to the
regional Malay dialects of my friends to achieve rapport and familiarity. In turn, my
friends would switch to my regional dialect to achieve equality. Thus, in a single speech
situation, a variety of regional varieties can go back and forth between a group of people
to heighten group solidarity such that sociocultural authenticity can be shared and
exchanged. All this supports Giles and Powesland's (1975) theory of speech
accomodation where in language choice an individual can induce the other to evaluate
him more favorable by reducing the dissimilarities between them.
The employment of different styles within the same language here refers to the variety of
styles ranging from formal to informal. Whether a formal of informal style is used would
228
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
depend on the situation and the participants associated with the situation. For example,
formal styles are appropriate in domains such as government and education whereas very
informal English or Malay are usually used in situations where it is generally assumed
that the participants are not educated beyond the primary level, for example, the market
domain. As mentioned earlier, very informal Malay and English are the language choices
with interlocuters who are assumed to have had only a primary education. Educated
speakers will use these very informal forms with the former to reduce social and
psychological distance for better communication and service. Instances such as these will
be discussed in more detail during interpretation of data used for this study. Sometimes,
however, bazaar English and Malay are used in the family and friendship domain for a
humerous effect especially among siblings and friends of the same generation.
2. Methodology
Data was gathered from 219 Malaysian Malays between the ages of 16 and 35 years
concerning their language choices in the family, friendship and market domains. Subjects
between the ages of 16 and 19, henceforth referred to as students, were from these
following schools:
1. St. Mary's Secondary School, Kuala Lumpur
2. Maxwell Secondary School, Kuala Lumpur
3. Pantai Secondary School, Kuala Lumpur
Participants between 20 to 35 years, henceforth referred to as professionals, included
university lecturers, computer analysts, lawyers, journalists, diplomats, managers of
various companies, and some lower on the occupational scale like clerks and secretaries.
Questionnaires were the principal instruments used in this study followed by interviews
on a smaller scale to supplement information gathered through the questionnaires.
Questionnaires for the student group were distributed by the researcher in person at each
school while questionnaires for the professional group were distributed through
a
229
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
network of friends and family. The purpose of the questionnaire was to obtain feedback
on the nature of language use among Malay Malaysians. Unstructured and informal
interviews were carried out with each secondary school teacher that administered the
survey in the three secondary schools investigated here, and with participants such as
members of the family and friends to discuss any problems that arose while they carried
out the survey, or about any other observations they had that would aid data analysis.
Most of the interviews lasted about an hour. Finally, discreet observation of the
interaction between interlocuters in the family, friendship and market domain was carried
out by the researcher to aid data interpretation. Here, most of the interactions were noted
and recorded surreptitiously by her. It is important to point out that although the language
choices on the questionnaire do not indicate levels of formality, semi-formality and
informality, these levels do exist during communication and will be included in the
discussion where relevant.
A combination of parametric and non-parametric tests was used in this study. The
Friedman analysis of variance was used to test assumptions in the family, market and
friendship domain. Discussion of data obtained will be handled in two ways; firstly, a
description of the domains to give readers, unfamiliar to the Malaysian situation, a
general sense of what usually goes on in each domain. Second, a discussion of the
quantitative results. These will be interpreted primarily by introspection. Used
objectively, introspection is an efficient method of interpreting data that yields objective
results. It draws on the inherent knowledge of a researcher already culturally and
linguistically sensitive to a given community, thus reducing the need for error-prone
postulating based on outside sources.
Saville-Troike (1982:110-111, 114) provides several advantages of studying one's own
culture:
1) "One of the advantages of studying one's own culture,
and attempting to make explicit the systems of understanding
which are implicit, is that ethnographers are able to use
230
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
themselves as sources of information and interpretation."
2) "..acknowledges the member of the society as the repository
of
cultural knowledge, and recognizes that the ethnographer
who already possesses this knowledge can tap it introspectively
validate, enrich, and expedite the task of ethnographic
description."
3) "..some major questions regarding validity and reliability
raised
by the quantitatively oriented social sciences can be at
least
partially resolved."
