Volume 22 No. 3 November 2014 TESOL Arabia Perspectives www.tesolarabia.org 18 Feature Article Functions of Teacher Code-Switching in a Saudi EFL Classroom: A Case Study Code-switching (CS) is a linguistic phenomenon that is practiced by bilingual and multilingual speakers. It is defined as the alternation of languages in a discourse, and it may be implemented by one speaker or two speakers in the same flow of speech in different forms and for multiple purposes (Gumperz, 1982). CS is also implemented in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms by both teachers and learners for different functions (Seidlitz, 2003; Sert, 2005). This paper presents a definition of CS, its types and functions, and reviews some previous studies on CS in EFL classrooms in different linguistic contexts. The paper also presents a case study that analyzes the types and functions of teacher CS practiced in Saudi EFL classrooms through classroom observation and teacher interview with an aim of investigating the use of CS as a teaching tool in EFL classrooms. Review of literature Poplack (1979) states that CS is the alternation of two languages or two language varieties within a single discourse, sentence, or constituent. Gumperz (1982) defines CS as “the juxtaposition within the same speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical systems or subsystems (p. 59).” He also adds that CS is a discourse strategy that generates conversational inferences; i.e., language choice itself can carry meaning in addition to the content of the message. It is unusual for a speaker to know only one language variety since most speakers are bilingual or multilingual as they at least command several varieties of any language they speak. A speaker chooses a particular “code” whenever he speaks. Furthermore, speakers may choose to switch from one code to another to convey certain messages (Wardhaugh, 1992). Poplack (1979) has identified three types of CS: tag, intersentential, and intrasentential. Tag switches include tags, idiomatic expressions, and interjections. They consist of small units that are added to but not integrated with the other language, including short expressions such as “right” or “understood.” This type can be described as automatic, mechanical, or unintended. Intersentential switches take place at utterance boundaries with the first utterance in one language and the second in the other. In contrast, intrasentential switches take place within utterance boundaries. Romaine (1994) stated that intrasentential CS involves the greatest syntactic risk because of the difficulty of integrating two or more language systems in one utterance. The difficulty lies in organizing the structure of the utterance. Bowler (2001) assumed that intrasentential switches in particular and CS in general are signs of linguistic incompetence, signaling that the speaker momentarily cannot remember a linguistic element in one language but is able to recall it in another language. However, Tian and Macaro (2012) indicated that CS is not a linguistic deficit, but rather a sign of bilingual superiority compared to monolingualism. Sert (2005) claimed that CS is not deficiency in learning a language, but may be considered as a useful strategy in classroom interaction. However, he is against the excessive use of CS since it may create Eman Alkatheery College of Languages and Translation, King Saud University Riyadh, KSA