ChapterPDF Available

Features of Macedonian-English discourse: code-switching as a (not so) peripheral attribute of Australian-Macedonians' vernaculars.

Chapter

Features of Macedonian-English discourse: code-switching as a (not so) peripheral attribute of Australian-Macedonians' vernaculars.

Abstract

Australia, to a great extent, has inherited and upheld the Old World notions of European ‘great powers’ and ‘peripheral groups’. A concomitant attribute of Europe’s ‘peripheral groups’ is that they record high rates of emigration, as the areas in Europe in which they are domiciled frequently experience socio-political and demographic upheavals. Macedonians are one such ‘peripheral group’ in the Old World, and large numbers of Macedonians began migrating to New World countries such as Australia before WWII. High levels of emigration have continued since then. As a ‘peripheral group’ lacking socio-economic and socio-political power, it is perhaps unexpected that Macedonians record very high rates of language maintenance and ethnolinguistic vitality in Australia. This paper examines features of the Macedonian speech of 100 Macedonian first- and second-generation speakers. A feature of many speakers’ speech is the presence of code-switching: use of two languages in the same utterance. This paper examines the motivations – discourse-pragmatic and socio-psychological – that account for incidences of code-switching.
4. Features of Macedonian-English discourse: code-switching as a (not so)
peripheral attribute of Australian-Macedonians’ vernaculars.
Jim Hlavac
Monash University
Jim.Hlavac@monash.edu
1. Introduction
Code-switching refers to “the use of two language varieties in the same
conversation” (Myers-Scotton, 2006: 239). The “use” of the two languages may
refer to any of the following: occasional insertions from one language into speech
that is largely in the other; alteration between languages by the same speaker at
or within clause boundaries; two speakers speaking monolingual versions of two
different languages such that the conversation is ‘bilingual’. Anyone who is bi-
or multi-lingual is sure to have code-switched at some time in their lives, and for
many, code-switching is a regular and unremarkable occurrence. For that
minority portion of the world population that is monolingual, there are few who
would never have witnessed instances where others have switched between their
languages, either on the basis of addressing others, changing topic, or for affect.
But while code-switching is a common and now well-documented phenomenon,
it was not so long ago that one of the founding fathers of contact linguistics, Uriel
Weinreich, considered this to be a peripheral and certainly inadvisable practice:
[t]he ideal bilingual switches from one language to the other according to
appropriate changes in the speech situation (interlocutors, topics, etc.), but
not in an unchanged speech situation and certainly not within a single
sentence. (1953, p. 73. Round brackets his).
Weinreich’s statement remained unchal-lenged for a short time only. By
the 1960s field work showed that code-switching was a very common occurrence
in interactions featuring bi- and multi-lingual speakers who share language
repertoires. Code-switching is now a well-studied topic in contact linguistics (cf.
Myers-Scotton 1993a; Gardner-Chloros, 2009). In many settings, particularly
those featuring interlocutors who are close and familiar to each other, such as
family members, code-switching can be the default or ‘unmarked’ code that most
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
82 Jim Hlavac
speakers use. A US-born child of migrants from Greece who are Macedonian-
speakers gives the following description of his family get-togethers:
My father was born in Greece (Macedonia) and all of my relatives spoke
both English as well as Macedonian. When I was younger we would have
up to ten people sitting around the dinner table and I would be the only
monolinguist at the table. All of them to a greater or lesser extent would
slip in and out of English. The sport of the event for me was to attempt to
keep up with the conversation as little clues about the topic were slipped
in English into the flow of Macedonian. Great fun!!
Later in life, my grandmother who spoke English well but was
failing mentally sat down across from me to talk. She didn't realize she
was doing so but she started talking to me in English and then as she
became more animated on a topic, started speaking Macedonian. The
amusing part was she needed me to get my Aunt (her daughter) but didn't
realize she had slipped in a language I couldn't grasp. She's sitting there
growing more and more agitated as I continue to ignore her request to get
her daughter. I guess that's as much a story about the failings of old age
but it is interesting how people can think they are speaking English when
in fact they are not. (Kottke.org, 2003)
The above comment characterises at least three instances when code-
switching can occur: firstly, when bilingual interlocutors familiar with each other
are together and talking about things they may draw on both languages as a
normal way to speak and also to index referential information according to the
‘realm’ that each language occupies for them (English for everyday life, work
and school in America, Macedonian for family, friends, homeland but also with
crossover between both); secondly, code-switching can be used as a discourse
tool that amplifies or emphasises chunks of speech, either through the code-
switch itself, or by repeating the same content in the other language as ‘translated
repetition’; thirdly, unintended code-switching can be a symptom of the early
signs of aphasia which is more likely to affect proficiency in the second language
such that code-switching back to the first language occurs, sometimes leading to
complete reversion.
Early studies on code-switching looked firstly at the linguistic elements
and sought to find patterns in its incidence for the purpose of positing
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 83
grammatical constraints (eg. Hasselmo, 1972; Poplack, 1980). These models,
based on specific data sets and perspectives, were developed to account for where
code-switching can and does occur. Further structurally-focused models have
followed, eg. matrix language frame model (Myers-Scotton, 1993b; Myers-
Scotton and Jake, 2015).