4) "Combining observation and self-knowledge, the
ethnographer
can plumb the depths and explore the subtle
interconnections of
meaning in ways that the outsider could
attain only with great
difficulty, if at all."
5) "..some of the problems of verification can be overcome,
and a
corrective to unbridled speculation provided."
6) " ...no outsider can really understand the meaning of
interactions
of various types within the community without
eliciting the intuitions of its members."
The raw data reveals that the subjects' language choices are influenced by the setting, the
degree of formality, whether the personal repertoires of the interlocuters are equal, age,
ethnicity of interlocuter and education. For example, the subjects' preferred Malay with
other Malays in the market domain but only 62 percent of the time with non-Malays in
the same domain. In the family domain, formal varieties are preferred with grandparents
and parents while an informal variety is preferred with siblings. Such comparisons lend
support to my conviction that the subjects' language choices in a given situation is not
arbitrary, but governed by certain norms of appropriate language use prevalent in the
Malay society.
3. Data Analysis and Interpretation
The domains investigated in this study are the family domain, the market domain and the
231
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
friendship domain.
3.1. The Family Domain
Four sub-domains can generally be found in Malay families. They are
1) Conversing with grandparents
2) Conversing with mother
3) Conversing with father
4) Conversing with siblings
3.1.1. Result and Discussion of Hypothesis Testing
The hypotheses that there is a difference in language use between the Malay subjects and
the participants in the family domain depending on the family member was significant
(Chi-square of ranks=17.41, df=3, p<.05)
Table 1
Malay
always
Mother
Father
Grandparents
Siblings
English &
Malay
equally
English more
than Malay
English
always
N
165
37
10
7
%
75.34
16.89
4.57
3.20
N
158
40
12
9
%
72.14
18.26
5.48
4.11
N
204
6
5
%
93.15
2.73
2.28
N
128
73
13
%
58.44
33.33
5.94
4
1.83
5
2.28
N=219
3.1.2. Summary and Discussion
The results show that the subjects’ prefer Malay with mothers, fathers, grandparents and siblings.
232
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
However, the use of Malay is most dominant with grandparents followed by parents and least
dominant with siblings. The use of English either monolingually or bilingually with Malay, on
the other hand, is preferred most with siblings, and almost equally used with mothers and fathers.
Interaction with the older generation has to exude a certain degree of social distance, humility
and deference to indicate respect for their age and authority. This is accomplished by being
formal in language and in behaviour. This formality in language and behaviour is often
accompanied by the lowering of one's voice and avoiding full eye contact. To do otherwise, such
as using informal varieties and talking in a loud voice, would be considered rude in Malay
society.
With the above in mind, the dominant use of Malay with grandparents is also influenced by the
assumption that they are not likely to be proficient in English due to informal interview data
indicating a Malay-medium education among the subjects’ grandparents. Hence, the use of
formal Malay accompanied by the proper social norms stated above would be appropriate and
polite. The table also shows small amounts of English being used with grandparents. This could
be explained by the following reason. In the Malay community, the choice of a nursing home for
the care of grandparents is socially and culturally unacceptable. Members of the grandparents'
immediate family usually take turns to care for grandparents. Hence, grandparents may
understand some English being constantly around some younger educated members of the family
who would sometimes use English. However, the grandparents would most likely answer in
Malay.
The use of Malay is primarily preferred with parents but not as dominant as its use with
grandparents. This is because the use of English is also favored with parents. The subjects'
primary use of Malay and some English with parents may be influenced by three reasons; the
subjects' parents proficiency in English and Malay, the subjects' level of proficiency in English
and Malay and the formality of this sub-family domain. First, a review of the subjects' parents
occupation in the initial part of the questionnaire reveal that more than half hold jobs such as
laborers, shopkeepers and hospital attendants, jobs that reflect holders possessing a low to
lower-mid Malay-medium education level at best. Hence, the subjects' use of Malay with these
parents would be the appropriate and polite choice. This would increase the tendency for Malay
to be used in this sub-domain. On the other hand, there were some parents who were employed,
233
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
for example, as lecturers, diplomats, architects, bank managers and engineers. These jobs
demand a high educational level. Hence it is assumed that they are more bilingually competent in
English and Malay. Therefore, the tendency to use English, either monolingually or bilingually
with Malay, with these parents would be higher.
