Anglicisms, Globalisation, and Performativity in Japanese Hip-Hop

Anglicisms, Globalisation, and Performativity in Japanese Hip-Hop

Yasutaka Hiwatari

Abstract
This paper explores anglicisms in Japanese popular culture in the light of recent
theoretical development of globalisation and performativity. The study of language
contact in Japan is far from new in sociolinguistics, where the contact between
Japanese and English has been mainly examined in terms of borrowings. However,
this work historically focused on the categorisations and stylistic functions of loan
words, and so foreclosed any appreciation of how anglicisms are produced to
construct new meanings. Pennycook’s treatment on hip-hop music (2003), based on
globalisation and performativity, opens up a new way of viewing the phenomenon of
borrowing. This paper builds on Pennycook’s research, aiming to identify 1. how
anglicisms project multidimensional identities in Japanese hip-hop music, 2. what
relationships pertain between globalisation and the process of constructing identities
through anglicisms, and 3. what the characteristics of language as a transmodal
performance in popular culture are. This paper suggests that use of anglicisms
refashions identities in Japanese popular culture, and draws attention to the way that
globalisation becomes a force to provoke such refashioning.

1. Introduction
The use of anglicisms in Japanese is one aspect of sociolinguistics which has
been focused on as part of the study of language contact. As Shibatani (1990) argues,
regardless of the fact that languages such as Chinese also took a crucial role in
Japanese context, it is English that has accounted for a larger part of the phenomenon
since the late-19th century. According to Loveday (1996: 17-25), the contact setting in
Japan has been defined as a ‘distant/non-bilingual setting’, which brings about
‘borrowings’. According to Shibatani (1990: 148-153), more than 10% of the lexicon
in Japanese dictionaries accounts for loanwords, and a survey, based on loanwords
collected from ninety varieties of magazine, which was conducted in 1964 by the
National Language Research Institute, shows more than 80% of the loanwords were
English-based. Even the research conducted more than decades ago indicates the
dominance of English loanwords in Japanese. This shows just how significant
anglicisms have been in Japanese.
The sociolinguistic study of borrowing was launched by Haugen (1950) and was
later taken over by Lahmann (1973), Thomason and Kaufman (1988) and Myers-
Scotton (2002). Those analysts were mostly concerned with the typological analysis
of borrowings, and so consequently they ended up producing categorisations of
loanwords. In addition, their work was based on a foundationalist point of view, as
were other aspects of language contact. In this tradition language was merely viewed
as a reflection of pre-existing reality (Pennycook, 2004: 8-9). Under these
circumstances, the study of loanwords in Japanese also concerned how they could be
categorised and what social identities would pair with the linguistic variables.
Loveday’s study (1996) of language contact in Japanese, which can be viewed as
representative of work in this field, seems to have been conducted on these
assumptions, seeking a possible categorisation of the loanwords and pairing linguistic
variables and social identities. The following is an example taken from his research
(Loveday, 1996: 128):



96

---

(1)
Anglicisms in Japanese Popular Music from Lovedays Analysis
Just in the dark 真夜中の
扉を開けたままにして
待ってるの息をひそめ
この退屈な部屋の中から

すぐに連出して どこか遠くへ

You just my lover Can’t you see

You just my lover Don’t you know
(‘Just My Lover’ from the album ‘Catch the Nite’ by Miho Nakayama,
Lyrics by Kadomatsu Toshiki, King Records, 1988)