While the bulk of studies that examine code-switching focus on its
grammatical and structural features, research in contact linguistics has also
focused on speakers’ apparent motivations for language alternation. Not long
after Weinreich’s (1953) contention, studies by Clyne (1967) and Gumperz
(1976) document mid-sentence code-switching and attempt to offer explanations
for its incidence. This chapter presents a corpus of code-switching data that is
firstly described in terms of the syntactic position where code-switches occur, ie.
within or between clause boundaries. The focus of this paper, however, is to
present and discuss motivations for why code-switching occurs. This paper
focuses on those incidences of code-switching in which it appears to perform a
function specific to the communicative event, eg. through amplification,
emphasis, parentheses (or side comments), shift of register etc.
Mid-sentence code-switching may occur due to the (momentary)
psycholinguistic state of speakers’ (in-)ability to distinguish or select words from
their own discrete or combined mental lexica. Clyne (1967) used the term
‘trigger’ to describe words that were homophonous across language boundaries,
and which led some speakers to ‘lose their linguistic bearings’ and move from
one language to another without apparent realisation of this. This kind of
psycholinguistically-focused account of code-switching is of relevance in
bilingual situations involving typologically closely related languages and/or
where storage of items is likely to be shared rather than separated in speakers’
lexica. ‘Triggered’ code-switching of this type is located and discussed in further
studies on code-switching (eg. Zentella, 1997; Gregor, 2003). Looking at the
Macedonian-English language pair, an important finding to note is the role of
English-origin proper nouns that are freely used in Macedonian speech, and
conventionalised borrowings from English that may have been phonologically
and/or morphologically adapted to Macedonian so that speakers of Macedonian
no longer view them as ‘imported Anglicisms’. Such examples may include karo
‘car’, biloi ‘bills’ or orajt ‘alright’. These may function as possible triggers.
To relate the relevance of studies on language use to wider questions about
groups of people, one can return to a basic principle of linguistic research:
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
84 Jim Hlavac
language is a form of social behaviour. When one looks at forms of behaviour
amongst individuals, small or large groups, one can expect their language and
their use of language to be reflective of the social processes that have shaped
their acquisition and continued use of language. Conversely, language and use
of language are reflective of social processes, and the study of these reveal the
situation of the language user and the relationships that the language user has
with others.
This chapter deals with the latter situation and focuses on Macedonian-
English code-switching amongst Australian-Macedonians with proficiency in
both languages. The research question that this chapter addresses is the
following: amongst the members of a bi-national and/or bi-cultural group, what
are and how frequent are the linguistic consequences of this, manifested in
bilingual speech known as code-switching?
This chapter is structured in the following way. Section two provides a
brief outline of the language of Macedonian emigrants in contact with English
languages in diaspora settings. Section three presents the data sample of this
research study, with reference to the methodology used to gain data from
Australian-Macedonian informants. Section four contains examples of code-
switching with a discussion of their incidence and accounts for why they occur.
Section five provides a conclusion that seeks to relate Macedonian-English code-
switching to the current body of knowledge on code-switching. Further, the
conclusion seeks to provide an understanding of Macedonians as a minority
group in an émigcontext and setting (Australia) in which they constitute a
sizeable group but about whom few studies have been undertaken.
2. Macedonian-English Language Contact in Anglophone countries: Canada
and Australia
Macedonian in contact with other languages in Macedonia has been
studied by Cepenkov (1972), Jašar-Nasteva (1987) and Friedman (1995, 2013),
amongst others. Of more recent vintage is the examination of the speech of
Macedonian emigrants who migrated to countries of the ‘New World’ such as
Canada and Australia. Large numbers of Macedonian-speakers had emigrated to
the New World in the pre-WWII era, but it is the post-WWII period that has
witnessed the largest waves of emigration, mostly to North America
particularly Canada and to Australia. Research on Macedonian-English
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 85
language contact has been led by Christina Kramer, based in Toronto, which is
home to the largest Macedonian émigré community in North America. In her
first study of Macedonian-speakers in Toronto, Kramer (1993) provides an
overview of speakers, most of whom originate from Aegean Macedonia, and
aspects of intra-family acquisition of the language. She also presents
sociolinguistic data on speakers’ contact with the homeland and examples of
code-switching, and lexical and syntactic innovation. In later studies, Kramer
provides case-studies on language as a vehicle for the preservation of ethnic
identity (1995) and on the pedagogical challenges faced by a language instructor
who teaches standard Macedonian to learners, many of whom have a
Macedonian dialect as their heritage language (2004).