Second, the fact the Malay-medium educated students form the majority of this study's sample
may have also increased the tendency for more Malay, compared to English, to be used with
parents even if the parents spoke English at home. Third, the reason for more Malay is also
closely related to the formality of the parental domain generally in Asian culture. Due to the
formality of the parental domain, the appropriate linguistic behavior would be to avoid using
very informal English or Malay or slang. Thus, subjects will tend to use the language in which
they are most proficient with parents. Here, the data indicates that the student subjects will be
inclined to use more Malay. The professional subjects, on the other hand, would be able to
achieve formality levels in both English and Malay, but would probably use more Malay to
accommodate the language in which their parents are most comfortable.
The subjects' language use with their educated siblings have an inclination to be more intimate,
casual and informal as the interaction is considered to be among equals. The results show that the
subjects' favor Malay about 58 percent of the time while English, bilingually with Malay or
monolingually was preferred a total of about 41 percent of the time. Since the majority of the
respondents are more comfortable in Malay compared to English, it is not surprising to see the
preference for Malay with siblings. However, the increased disposition to use English with
siblings, compared to its use with parents and grandparents, may be related to two factors; One,
the topic of discourse and two, the informality of this sub-family domain. The influence of the
first factor may be due to the fact that siblings tend to discuss issues related to love,
relationships, music, movies, and television programs among themselves rather than with their
parents or grandparents. These discussions increase the tendency for English, monolingually or
bilingually with Malay, to be used. The fact that lexical gaps exist in Malay, especially in the
field of science and technology enhances the use of English. Indeed, the professional subjects are
expected to hold more debates about advances in science, technology and politics compared to
the student subjects due to various fields in which they (the professionals) are involved such as
engineering, computer science and journalism. This may have caused a rise in the tendency to
use English. Second, the informality of this sub-domain encourages the use of more English
234
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
because language appropriacy becomes less of a concern. Thus, for the student subjects,
especially, interacting with their siblings about movies and television programs in less than
perfect English would be acceptable. Though imperfect, the use of English, bilingually with
Malay or monolingually would be a marker of equality and educational status.
3.2. The Market Domain
Market domains are established when members of the Chinese, Malay and Indian
community, from various parts of town, congregate at semi-permanent or permanent,
frequently open air areas to sell a wide range of relatively cheap multiethnic food or an
assortment of goods such as padlocks, fabric, sewing materials, tapes and records,
clothing and kitchen utensils to customers from all walks of life. Food areas normally
have Malay stalls in one row, then Chinese, then Indian, not necessarily in this order. This
is generally so to facilitate selection and purchase of food type by customers. Food is
cooked over kerosene or gas stoves. This creates a noisy atmosphere due to the constant
contact between iron or steel ladles against iron or steel pots and pans while cooking
food. Service can be trying, especially during peak hours in the afternoons and evenings
because customers have to compete with one another for the attention of a small number
of waiters or waitresses. These waiters or waitresses either list customers' food orders on
paper or shout out the orders to the cooks working nearby. The latter method seems
preferred and, this adds to the din in the hawker area. Many hawker areas offer customers
places to sit to enjoy the ordered food while it is fresh and piping hot. Despite the noise
and heat constantly radiating from the gas and kerosene stoves, the food is not only good
but cheaper compared to larger restaurants in the downtown area of the city. Additionally,
the chance to have food at or near a food stall provides a casual atmosphere for customers
to relax with family and friends.
Merchandise stalls are, however, generally interspersed throughout the area without
regard to ethnic origin. This is because goods tend to be similar with variation only in
terms of price unlike food which is prepared differently. In some areas, hawker activity
takes place all day daily or two or three times a week while in others, it would begin daily
235
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
in the evenings and often end as late as four or five in the morning.