Loveday argued that one of the most significant characteristics of the use of
anglicisms in Japanese popular music is the repetition of particular phrases. These, he
argued typically are isolated semantically from other parts, written in Japanese and,
are not necessarily expected to be understood by listeners. Rather, they merely project
‘a sophisticated image’ as a kind of decoration (Loveday, 1996: 131-133). However,
in examining such restricted data, Loveday seems to have overlooked the creative
potential of anglicisms in Japanese pop music, missing out the possible social
identities which could be created by them. In addition, since he considered the process
of borrowing on a nation-state basis, he failed to grasp the complexity of individual
identity formation. In other words, he only explained one dimension of the relations
between anglicisms and social identities, and did not fully appreciate the dynamic
processes linking borrowings and identity construction.
Building on these previous studies, Pennycook (2007), examining anglicisms
and hip-hop music including Japanese hip-hop music (hereafter J hip-hop), attempts
to open up a new way of understanding language contact based on two key concepts:
globalisation and performativity. Firstly, he notes that in earlier studies language
contact was conceived as occurring within in a fixed time and space, which failed to
see it as part of a more dynamic, diachronic phenomenon within the context of
ongoing globalisation. Taking globalisation into consideration, Pennycook (2007)
draws attention to the complexities of the relations between communities, and to the
processes which can stimulate adaptation as a result of inter-language contact.
Secondly, Pennycook (2007) proposes performativity as the theory that can shed light
on the issue of language and identity. Pennycook (2003: 528) argues that ‘we perform
acts of identity as an ongoing series of social and cultural performances rather than as
an expression of prior identity’. In this paradigm language is one of the modes of
social and cultural performance producing new semiotic meanings. Taking these two
concepts as his starting point, Pennycook suggests that the use of anglicisms in J hip-
hop can be seen as a means of producing new semiotic meanings and projects
multilayered identity. He explains the production of these new meanings as a process
of ‘semiotic transformation’
These two concepts: globalisation and performativity are the backdrop to my
ongoing Ph.D thesis. While Pennycook focuses on anglicisms and hip-hop music from
a variety of national contexts such as Japan, Korea, Malaysia, and so forth, my
research aims to conduct detailed analysis of the way in which multilayered localities
project multiple identities in specifically J hip-hop contexts along with other semiotic
domains such as manga and internet chat rooms. More specifically, this paper presents
part of my first case study on J hip-hop, which attempts to identify the way in which


97

---

multilayered identities are constructed through anglicisms in J hip-hop. The study also
explores the extent to which these identities correlate to the processes of globalisation.
It does this along with three trajectories:

1. It examines the complexities of ‘community interdependence’.
2. It explores processes of ‘disembedding’ and ‘reembedding’.
3. It seeks to account for the relation between language and music in terms of what
Pennycook calls ‘transmodality’ (Pennycook, 2007: 98) (see 2.2 below).

These analyses are operationalised by examining the use of code-mixing and code-
switching in lyrics from J hip-hop. However, before looking into data analysis, I will
develop the new theoretical concepts of globalisation and performativity.

2. Language, Globalisation and Performance

2.1 Language and globalisation

Globalisation has been a crucial theme since the 1990s, when social theorising
of globalisation had just started. Deriving from sources such as Appadurai (1996),
Fetherstone et al (1995), Giddens (1991, 1994), Robertson (1992, 1995), and so forth,
Coupland suggests, in a special issue of Journal of Sociolinguistics (2003a) dedicated
to globalisation in sociolinguistics, that globalisation has already been conceptualised
as a theme in social theory and cultural studies, and he aimed to see how the concept
works in sociolinguistics. In that issue, Coupland conceptualised language and
globalisation on the basis of four key terms: ‘community interdependence’,
‘compression of time and space’, ‘disembedding’ and ‘commodification’ (2003a: 467-
469). In my paper, three of these terms, namely community interdependence,
compression of time and space, and disembedding are mainly focused on. Coupland
firstly conceptualises ‘community interdependence’ as a situation wherein
communities interrelate with and influence one another under globalisation. As
Robertson argues (1995), globalisation cannot be reduced to either homogenisation or
heterogenisation, but rather, it is process of localisation on a global level, in which the
relations between communities are not merely held based on nation-states, but also on
multilayered localities ranged from individuals to communities beyond nation-state
boundaries such as, for examples, the global hip-hop community. Secondly, Coupland
(2003a) suggests ‘compression of time and space’ as a crucial characteristic of
globalisation, which captures the reorganisation of time and space. Giddens (1991:
15-17) argues that while ‘time and space’ in pre-modern era were tightly linked to the
situatedness of place and fixed time zones, they are separated from them in the
context of current globalisation. In short, the localised time and the imaginary map
under globalisation which do not correspond to the universal dating system and
geographical distance are established, where community interdependence is taking
place. These two characteristics affect the quality of ‘disembedding’. Giddens (1991)
defines ‘disembedding’ as ‘the lifting out of social relations from local contexts and
their rearticulation across indefinite tracts of time-space’ (1991: 18). This does not
mean that it is merely an imitation of the original, but it is the process of refashioning
the original through rearticulation; moreover, the quality of ‘disembedding’ and
reembedding varies depending on the conditions of community interdependence and
compression of time and space.
Furthermore, Pennycook (2007: 22) especially focuses on English in