Macedonian-speakers have been arriving in Australia at least since the 19th
century, but the largest groups have migrated in the post-WWII era. These waves
can be chronologically distinguished in the following way: arrival of large
groups from Aegean Macedonia (northern Greece) in the late 1940s and 1950s
(including the deca begalci ‘child refugees’) as a consequence of the Greek Civil
War; ‘economic refugees’ from Aegean Macedonia who emigrated due both to
the socio-economic situation in northern Greece and to the pan-Hellenic policies
that discriminated against Macedonians; ‘economic migrants’ from the then
Socialist Republic of Macedonia that was part of Yugoslavia, who arrived in the
late 1960s and throughout the 1970s; family- and chain-migration from Aegean
Macedonia throughout the 1960s and 1970s; ‘economic-political migrants’ from
the newly independent Republic of Macedonia who, after the break-up of
Yugoslavia in the early 1990s, feared that war could break out in their own
homeland. From the 2011 Australian census, there are 68,848 speakers of
Macedonian1 in Australia, and Macedonian is one of the best maintained
languages in Australia, and the best maintained European language in that
1 This figure is based on those who responded with “Macedonian” to the Australian Census
question, “Which language do you speak at home?” This question captures only those who
speak the language at home. The number of Macedonian-speakers, or those with high-level
proficiency in Macedonian, is likely to be 25% to 50% higher. Historically, some Australian
residents of Macedonian background have been hesitant to openly list their home language as
‘Macedonian’ (Clyne, 1985: 195). Further, the figure does not include those Macedonian-
speakers who may have grown up speaking Macedonian, but who, after leaving their parents’
home, no longer use the language as the main language of intra-family communication. Those
in this demographic usually have high-level proficiency in Macedonian but remain uncounted.
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
86 Jim Hlavac
country. This is still the case today (cf. Hlavac, 2015), but was also true over
twenty years ago, as observed by Mišeska Tomić (1992: 389, 390):
“Extrapolations from the census data also indicate that the Australian-
Macedonians have a low percentage of language shift”.
The claim about Macedonian being a very well-maintained language is
based on cross-tabulation of the place of birth of Australian residents and the
language that they speak at home. Language maintenance amongst first-
generation (ie. Macedonia-born) speakers is over 90 percent, while there are a
significant number of second- and subsequent-generation (ie. Australian-born)
speakers over 40 percent of the nearly 70,000 recorded speakers are Australian-
born (ABS, 2011).
Despite the sizeable numbers of Macedonian-speakers in Australia,
particularly in Melbourne, there have been few studies on their language, and
most of these studies have focused on language maintenance from a sociology
of language perspective. One of the first descriptions of speakers of Macedonian
in Australia is provided by Mišeska Tomić (1992). As a noteworthy
sociolinguistic feature, she identifies the different vintages of Macedonian
immigrants, comparing those from Aegean Macedonia as the earlier arrivals
(19301950) and those from the (then Socialist) Republic of Macedonia as more
recent arrivals. She observes also the use of Roman-script for written
Macedonian amongst those from Aegean Macedonia, and their children. An
unduly normative view is apparent in her description of texts written in
Macedonian that are close to or reflective of the vernaculars of Australian-
Macedonians:
The “pearls” of Australian Macedonian, English roots with Macedonian
suffixes and prefixes are lacking they are not part of the register of the
editors but there are many “false friends”, inappropriate uses of
exponents of grammatical categories and sentences and inadequate word
order. An explanation of the inadequacies could be sought and found in
the fact that the Macedonian text is a translation of the English one. But
the reasons are much deeper. An examination of the contributions which
appear only in Macedonian show that the false friends, the inappropriate
usage of exponents of grammatical categories and the inadequate word
order are features which characterise Australian Macedonian in general.
(Mišeska Tomić, 1992: 389. Original punctuation).
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 87
More interestingly, Mišeska Tomić observes regularities of
accommodation and convergence between speakers of different dialects, a
common but still rarely studied phenomenon in diaspora communities, that
contribute to a ‘supra-dialectal’ vernacular, and where the activism of some is
also apparent in “the recent endeavours of the Australian-born intellectuals of
Macedonian descent… to ‘legalize’ an inter-dialectal Macedonian code and use
it as a factor contributing to the unification of the Macedonian immigrants in
Australia…” (Mišeska Tomić, 1992: 391. Original punctuation).
In a study which records some of the linguistic consequences of 2030
years of settlement of Macedonians in the Illawarra region of New South Wales,
Stewart (1995a) documents instances of lexical and semantic transference from
English into Macedonian, along with code-switching. Stewart’s study (1995a:
17) alerts us to an important circumstance: to the ‘local’, that is, the Australian-
Macedonian source of linguistic input that is the model that second-generation
speakers hear, not literary Macedonian: “the identification of transference in the
speech of the bilinguals must be compared with the speakers’ competency in
Macedonian and not the standard language”. This is an obvious truth, but one
that is frequently overlooked by some language contact researchers, who use
exclusively ‘high-register’ models such as dictionaries and grammars to describe
(and then unjustifiably bemoan) what is often likely to be colloquial, ‘low
register’ speech.2 Stewart identifies a number of English-origin lexical transfers
or single-word code-switches in the speech of first- and second-generation
speakers, particularly those relating to the work place: ofis (‘office’), kemis
(‘chemist’), stilvork (‘steelwork’), šifti (‘shifts’), overtaj, (‘overtime’), lajdžuti
(‘light duty’). Instances of morphosyntactic integration of English-origin verbs
are given: nemoj da me blejmaš mene (‘don’t blame me’) as well as semantic
transference from English onto Macedonian verbs: odi pravo duri da go udriš
Wentworth Street i setne svrti desno (‘Go straight until you hit Wentworth Street
and then turn right’) (Stewart, 1995a: 20–21). Discourse markers such as you
know and alright are also identified, while Stewart identifies the ‘local’
environment and features of in-group members’ vernaculars for particular forms
2 If parents habitually use intra-family codes such as a dialect or colloquial speech with their
children, their children can hardly be criticised for speaking exactly this variety, which is the
main or only one that they have had exposure to.