Malays tend to gravitate more towards Malay stalls when it comes to buying merchandise
and food. In the first instance, goods are bought from Malay buyers even though other
ethnic groups offer comparable goods. A contributing factor for this tendency is the
assumption that Malay sellers would sell goods to Malay buyers at a lower price because
they "are one of us," a privilege not readily extended to non-Malay buyers. This not only
economically motivate Malay buyers to purchase goods from Malay sellers but the mutual
trust that results from such an action also serves to strengthen the existing social, cultural
and linguistic bond between them. As a result, the process of haggling for a lesser price
is kept at a minimum. On the other hand, the belief that the Chinese, especially, are
economically more successful than the Malays makes many Malay buyers willing to buy
goods at a higher price from Malay sellers to help improve Malay sellers' economic
situation. This may occur despite the fact that some non-Malay sellers price similar items
cheaper or have comparable items of better quality
The purpose of the discussion above is not to imply that successful economic interaction
does not occur between Malays and non-Malays, only that an ethnic bias would tend to
prevail when Malays patronize transaction domains.
Malays would also favor Malay stalls especially if they desired meat or poultry dishes.
This is because of the "halal" concept in Islam. Halal is similar to keeping kosher in the
Jewish tradition whereby all animals must be slaughtered in the name of God. Eating
non-halal meat is considered "haram," a sin. Consuming pork or pork products is also
prohibited in Islam. The uneasy feeling that pork may be used as fillers in rice and noodle
dishes at non-Malay non-Muslim stalls and that the oil or butter used for cooking may
contain lard further motivates them to invest in malay stalls. Some non-malay stalls, to
attract malay customers, advertise a "halal" sign, implying that the meat and poultry in
their dishes were bought from certified Muslim butchers. While this may still deter some
malay customers due to the fact many of these non-malays may also cook pork dishes at
236
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
the same time, and perhaps (in the minds of some Malays) cooking pork in the same
utensils that they use to cook halal meat and poultry, other Malays may choose to accept
the claim and savor non-malay dishes.
3.2.1. Result and Discussion of Hypothesis Testing
The hypotheses that there is a difference in language use between the Malay subjects and
the participants in the market domain depending on the ethnicity of the sellers (Malay,
Indian or Chinese) was significant ( Chi-square of ranks = 29.30, df=2, P<.05).
Table 2
Malay
always
Malay
Hawkers
Chinese
Hawkers
Indian
Hawkers
English &
Malay
equally
N
213
3
%
97.26
N
English more
than Malay
English
always
2
0
1.37
0.91
0
135
76
7
0
%
61.64
34.70
3.20
0
N
141
71
5
1
%
64.38
32.42
2.28
0.46
N=218
3.2.2. Summary and Discussion
The figures in the table above indicate that the subjects preferred Malay dominantly with
other Malays in this domain. Malay is also favored with non-Malays, but on a lesser scale
due to the higher indication of the subjects' choice of English and Malay.
Malay and English, as indicated in the table above are very informal styles. The reason
why informal styles were used in the market domain is due to the assumption that the
237
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
sellers are stereotypically perceived to have had only a minimal formal education
amounting to a vernacular primary education at best. Consequently, they are regarded to
be proficient only in very informal, somewhat non-standard forms of English and Malay.
Therefore, customers, regardless of their ethnic origin, feel that it would be polite for
them to interact with participants in this domain using these forms of language. It is
necessary to point out that the use of these styles with participants in this domain is
influenced primarily by the co-existence of the setting and the participants. This is
because without the presence of the sellers in market designated areas, language choice
would be different, for example, if one were to unknowingly meet a seller in another
setting such as in a bank or at the post office or if young Malaysians make use of market
designated areas to play cards or hopstoch before the usual activity of a transaction
domain begins.