98

---

globalisation, suggesting ‘Global Englishes’ to fully describe English in the above
theory. Pennycook critiques two standpoints established prior to his. He firstly
questions viewing English in globalisation as a process of homogenisation, which
does not take the complexity of globalisation seriously and sees English as distributed
equally in the world. Moreover, he also critiques the way of viewing English in
globalisation based on ‘World Englishes’ which draws attention to difference of
English. Kachru (1992: 356) describes that ‘World Englishes’ in globalisation can be
simply categorised into three paradigms, namely ‘Inner Circle’, where English is
spoken as a native language, ‘Outer Circle’, where English is spoken as a second
language, and ‘Expanding Circle’, where English is spoken as a foreign language.
Pennycook (2007) argues that although these paradigms draw more attention to
English variants in Outer Circle and Expanding Circle, they still view English in
binary opposition between native and non-native variants and are primarily
established based on the categorisation of the nation-states’ basis. He goes on to argue
that under these circumstances, the paradigms induce static views of English variants,
excluding some possible variants that can be included in Englishes in globalisation
such as English-based pidgins, creoles, loanwords and so forth. This may offer a
possible explanation for the relation between language and globalisation as a
refashioning force. This newly defined Englishes as differentiated from World
Englishes is what Pennycook calls ‘Global Englishes’ (2007: 22). On these
assumptions, anglicisms in popular culture cannot be reduced to a mere adaptation of
English in the relation based on nation-states, but rather should be understood as a
cutting-edge phenomenon of localised Englishes on a global scale. This creates a
strong connection between globalisation and anglicisms in Japanese popular culture.

2.2 Language and Perfomativity

Pennycook (2004) mentions that ‘performativity’ could be a concept to open up
a new way of looking at language in relation to identity. Pennycook (2007: 58-76)
explains it in relation to sources such as Austin (1962), Bourdieu (1991), Butler (1990,
1997), Cameron (1997), Habermas (1984) and so forth. The study of performativity
has its origin in the work of J.L. Austin (1962) on speech acts. Austin’s concern is
how language works as a tool of creating social reality. However, performativity as a
form of social theory has been differently developing in sociolinguistics based on an
essentially poststructuralist perspective. Cameron (1997: 49) argues that ‘while
sociolinguistics traditionally assumed that people talk the way they do because of who
they (already) are, the postmodernist approach suggests that people are who they are
because of (among other things) the way they talk’. This means that while the former
perspective sees language as a social reflection and identities as pre-given prior to
language, so that the relations between social identities and linguistic variables are
always stable as pre-given pairs, the latter suggests that we use language to construct
our identity. This means that the relations between language and identity are neither
pre-given nor stable, but that language use constitutes the ongoing process of
performative identity work. Pennycook (2007) argues that our performative acts are
repetitions of citations from previous acts; however, they are not merely repeated, but
we make changes and adjustments to perform them in new discourses when
borrowing them from previous discourses, which creates new identities. In this
process, the performative acts are sedimented through time, which constructs
multidimensional identities. Moreover, Pennycook argues that the repetition of
performative acts is, in fact, the process whereby new subjects are projected in new