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
88 Jim Hlavac
that differ from ‘homeland Macedonian’. For example, popravam karoi (‘I fix
cars’) is preferred rather than a construction such as sum mehaničar (‘I am a
mechanic’) or e imam šaoa (‘I’ll have a shower’) is more usual than se tuširam
(‘I shower myself’) (Stewart, 1995a: 22). (e se izbajnam ‘I’ll bathe myself’ is
another common form.) Some differences in the gender allocation of English
transfers are noted by Stewart (1995a: 23) as well. The large sample of English-
origin words that Stewart (1995b: 138139) records is categorised and examined
in terms of context of use (domain) and part of speech (grammar), and some
instances of longer sequences of English speech are accounted for in terms of
proficiency or affect.
Stewart’s study is the only one that presents examples of the speech of
Macedonian-speakers in Australia with reference to code-switching and features
of the semantic and/or morpho-syntactic structure of ‘diaspora Macedonian’ in
comparison to ‘homeland Macedonian’. This latter term is used, rather than the
term ‘standard Macedonian’, as the chief models of acquisition of Macedonian
for younger speakers are not textbooks, dictionaries and grammars, but the
vernaculars of their Macedonian-speaking parents and others, regardless of how
closely these correspond to standard Macedonian. Other studies on the
Macedonian language in Australia have examined aspects of speech and
language use (Hill, 1979), its teaching as a university subject (Hill, 1989),
sociolinguistic aspects of its use amongst first-generation speakers (Najdovski,
1995), the teaching of Macedonian to Australia-born speakers and acquisition of
literacy amongst Macedonia-born speakers (Petrovska, 1995), use of different
varieties of Macedonian amongst speakers from Aegean Macedonia and the
Republic of Macedonia (Čašule, 1998), and language maintenance patterns
amongst speakers from different generations and different countries of origin
(Clyne & Kipp, 2006; Hlavac, 2016).
3. Informants and Data
The code-switching data on which this chapter is based come from
recorded interactions with 103 bilingual Australian-Macedonian informants.
Seventy-six of the informants are first-generation Macedonian-Australian, ie.
born in Macedonia, while the remaining 27 are second-generation informants.
The informants took part in video-recorded interviews conducted by a
fieldworker and data collector, Dr Chris Popov. Informants were gathered firstly
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 89
through Dr Popov’s own personal contacts and secondly through the snowball
effect. Informants were usually interviewed in their own homes and the corpus
of available data from this third sample consists of an approx. 10-minute period
of the interviews that were transcribed by Dr Popov. The interviews took place
between October 2010 and June 2011. All informants were asked similar
questions related to their place of birth, where they grew up, childhood memories
(regardless of where they spent their childhood), circumstances of leaving
Macedonia and arriving in Australia (for first-generation informants), growing
up in Australia (for second-generation informants), particular occasions of
importance in villages across Macedonia (eg. celebrating Easter, working in
agriculture, change of the seasons), life in urban Melbourne, recounting a joke
or the sto ryl ine of a film. T hes e in ter vie ws a lso inc luded a description of pictures,
some of which appeared ‘typically Macedonian’ (ie. village market scenes),
some ‘typically Australian’ (ie. scenes from an urban, New World city). The
purpose of these questions was to gather comparable data on the same topics
from different speakers to see how congruent thematic topics were recounted by
speakers of different dialects, from both Aegean Macedonia and the Republic of
Macedonia.
The data sample consists of 95,028 words (or tokens that are lexical items,
excluding non-lexicalised forms such as ‘uh-huh’) and 3244 turns from the 103
informants. The ‘unmarked’ or predominant language of the recorded interviews
was Macedonian. However, as the interviewer himself was an Australian-born,
Macedonian-English bilingual, known to most informants, informants were free
to code-switch into English and back into Macedonian. Table 1 below sets out
features of the sample relevant to an analysis of code-switching.
There are differences in the incidence of code-switching between the two
generations and the number of turns that informants uttered that were either
monolingual Macedonian, or consisting of both languages (through code-
switching), or even monolingual English. A very high percentage (83%) of the
first-generation informants’ turns were in Macedonian only, while only 17%
contained code-switches. Amongst second-generation informants, 65% of turns
were Macedonian-only, 30% contained code-switches, while 5% were
monolingual English. There is variation across the two generations, as stated, but
on average 21% of turns contain code-switches. Code-switching is a
comparatively common occurrence. While the focus of this paper is on code-
switching, it is important to note that in a statistical sense, most first-generation
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
90 Jim Hlavac
Table 1: Data on the 76 Gen.1 and 27 Gen.2 informants and the numbers of words,
turns and code-switches across the sample.
and second-generation speakers, even after 60 or more years of living in
Australia, most of the time when speaking Macedonian employ a monolingual
version of Macedonian, ie. without code-switching. Thus, the following recount,
from a first-generation speaker from Aegean Macedonia, is typical of much of
the sample:
(1) Pa toa mi e najdobroto nešto koeto go pametvam da ti kaža Kris. A
imafme četiri sezoni koito počve, da rečime, od leto, odiš na esen, zima,
First
Generation
Second
Generation
Total
No. of informants
76
27
103
Ave words per person
951
841
923
Total words
72,297
22,731
95,028
Ave. no. of turns per informant
29
38
31
Total turns
2,215
1,029
3,244
Total Mac. monolingual turns
1,838
667
2,505
Percentage of turns that are Mac.