The dominant tendency for the Malay subjects to use Malay with Malay sellers can be
attributed to two reasons; One, very informal Malay is the appropriate and polite language
choice considering the assumption that Malay sellers speak and understand very informal
Malay better compared to very informal English. Thus, using Malay would facilitate the
business transaction. Two, and more important, Malay serves the important function of
reducing the social and psychological distance and establishing sociocultural authenticity
between Malay buyers and sellers. Indeed, the use of Malay to lessen the social and
psychological gap between Malays of higher social and economic status and those on the
lower social and economic scale is regarded necessary to achieve Malay kinship and
solidarity. In such interactions, it is usually the Malays in the former category that have to
accomodate to the speech style of the latter. The reasons above as to why Malay is
preferred with Malay sellers may also explain why formal English and Malay is seldom
used with Malay sellers. Certainly, the use of formal Malay or English by Malays buyers
with Malay sellers in the market domain is regarded as inappropriate. It would be
indicative of the Malay buyers' need to distance themselves socially from Malay sellers or
mocking their minimal formal education. Both would hurt the seller's feelings and
threathen Malay kinship and solidarity. Furthermore, the Malay buyer would be
238
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
considered arrogant and lacking in manners.
The need for Malays to bond socially, psychologically and culturally with non-Malays to
establish kinship or solidarity with non-Malays in this domain is less. This and the fact
that language becomes less associated with Malay identity and customs makes the use of
English and Malay or the use of English more than Malay more possible with non-Malay
sellers compared to Malay sellers. Also, the fact that the language used is less associated
with Malay identity and customs may explain why Malay customers would generally not
feel culturally obliged to guard against hurting the feelings of non-Malay sellers as they
would have to with Malay sellers when buying merchandise. This allows for more
verbally aggressive behavior during haggling with non-Malay sellers in either English
and/or Malay to obtain lower priced goods.. Usually, if the outcome is not financially
satisfactory, the buyer would move to another stall in search of a better bargain.
Two other factors may also account for why Malay was preferred on a lesser scale by
Malays with non-Malay sellers: Firstly, non-Malay sellers are assumed to have attended
Chinese-medium or Indian-medium primary schools. Even though the medium of
education in these schools is Mandarin and Tamil, Malay and English would be the other
languages taught as school subjects. Hence, it is assumed that they would have some level
of understanding in both English and Malay. Certainly, the possibility of many Malays
knowing Mandarin or Tamil is slim. Thus, their interaction with non-Malay sellers would
be limited to Malay or English. Second, although both Malay and English are possible
language choices with non-Malay sellers, the assumption that the learning of Malay as a
subject is stressed more than the learning of English in Chinese and Indian vernacular
schools because of Malay's important role as national language encourages the greater use
of very informal Malay with non-Malay sellers.
3.3. The Friendship Domain
The friendship domain is regarded to be an informal setting. In this study, the friendship
239
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
domain involves the subjects' interaction with Malay, Chinese and Indian friends from
both sexes. Compared to friendship between those of the same sex, female-male
friendship are primarily expected to reflect a certain degree of social distance and
formality to prevent promiscuous behavior. This is not to imply that a healthy platonic
relationship between males and females cannot exist only that the level of friendship is
usually guarded, and not expected to be as open and casual as female-female or malemale friendship. Indeed, especially for a female, being seen to be too friendly or familiar
with males would endanger her reputation negatively. Similarly, males who are seen to be
too friendly with many females. Certainly, if community elders, who are regarded as
gatekeepers of religious standards of morality, suspect that the friendship between a male
and female are closer than religiously, socially and culturally expected, the couple will be
reprimanded or in the worst case scenario, forced to get married.
3.3.1. Result and Discussion of Hypothesis Testing
The hypothesis that there is a difference in language use between the Malay subjects and
the participants in the friendship domain depending on their ethnicity was significant
(Chi-square of ranks=157.78, df=5, P<.01).