99

---

discourse. This means that subjects are also renewed when performances are
refashioned in new discourses. In other words, this is the process of creating and
recreating subjects as well as identities. However, as Butler (1990) mentions, they are
not acts of free will, but only occur within an order constructed in cultural and social
relations in the discourse (1990: 33). In short, taking language as a mode of
performative action, we repeatedly borrow language from previous discourses and
make changes to perform it in new discourses, in which we simultaneously refashion
our identities as we are called into social being in the new discourses. This only
occurs within a culturally and socially constructed frame (Milani, 2007).
Pennycook (2004) goes further, arguing that we refashion language itself at the
same time when we recreate identities through performative acts of language. As
previously mentioned, we borrow language from previous acts and make changes to
perform it in new discourses, in which language is no longer normalised as it was in
the previous contexts, but new norms of language are established, reinventing rules
such as grammar, meanings and so forth. In other words, performative acts in
language are simultaneously processes of ‘disinventing and reinventing’ language
itself. At the same time the ongoing production of new identity is achieved
(Pennycook, 2004: 6-7).
This notion of performativity also gives a new way of viewing identity and
anglicisms in Japanese popular culture. According to the theory, it is assumed that
borrowings from English are not just regarded as repeating a fixed meaning and
identity, but they become adjusted in Japanese contexts, which simultaneously
projects new semiotic meanings and identities. In this sense, borrowings themselves
can be performative acts. Besides, Pennycook (2007: 48-49) goes on to argue that
language should be understood as ‘transmodal performance’, meaning that it is
possible that language is viewed as a mode of performative action along with other
semiotic domains such as music, dance and so on. This provides a strong connection
between language and popular culture as social semiotics and sheds light on both
performativity and anglicisms in Japanese popular culture.

2.3 Globalisation, Performativity and Anglicisms in Japanese Popular Culture

Putting globalisation, performativity and poplar culture altogether, Pennycook
(2007) focuses on anglicisms in hip-hop music as a mode of performative acts in
‘Global Englishes’ (p33-34). In his research, he focused on some lyrics from J hip-hop,
analysing a small quantity of data from a Japanese band named Rip Slyme. The
following is the summary of part of his analysis:

(2)
Data from Pennycook’s research
Title: Tokyo Classic
Lyrics Transliteration and Translation
錦糸町出 Freaky ダブルの Japanese kinshichoo de freaky daburu no Japanese
Freaky mixed Japanese from Kinshichoo
(Lyrics by Rip Slyme cited by Pennycook, 2007: 96)

Pennycook’s analysis demonstrates that the text is constructed by a mixture of
four writing systems in Japanese, namely kanji, hiragana, katakana and Roman
alphabet, where kinshichoo written in kanji shows the group’s local identity quite
clearly, as kinshichoo, which is suburb of Tokyo, is where one of the members of Rip
Slyme come from. On the other hand, Japanese and Freaky represented in Roman


100

---

alphabet refashion their identity through the use of English. In addition, ダブル in
katakana, corresponding to double in English, refers to people of mixed race origin.
This refers to one of the band members who has Finnish and Japanese parents, and
describes a personal identity (Pennycook, 2007: 96-97).
As previously mentioned, this analysis is crucial in two ways. Firstly, it
demonstrates how the use of anglicisms projects multilayered identities, which are
realised in the mixture of writing systems. Secondly, Pennycook (2003) points out that
this is a process of establishing new semiotic meanings differentiated from original
contexts, which he called ‘semiotic transformation’ (p527). Based on these two
crucial points, the next section will show part of the analysis from my first case study
on data from J hip-hop band Rip Slyme, in which some new data will be analysed, in
addition to the extended analysis of Pennycook’s data.

3. Case 1: Anglicisms in J Hip-Hop

3.1 Background of J Hip-Hop

According to Condry (2001), transmission of hip-hop music to Japan is part of
the huge process of globalisation. However, on the basis of Appadurai’s
understanding of globalisation, Condry (2001: 381-384) argues that transmission of
the music cannot be reduced to process of homogenising, but rather part of a
localising process, where nation-states are not taking the major role for the
community interdependence, but multidimensional communities engage in the
embedding processes. When reembedded from the original context to the Japanese
context, the music is refashioned. It is still hip-hop musically, but it projects new
identity in the new discourse.
This case study will analyse lyrics extracted from songs written and performed
by J hip-hop band Rip Slyme, which was formed in 1994, when the genre was still
limited to the underground music scene in Japan. Rip Slyme is composed of four MCs
and one DJ: Ryo-z, Ilmari, Pes, Su and Fumiya, respectively. They have been one of
the most popular hip-hop bands in Japan since 2001, when they made their debut in
the Japanese mainstream music scene. The data used in this case study are extracted
from the album Tokyo Classic, which topped the chart in Japan in 2002. This analysis
focuses on written scripts of the lyrics, in which code-mixing and code-switching are
used to project identities in various ways by making use of four writing systems,
namely hiragana, katakana, kanji and Roman alphabet.