monolingual
83 %
65 %
77 %
Total turns containing code
-switches
373
306
679
Percentage of turns containing code-
switches
17 %
30 %
21%
Total Eng.
monolingual turns
4
56
60
No. of Eng. code-switches / code-switched
items
758
708
1,466
Ave. no. of code
-
switches per informant
11
26
14
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 91
prolet i pak si vrti vremeto. Sprema vremeto i takvo i oblekloto, ama
zimata ja čekafme. Kuḱata ni beše naš skačena na planina visoka taka ni
beše od karši. Sekoe utro koa ḱje stanafme na ranoto izlegvame na
čardako, šo si go velime nie… Čardak, parmaci, edno drugo tamu i ja glede
planinata. e stane denes, e go pule vrvo na taa planinata obelen zimata.
Drugio den do polojnata, tretio den ne poklati vo seloto i se radvafme nogu
nie zima za da ko deca se igrafme nogu so snegot. Prae’me, se vo, se
lizgafme na nemu so taka so pincite šo gi ima’me. I ni beše merak ko e,
ko ḱe snego padvaše dolu beše… ka da reča?, taze. Koa odefme praefme
tragi, ni praeše krc, krc, krc. Go pametvam veče kako sega, zaniaš ko na
pambuk da, d, da se ah ojš. (Inf. 59, Gen.1, , Age: 66)
Well, to tell you Kris, that's the best thing I remember. We had four
seasons: summer, autumn, winter, spring. And accordingly, we wore
appropriate clothing in each season. But we looked forward to winter. Our
house sat high up opposite a mountain. Since way back. Every morning
when we got up, we'd go out onto the balcony, as we call it, on the
balustrade balcony, balustrade, it's one and the same thing and we'd
look out across at the mountain. The day would break and we'd watch it
dawning over that snow white mountain. The next day the snow reached
the glade. The third day our village and and all of us enjoyed winter very
much. As kids, we played a lot in the snow. We did everything. We slid on
it with our "pinci" [distinctive Balkan footwear]. And we were delighted
when the snow fell. It was fresh. When we walked, we left footprints. It
made a sound: krts, krts, krts. I remember it as if it were [happening] right
now. Like walking on cotton.
While language change, code-switching and instances of first language
attrition are topics of interest in linguistics, it is important not to lose sight of the
fact that many if not most speakers remain fluent and uninhibited speakers of
their first language, with very many speaking varieties that differ little from the
varieties of those of homeland speakers. As Schmid and Keijzer (2009) who are
first language attrition researchers report, first language retention is the rule
rather than the exception, even amongst people who have few others with whom
they may regularly use their first language. This chapter, however, focuses on
the presence of two languages, which, as suggested by Clyne (2003), can be a
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
92 Jim Hlavac
communicative strategy to aid language maintenance, through the frequent use
of a language that otherwise is receding and which speakers may not be able to
use in all situations, with all interlocutors, talking about all possible topics.
In the examples provided in the following section, speech in Macedonian
is presented in normal script, English elements are shown in bold, while those
elements that are of particular interest, such as trigger words, are underlined.
Macedonian speech is represented here in Roman-script transliteration. (For a
guide to the transliteration conventions used, cf. Appendix One.) The
orthographical conventions used reflect the form of the item: phonologically
unintegrated English code-switches are represented according to English
orthography (eg. happy atmosphere); phonologically integrated English code-
switches are represented according to Macedonian orthography (eg. orajt
‘alright’). Information about the speakers of each example is given at the end.
For example, the following information: (Inf. 5, Gen.1, , Age: 65) indicates
that the informant number is 5, from the first-generation, male, and his age is 65.
4. Presentation of Data on Code-switching and Discussion
Code-switching data here are set out in the following way. Firstly, a break-
up of instances of code-switching is made according to the position of the code-
switch within a clause, or at a clause boundary. Examples are given of all three
different types of code-switching according to clause boundary. Discussion then
moves to an interpretive approach to code-switching in which the motivations and
causative elements of some examples are discussed. Table 2 sets out in statistical
terms the frequency of different types of code-switching according to position vis-
à-vis clause boundary.
Single items
Multiple items
Total
307
95
412
44
47
91
884
79
963
1235
221
1466
Table 2: Categories and numbers of code-switches (single-item and multiple
item)
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 93
Comparing Table 1 and Table 2 it can be seen that the total number of
code-switching forms is 1,466 in a corpus of approx. 95,000 words. While 21%
of turns contain code-switches, the percentage of words that constitute code-
switched items is much lower 1.5%. Despite code-switching being present in
many turns, these code-switches tend to be single item code-switches, as Table
2 above shows. Further, 66% of code-switches are extra-clausal code-switches,
ie. code-switches that occur at a clause boundary, and which function usually as
discourse-specific devices, rather than as content-referential items. In the first
place, English-origin items in the Macedonian speech of the informants usually
occur in positions which are the most amenable to code-switching where
insertion or embedding is morpho-syntactically least constrained, ie. at clause
boundaries. There may also be features about the English items that are inserted
in Macedonian speech to indicate that they may commonly be discourse-
pragmatic items that otherwise occur at clause boundaries in English and their
use in Macedonian coincides with their placement at Macedonian clause
boundaries too. These items are usually single-item or compound-item code-
switches such as well, yeah, you know. These are outlined in examples (4) and
(5) below.