Table 3
Malay
always
with a male
Chinese friend
with a female
Chinese friend
with a male
Indian friend
with a female
Indian friend
N
64
%
29.22
N
53
%
24.20
N
52
%
23.74
N
61
%
27.85
English &
Malay
equally
English more
than Malay
English
always
80
42
33
36.53
19.18
15.07
89
47
30
40.64
21.46
13.70
88
48
31
40.18
21.92
14.16
86
39.27
46
21.00
26
11.87
240
Journal of Language and Linguistics
with a male
Malay friend
with a female
Malay friend
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
N
121
76
%
55.25
34.70
N
119
70
%
54.33
31.96
ISSN 1475 - 8989
22
10.05
24
10.96
10
4.57
6
2.74
N=219
3.3.2. Summary and Discussion
The table shows that the Malay subjects consistently chose Malay as a primary
preference, followed by English bilingually with Malay and least of all, monolingual
English, with Malay participants in this domains. As expected, too, is the greater amount
of English used with non-Malays. However, the tendency for English to be used with
non-Malays here appears higher compared to the other domains.
English and Malay as represented in the table above are slightly formalized where malefemale friendships are concerned and informal for female-female and male-male
friendship due to the reasons given during the initial description of the friendship domain.
Although a considerable amount of English is used to mark social and educational status
in this domain, ethnic kinship and solidarity can again be a persistent influence on the
language choice of Malay with Malays. Usually, the excessive use of English, either
monolingually or bilingually with Malay, is avoided because of possible negative
backlash from Malays who regard English-dominant Malays as not being "pure" Malays.
This encourages the majority of Malays to use Malay with Malay interlocuters. NonMalays, on the other hand, usually address Malay friends in English, monolingually or
bilingually in Malay, but seldom in monolingual Malay. This increases the tendency for
Malays to use less monolingual Malay and more amounts of English with non-Malays in
this domain. The fact that ethnic bonding is not essential with non-Malays contributes to
the Malays' lesser use of Malay with non-Malays.
4. Conclusion and Implications of the Study
241
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
In the ideal linguistic universe, all members of the speech community would line up and
await their turns to provide the investigator with fascinating and publishable data with
unlimited time, energy and money and emerge with a definitive statement about the
nature of speech in that community (Anshen, 1982:37). Not being in the ideal research
situation, I had to content myself with taking what was available, a portion of the speech
community. This raises some theoretical questions about the representation of the sample.
Another issue that has often been mentioned in the literature dealing with surveys is the
reliability of self-reported questionnaire data. By this, for example, self-reported
responses on surveys could reflect how the subjects' think he or she should respond rather
than how they actually feel due to outside pressures such as work, limited time, religious
activities or their perception of how they are expected to feel by others around.
The statistical results, however, are consistent with my experiences as a native Malay.
Fishman (1983:43-44) also indicates that
"the limitations of aggregated self-report data are not as damning as is
sometimes claimed to be the case. Self-report data is a very basic route to
reality, not only for researchers but for all of mankind. We are forever telling
others what we know, believe and think (modified, of course, at least to some
extent, by whom we are interacting with and what we want them to know,
believe and think), and others are forever asking us to express ourselves along
these lines. Even the formal/written nature of some of the aforementioned
data-gathering approaches (on certain occasions or as utilized by some
investigators) need not constitute nor cause departures from reality."
Results from the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the questionnaire data indicate a
correlation between the respondents' language use and and factors such as education, age,
occupation, length of exposure to English and Malay and ethnicity. This is advantageous
in defining the diglossic distribution of English and Malay in the Malay community. The
results suggest that (based on polyglossic models proposed in Platt and Weber (1977,
1980)), a basic outline of a polyglossic model for Malays can be as follows (H=high,
M=mid, L=low):
242
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Formal Malay
Formal English
Semi-formal Malay
Semi-formal English
Regional Malay
Informal Malay
Informal English
Results of this study suggest
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
H1
H2
M1
M2
M3
L1
L2
that the professionals' are comfortable in both English and
Malay. On the other hand, the results suggest that the students' are more comfortable in
Malay, compared to English. Certainly, the professionals and the students, can affect the
future diglossic distribution of English and Malay. The presence of Malay professionals
now, such as those found in this study, would ensure the use of both languages. This is
compared to,on the other hand, to the likely declining role and status of English among
the younger Malay generation when they enter the work force.