3.2 Data Analysis: Code-mixing and Code-switching as Performative

Loanwords in Japanese are principally represented in katakana, while hiragana
and kanji are used to represent elements other than the borrowed words. Therefore,
code-mixing between katakana and either hiragana or kanji occurs frequently.
Example 1 shows a typical example of this kind:

(3)
English Loanwords in katakana
Lyrics
俺なりの オリジナリティ 探し
Gloss
my own originality look for
Translation
I look for my own originality
(Extracted from Case1 Stand Play)


101

---

As shown above, オリジナリティ [orijinarityi], which is borrowed from
English originality, is written in katakana, and 俺なりの and 探し are both written in
kanji and hiragana, in which 俺 and 探 are in kanji and the other elements are in
hiragana. In short, this shows code-mixing between the English element in katakana
and Japanese elements in kanji and hiragana. However, code-mixing of this kind does
not explain much about how anglicisms and the writing systems are made use of to
perform multidimensional identities in J hip-hop. The complexity of code-mixing
emerges when it comes to viewing the way in which Roman characters are integrated
into the lyrics as the fourth writing system. Each type of writing offers a distinct
social semiotic function. The example Pennycook (2003: 526) introduced is
reanalysed with a new interpretation:

(4)
Code-mixing in the Mixture of Writing Systems
Lyrics
錦糸町出 Freaky ダブルの Japanese
Gloss Kinshicho-from

Freaky double-of Japanese
Translation
I am a Japanese from Kinshicho, who is freaky and has
parents of a mixed parentage
(Extracted from Tokyo Classic)

As previously mentioned, this is a mixture of kanji, hiragana, katakana and
Roman alphabet, in which 錦糸町出 [kinshichode] in kanji, Japanese and Freaky in
Roman alphabet, and ダブル [daburu] in katakana are projecting social meanings
differently. While 錦糸町出 [kinshichode] seems to be viewed as an attempt at the
representation of local identity, Japanese can be understood as an attempt to refashion
a national identity from outside Japan, given that ‘Japanese’ in Roman alphabet might
have also been represented as either 日本人 [nihonjin] or ‘ジャパニーズ’[japaniizu]
in kanji and katakana respectively (Pennycook, 2003: 527). On the other hand, Freaky
and ダブル [daburu] both seem to project identities on individual levels. Whereas
Freaky is used elsewhere in Rip Slyme’s lyrics to project the band’s identity, ダブル
[daburu], which corresponds to ‘double’ in English, is used to refer to a child of
mixed origin, indicating one of the band members who has Finnish and Japanese
parents (Pennycook, 2003: 527).
Compared to Example 1, the code-mixing here has multiple dimensions. As
explained above, all the lexical choices except for the one in kanji are English-based.
Here, the mixture of two writing systems shows that the community interdependence
and embedding process are taking place differently on each word: Freaky appears to
maintain the nativeness of English semantically, having the simple adaptation to
Japanese grammatical structure. On the other hand, ダブル [daburu], which is a
loanword often used as the meaning of twice in Japanese contexts, is used to refer to a
child of mixed race origin in this line, despite the fact that ハ ー フ [haafu],
corresponding half in English, is commonly used to refer to it in Japanese, which
makes the embedding differentiated from Freaky. As for Japanese, selecting Roman