A further smaller group of code-switches occur at a clause boundary that
are not pragmatically motivated. These usually consist of clause-length
alternations into English and an instance of this is given in example (3) below.
The first group of code-switches to be looked at are intra-clausal ones.
Table 2 above shows that approx. 28% of code-switches (412 out of 1466) are
clause internal, ie. they occur as ‘insertions’, usually single-word ones inside
Macedonian clauses. Example (2) below contains multiple examples of this.
Intra-clausal switching:
(2) Ah um vo, vo office rabotam, um, i gledam, um, za pulam za fabrikata
šo prai. A gi gledam za sales šo praat i treba kako, nekako balance da
praime od sales i um fabrikata, ama i, i dosadno mi e. (Inf. 83, Gen.2, ,
Age: 38)
Ah, um, I work in, in [an] office, um, and I see, um, I look at how the
factory is doing/going. Ah, I look at the sales they are making and I have
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
94 Jim Hlavac
to like, somehow we have to balance the sales and, um, the factory, but
it’s also boring for me.
In example (2) above, English-origin items occur in this second-
generation speaker’s speech, when recounting aspects of his workplace. (These
English-origin items are not phonologically integrated which is typical for the
speech of this generation, cf. Stewart, 1995b.) As stated, most intra-clausal code-
switches are single words, and the prominence of nouns, with a thematic link to
the informant’s largely English-speaking workplace, is clear. What is also
apparent in example (2) is that the English insertions have a lexical-referential
function only. The code-switches to English do not have any function at a
discourse level as they do not ‘do’ anything other than refer to English concepts.
The next example is one of inter-clausal code-switching from an informant
talking about places she has travelled to.
Inter-clausal switching:
(3) Ojdov vo Queensland, Sydney bevme, Canberra nemame ojdeno, well
that’s it... Nemame ojdeno drugite mesta, um.. sakame, ama nemame
ojdeno. I setne... where else have we?.. sega vo America… vo Thailand
ednaš bevme. (Inf. 84, Gen.2, ♀, Age: 39)
I’ve been to Queensland, we’ve been to Sydney. We haven’t been to
Canberra, well that’s it.... We haven’t been to other places, um… we want
to, but, we haven’t gone. And then… where else have we?.. And also to
America… we’ve been to Thailand once.
In (3) above, there are two clause-length code-switches into English that
are separate from the remaining parts of the turn. The first inter-clausal code-
switch, well that’s it, occurs as a turn-terminator. The informant then continues
her turn and her latter code-switch appears as a question directed to her husband.
These two code-switches appear to have a function additional to their lexical
referential content, ie. the code-switches perform a function beyond that of
conveying an expressed message. The first code-switch, well that’s it is also a
turn-terminator, and the switch to English may be a means to mark that the
speaker has nothing further to say. What can also be observed is that the code-
switch may also be motivated by the speaker’s adoption of Australian English
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 95
pragmatic norms in which turn terminators are a frequent tool to facilitate the
sequencing of talk between speakers. These occur perhaps more frequently in
Australian English than in Macedonian, and an adoption of an Australian
English-origin turn terminator is evidence of pragmatic transference in not only
function, but also in form.
The second code-switch, as speech addressed to her husband, is motivated
by sociolinguistic features, i.e. a change in the interlocutor as the recipient of her
speech. This second code-switch conveys not only the referential content of the
message where else have we? but also the information that English is the more
commonly used language when she addresses her husband.
The third category introduced above in Table 2 is ‘extra-clausal code-
switching’. This category shares features of both intra-clausal and inter-clausal
code-switching. The defining characteristic of extra-clausal switches is that they
perform a function that is discernible at the discourse level, for example as
affirmatives, solidarity markers (eg. you know), evaluative markers (eg. doesn’t
matter), regardless of whether syntactically they occur within a clause or at a
clause boundary.
Extra-clausal switching:
(4) Yeah, vo, vo Srbija, ne toku vo Makedonija. Po, pojeto godini vo
Srbija gi pominavme, yeah. I tamu jajca vapsuvavme, takvi raboti.
Oright.. i so čupinata, really… poje kaj familijata. Yeah, so familijata
si s.. yeah.. Veligden go slavevne sekoja godina… yeah, yeah. (Inf. 89,
Gen.1, , Age: 77)
Yeah, in, in Serbia, not so much in Macedonia. We spent mo.. more years
in Serbia, yeah. And we used to dye eggs there, things like that. Alright..
and with the girls, really… more with the family. Yeah, with the family we
s.. yeah. We celebrated Easter every year… yeah, yeah.