Results also indicate that the ethnicity of the participants is a contributing factor to the
Malays' languages choices. Here, the subjects dominantly preferred the Malay language
with Malay participants compared to non-Malay participants even though the latter are
also familiar with Malay. It appears that the Malay language, especially where language
choices in domains of use are concerned, serves as a marker between Malays and nonMalays. It calls upon a shared past and present cultural, social, religious and political
history, all of which are evoked in the Malay language's important role as a means for
intragroup communication.
Apart from this study's contribution to Southeast Asian sociolinguistics, the results of
the study could be advantageous to language and educational policy makers as it provides
them the opportunity to see the kinds of effects earlier language and education policies
have had on the Malays' language behavior. For example, this study suggests that
language and educational policy makers have been largely successfully in raising the role
and status of Malay at the expense of English through education as the major vehicle for
nationalism. This is primarily evident in the language profile of the student subjects.
Conversely, the results of this study should motivate policy makers to arrest the decline of
English considering its importance in vast new areas of knowledge such as genetic
243
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
engineering, medical advances, astronomy, marine biology, computer technology and
space and nucleur technology. Indeed, even if the government increases the amount of
resources and the number of translators to translate into Malay these vast outpouring of
new thoughts and discoveries, vital to Malaysia's growth, there would still be an
insufficient number of up to date textbooks in Malay. The fact that there are many lexical
gaps in Malay where scientific and technological advances are concerned means that
translators have to literally coin hundreds of new Malay words. This would delay the
effort to impart new knowledge and discoveries in Malay, and delay the learning of
knowledge. Thus, while factors such as the unifying effects of having one national
language is recognized, Malaysia with its tradition of multilingualism, including English,
should not ignore the benefits of
being bilingual or multilingual as a bilingual or
multilingual person has more gateways to knowledge compared to a person making do
with one.
About the Author
Dr Burhanudeen works in the Center for Language Studies and Linguistics, Faculty of Social
Science and Humanities, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Email: riza@pkrisc.cc.ukm.my
References
Anshen, Frank. 1982. Statistics for linguists. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House Publishes.
Asmah Haji Omar. 1982. Language and society in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford
University Press.
Asmah Haji Omar. 1989. Nationalism and exoglossia: The case of English in Malaysia.
Malaysia: University Malaya Press.
Asmah Haji Omar. 1992. The Linguistic scenery in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford
University Press.
244
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Vol. 2 No. 2 2003
ISSN 1475 - 8989
Fasold, Ralph. 1984. The sociolinguistics of society. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Fishman, J.A. 1968. Sociolinguistic perspective on the study of bilingualism. Linguistics
39: 21- 50.
Fishman, J.A. 1972. Domains and the relationship between micro and macrolinguistics.
In
Directions in sociolinguistics, ed. John J. Gumperz and Dell Hymes, 435-453.
New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Fishman, J.A. 1983. Epistemology, methodology and ideology in the sociolinguistic
enterprise.
Language learning n.5 33: 33-47.
Giles, H. and Powesland, P. 1975. Speech style and social evaluation. London Academic
Press.
Hatch, E and Farhady, H. 1982. Research design and statistics for Applied Linguistics.
Rowley:Mass: Newbury House Publishes.
Platt, J.J. 1974. A model for polyglossia and multilingualism with special reference to
Singapore
and Malaysia. Language in Society. 6:361-378.
Platt, J.J. and Weber, H. 1980. English in Singapore and Malaysia: status, features,
functions. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.
Platt, J., Weber, H and Ho, M.L. 1984. The New Englishes. London, Boston,
Melbourne: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Saville-Troike, M. 1986. The ethnography of communication. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
Smith, Larry E. 1981. English for cross-cultural communication. London: Macmillian &
Co.
Tongue, R.K. 1979. The English of Singapore and Malaysia. Singapore University Press.
245