102

---

alphabet rather than 日本人 [nihonjin] or ジャパニーズ [japaniizu] in kanji or
katakana respectively provides a different way of embedding again. These borrowings
cannot be reduced to mere adaptations of English loanwords in the relations between
Japanese and English, but rather each lexical item has community interdependence
and embedding in different localities and qualities, indicating that the contacts are
taking place in a globalised context. In other words, compared to Example 1, the
code-mixing is deeply integrated into the four writing systems and is taking place on
two different levels: one is between the element in kanji and those derived from
English, the other is between English loanwords in Roman alphabet and katakana,
which can be called internal code-mixing.
Further, performativity sheds light on the relations between borrowings and the
process of constructing identity. As mentioned above, each lexical choice has a
different community interdependence and quality of embedding, which provides an
assumption that it is performed as a different performative act. Under this
circumstance, the lyric above is projecting multilayered identities, which can no
longer be seen as a simple adaptation of a pre-existing identity, but rather as the
process of constructing new identities in the various adaptations and articulations of
the lexical items in the new context. As Pennycook (2003: 527) mentions, establishing
identity in self-introduction is a typical performance in hip-hop music. However, self-
introduction of the kind shown in Example 2 is anything but the imitation of
American hip-hop music. It is deeply integrated into the Japanese context just as seen
in the use of ダブル [daburu] and Japanese: they are doing hip-hop as another mode
of performative acts specifically in Japanese contexts. This indicates that language
functions with music as ‘transmodal performance’ in this context (Pennycook, 2004:
16).
Code-mixing of this kind frequently occurs in J hip-hop. The following example,
however, shows code-switching as well as code-mixing, which will expand the above
analysis:

(5)
Code-mixing and Code-Switching
Lyrics
RIP SLYME 5 for the Microphone じゃなく
Gloss
RIP SLYME 5 for the Microphone – not
Translation
This is not the microphone for Rip Slyme 5

Lyrics
MC セレクト Myself
Gloss
1MC select Myself
Translation
I am the only MC
(Extracted from Case 1 Stand Play)

This is part of the song named Case 1 Stand Play, where only one of the
members of Rip Slyme, Pes, performs the role of MC. The first line begins with an
English phrase RIP SLYME 5 for the Microphone, which is followed by a Japanese
negation じゃなく [janaku]. It mostly accounts for the English phrase, which looks
as if it were written grammatically in English. However, the ending with Japanese
negation draws it back to Japanese convention. It seems that this combination of the
English phrase and Japanese negation brings about a diffusion of grammatical


103

---

convention.
Rip Slyme 5 is frequently used in their lyrics to refer to all five members of the
band. Thus, RIP SLYME 5 for the microphone can be literally understood as an act to
call them into the performance. As previously mentioned, self-introduction of this
kind as representation of self is one of the features that American hip-hop music has
established (Pennycook, 2003: 527); in this sense, this performance looks as if this
Anglicism were used in such a culturally constructed frame affected by American hip-
hop music, which simultaneously gives an idea of community interdependence held
between J hip-hop and American hip-hop communities. However, Japanese negation
じゃなく [janaku] following the English phrase indicates that not all 5 members of
Rip Slyme are in place to perform, denying the represented group identity in the
English part. This draws more attention to Pes as the only performer in this song. This
negation functions performatively to project the individual identity.
The next line, however, in which the lexical choices are all derived from English,
goes differently: 1MC, which is the abbreviation of rap/hip-hop vocabulary
Microphone Controller, and セレクト [serekuto], which corresponds to select, and
Myself. This also shows the mixing of two possible writing systems for English
loanwords in Japanese: katakana and Roman alphabet. Despite the fact that all these
three elements are derived from English, the relations of community interdependence
and dis- and reembedding in the three terms seem to be all different. As explained
above, MC is derived from rap/hip-hop vocabulary, meaning that the relation is taking
place between Japanese and American hip-hop communities, while セ レ ク ト
[serekuto] is frequently used in everyday language in Japanese, which can be
understood as a word deeply integrated into standardised Japanese, meaning that they
are performing it detached from the relation with the hip-hop community. On the
other hand, Myself may possibly be derived from Pes’s vocabulary restricted by his
English proficiency. Myself seems to be used as a synonym of 俺自身 [orejishin] in
this context, which is often placed in the slots for the subject or objects in Japanese to
emphasise the first person pronoun rather than simply using 俺 [ore], which
corresponds to the first person pronoun ‘I’ in English. This also shows that Myself is
used in Pes’s own convention and has a different relation of community
interdependence both from MC and セレクト[serekuto].
The above analysis shows a similarity in terms of the way the codes are mixed
in Example 2 in that they both have the mixture of katakana and Roman alphabet and
it also has various community interdependences. However, focused on the
grammatical convention here, this line shows that the processes of the adaptation and
articulation are viewed differently from Example 2: セ レ ク ト [serekuto] is a
borrowing from the English select, which is used as a verb, while 1MC is used as the
subject and Myself as the object. In other words, it is in the sequence of English
grammar. In comparison with the previous line ‘Rip Slyme 5 for the microphone じゃ
なく’, in which the Japanese negation draws back the grammatical convention to the
Japanese basis, it dramatically switches the frame into the English-based one fairly
influenced by Pes’s individual sense. In fact, it is hardly understandable either for
English native speakers even though it is all derived from English, or for native
Japanese speakers without an understanding of the code-switching here. This means