In example (4) above, English-origin yeah appears six times. Its
dictionary-entry function is that of an affirmative, which is the function it fulfils
at the start of the turn. But yeah is poly-functional, and has here the multiple
functions of a pause-filler (second instance), both affirmative and pause-filler
(third instance) and then utterance terminator (fourth instance) and then turn
terminator (fifth and sixth instances). The point is that the function of yeah is
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
96 Jim Hlavac
independent of the syntactic and lexical-referential content of the clauses that
otherwise make up example (4) and it is used as discourse marker, with various
functions (cf. Hlavac, 2006). The two other extra-clausal switches in example (4)
above are orajt as an evaluative or summative marker of the activities that the
informant engaged in over Easter, and later, really is employed as an amplifier,
and possibly also as a pause-filler. Although really appears as an adverb that
occurs internally in an otherwise Macedonian-language clause, its discourse
function is largely separate to the lexical-referential content of the clause, and
can be therefore considered to be ‘outside’ it.
Of course, it is not the case that speakers who code-switch only do so
according to its position within or outside clause boundaries. Instances of
different types of code-switching can be found in the same turn, such as the
following:
Extra-clausal & Intra-clausal:
(5) Ah, well.. Um, well nogu, sum nogu fatena so decata sea e oj, e ojme
always, I don’t know, na parko da se naigrat eli shopping. Um yeah,
takvi nešča, you know. (Inf. 86, Gen.2, , Age: 45)
Ah, well.. Um, well very, I’m very taken up with the children now, we’ll
go, we’ll go always, I don’t know, to the park (for them) to play or
shopping. Um, yeah, those kinds of things, you know.
In (5) above, there are extra-clausal switches such as well, yeah and you
know, intra-clausal switches such as always and shopping, and an entire inter-
clausal switch, I don’t know. While example (5) may appear as an example of
quite ‘dense’ code-switching, the English-origin items may not be perceived as
‘incursions’ or ‘embeddings’ or as ‘switches’ that are inserted in a conscious way
into this speaker’s speech. It may be that this is her ‘default’ or unmarked manner
of speaking that includes English-origin items as integral and unremarkable
items in her spoken vernacular of Macedonian. We therefore need to keep in
mind that in many instances and for many speakers, the presence of English-
origin items has no indexical meaning beyond their referential content. In these
instances, code-switching can be conceived of as an unmarked variety. Taken
further, this means that for speakers in this group, it would be, in fact, marked
for their speech to remain absent of English-origin items, ie. if they were to
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 97
‘slavishly’ avoid their use. Example (5) above is a likely example of unmarked
code-switching being the default for her spoken variety of Macedonian.
This brings us to examples of the insertion of English-origin items that
have, in an unremarkable way, an effect on the language choice of the speaker
that appears to be involuntarily conditioned: code-switching on the basis of a
‘trigger’ word that leads to the remainder of the utterance being produced in the
same language as that of the ‘trigger word’. This is labelled consequential
triggering. Figure 1 below sets out how this may appear:
language x
text text text text trigger word text text text text
language y
Figure 1: Language selection and status of trigger word in consequential
triggering
Example (6) below appears as an example of consequential triggering in
which the item travelling precipitates a code-switch to English:
(6) Yes, imam nogu šetano. Ah.. i vo Australija i preku more. Jas imam
odeno vo, vo site kontinenti, samo ne vo Antarktika i ne vo Antarktika,
ama vo drugite kontinenti site gi imam um videno i plus jas živeev vo ah
Švajcarija za godina i pol i od tamu.. dosta um.. oh... ah, travelled, I
travelled a lot.... Patuvav vo drugite državi okolu. (Inf. 32, Gen.2, ♀, Age:
45)
Yes, I’ve travelled a lot. Ah.. both in Australia and overseas. I have been
to, to all continents, except for Antarctica and not to Antarctica, but all
other continents I’ve, um, seen and plus, I have lived in, ah.. Switzerland
for a year and a half and from there… a lot, um.. oh… ah, travelled, I
travelled a lot… I travelled around other countries.
Informant no. 32 in example (6) above commences with turn with an extra-
clausal switch, yes, and then continues in Macedonian with the clause imam nogu
šetano (‘I’ve travelled a lot’). This is significant as the informant shows that she
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
98 Jim Hlavac
can express the concept of ‘travelling’ in Macedonian. Towards the end of the
turn, the informant’s speech bears unfilled pauses, um.. oh.. ah, which are signs
of accessing difficulties. While recounting her time living in Switzerland and the
activities that she did there, it appears that she cannot momentarily access the
Macedonian term for travel, ie. šeta (or patuva) and her production of travelled
appears to account for the code-switch to English of the following clause, I
travelled a lot. The item travelled, once accessed, has led the informant to
continue in English, which is not what she intended to do. As a consequence of
travelled an unintended code-switch to English has been triggered. This is
evident in the following clause, which after an unfilled pause commences in
Macedonian as a repetition and ‘correction’ of what was expressed in English.
There is also another factor that may indicate there is dual causation for
this triggered code-switch. The other co-contributing cause is English syntax.
English, unlike Macedonian, is not pro-drop, and subject pronouns cannot, in an
unmarked sense, be dropped. After production of travelled, the informant is
compelled to identify the subject of the verb, and this is given in the code-
switched English clause which is well-formed, containing the personal pronoun,
I.