104

---

that this code-switching is brought about in more internal interactions and
articulations between multilayered localities: this can be called internal code-
switching. Anglicisms of this kind cannot be reduced as those which often occur in
such Japanese popular music as Loveday (1996) mentions above.
This interpretation brings a new way of understanding the process of embedding
in comparison with Example 2. While each element has a different process of
community interdependence both in Example 2 and 3, Example 3 is also seen as an
aggregation of three different scripts together with switches of the code into English
grammatical convention. It shows that, as well as being far beyond the notion of the
nativeness of English, the anglicism is rarely seen in normal usage of Japanised
English expression either in daily conversation or Japanese popular music.
Given these interpretations, the verse is analysed as complex process of
constructing identities based on performativity. As shown above, the elements
borrowed from English are no longer used in line with native English speakers’
intuitions, and they are grammatically based on a version of English far beyond both
the native speakers’ intuitions and the everyday use of anglicisms in a Japanese
context. Performative acts shown here are multidimensional. They are not merely
performed in the adoption and adaptation of the loanwords, but represented in the
mixture of writing systems and internal code-switching. This indicates that the lexical
choices in the multilayered localities, code-mixing and code-switching in the internal
level occur at the same time, which provokes the notion that they are enacted as Pes’s
own iteration of himself into the role of performer. In addition, taking ‘transmodality’
into account again, anglicisms in this example are regarded as ‘transmodal
performance’ (Pennycook, 2004: 16, 2007: 96). These two lines are interpreted as
‘Rip Slyme 5 are not all for the microphone. But I am the only MC selected to
perform’. As mentioned in Example 2, self-introductory performances are typically
seen in MC performances in rap music generally, which may well make us view this
performance as if it were entirely acted based on the general cultural norm. However,
the self-introduction is entirely performed in the Japanese context, which proves that
doing J hip-hop is another mode of performative acts, implying that language and
music interrelate as transmodal performance to construct Rip Slyme’s
multidimensional identities.
Furthermore, this can be also regarded as the process of reconstructing language.
As Pennycook (2004: 12-13) puts it, performative acts through language are not only
an ongoing process of constructing identity, but also constructing language itself. It is
a circulating process of refashioning identity and language: we perform language to
construct identity, which, in turn, promotes us to reconstruct language to perform new
identity. These integrations and rearticulations of English in Example 3 are
constructing new meanings detached from the nativeness of English on a semiotic
level, which means that semiotic meaning is reconstructed in the process. It is in this
process that language is coincidentally reconstructed when we perform acts of
identity: this is what Pennycook (2007: 115) calls ‘semiotic reconstruction’. This
proves that globalisation brings about a large scale ‘semiotic reconstruction’ which
affects the way we perform through language and creates new identities and new
language.

4. Discussion and Conclusion

As shown above, anglicisms cannot be seen in the simplified way they have
been treated previously. The above examples show that borrowings have various


105

---