The other variety of triggered code-switching is anticipational. Figure 2
below shows a schematic description of this.
language x
text text text text text text trigger word text text
language y
Figure 2. Language selection and status of trigger word in anticipational
triggering
The following example, (7), has instances of extra-clausal and intra-clausal
code-switching and an instance of anticipated triggering that forms part of a longer
intra-clausal switch:
(7) Um , sakam sport, ne igram. Um jas go pulam tennis i football,
Australian Rules football, jas pulam, barrack for Carlton i um.. samo
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 99
tie, takvi sporti. Samo jas se inses interest in tie, yeah. (Inf. 64, Gen.2, ,
Age: 46)
Um , I like sport, but I don’t play it. Um, I watch tennis and football,
Australian Rules football, I watch, barrack for Carlton and um.. just
them, those kinds of sports. I’m only inses interest in them, yeah.
In example (7) above, there are many single intra-clausal insertions such
as sport, tennis, football, interest and a multiple-word item, Australian Rules
football, that can be conceived of as a single noun phrase. There is extra-clausal
yeah at the end, which functions as a turn-terminator. The instance of
anticipational code-switching is triggered by a proper noun, Carlton, the name
of the football team that the informant supports. The informant’s relationship
with Carlton is that of a person who not only watches (pulam ‘I watch’) them,
but she barracks or supports them as well. Her anticipated production of Carlton
as the theme of the clause, leads her to produce the rheme (or the comment about
that topic) of it, the verb, barrack in English. The English-origin proper noun is
anticipated, but what is carried with that anticipation is the notion that its rheme
(comment) will precede it. Syntactically, when the trigger word is a direct object,
this can bring about (in English) the production of the preceding verb in the same
language and the code-switch commences at the start of the clause.
There is a feeling of ‘change of tack’ about the informant’s triggered code-
switch in example (7) above. Other researchers such as Auer (1995) and Rindler
Schjerve (1998) have identified anacolutha unexpected discontinuity due to a
sudden reformulation of one’s speech – as a discourse feature that can coincide
with code-switching. The expression barrack for + name of team is also a
semantic unit that the informant feels is best produced as a whole, rather than
navivam za Carlton. In any case, proper nouns are often catalysts for triggered
code-switching (cf. Clyne, 1967; Halmari, 1997; Hlavac, 1999).
While triggering is a phenomenon that refers to code-switching that is
thought to be largely ‘unconscious’, there can be code-switches that are clearly
marked as such, and attention is explicitly drawn to them as ‘other-language’
items. These code-switches areflagged code-switches and they are
accompanied by metalinguistic talk that refers overtly to particular words coming
from a particular language. Example (7) below contains an example of this.
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
100 Jim Hlavac
(8) Šo mi e najubafiot spomen od detsvoto? Skoljeto tamu šo učev, i
igra’me tamu Lazara, za Veligden koa si go čekafme. So čupinjata okolu
seloto praefme , imaše, ka da reča? K’o korzo selo, sred selo, sekoja nedela
svirki, igra’me, čine’me i beše happy atmosphere šo velat, radosno beše.
(Inf. 65, Gen.1, , Age: 66)
What’s my most favourite memory from childhood? School there where I
studied, and we played Lazara. Awaiting Easter. With the girls from
around the village we did, there was… how do you say it? Like a corso [in
the] village, in the middle of the village, every Sunday there was music,
we danced, we did things and it was [a] happy atmosphere as they say, it
was happy.
The informant’s code-switch happy atmosphere in example (8) above is
followed by a comment, in Macedonian, that comments on its linguistic
affiliation as belonging to English, the language of ‘out-group’ speakers. The
point here is that the informant is fully aware that she has code-switched and
feels the need to provide a ‘repair’ for it. There can be other, more vivid examples
of metalinguistic talk, where informants specifically outline a feared lack of
ability to respond to a question, and also possibly to express that response in
Macedonian:
(9) CP.: Dobro i sega kaži mi nešto smešno ako možeš da, ako ti teknuva.
Goodness me. Oh, nešto smešno po makedonski? Oh dear.. ne
znam smeški.. jokes ne znam. (Inf. 32, Gen.2, , Age: 45)
CP.: Okay and now tell me something funny if you can, if something comes
to you.
Goodness me. Oh, something funny in Macedonian? Oh dear.. I
don’t know [any] jokes.. jokes I don’t know.
The inter-clausal code-switches in (9) above are in English and appear to
be self-directed. It is likely that the informant typically ‘talks to herself’ in
English and English is the more dominant language for private or intimate use of
language. The metalinguistic talk is given in Macedonian, Oh, something funny
in Macedonian?, but the implicature of the utterance is that she fears that she
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 101
does not know any jokes and/or she is unable to tell them in Macedonian. At the
same time, the code-switches themselves are formulaic, polite expletives,
goodness me and oh dear. The code-switches are co-motivated by the
informant’s adoption of pragmatic norms from Australian English, not only in
function but in form as well (cf. example (3) above).
The last group of code-switches to be examined are those where a change
in interlocutor appears to account for them, ie. sociolinguistically-motivated
code-switching. Example (10) below contains just one code-switch, which is
attributed to a by-stander, referred to before in the exchange between interviewer
and informant:
(10) Vlegov vnatre so takva brzina, izbrav eden par čevli, gi oblekov, gi
probav, se beše vo red. I dadov pari na ženata. Si gi zemav čevlite so mene.
Gi oblekov vo kolata taka na brzina. Stignavme do, do salata, i seto toa
završi prezentacijata i na krajot site stoevme taka roditeli, prijateli na
mojot partner togaš čajče si napivavme i biskviti i takanatamu i naednaš,
kako što bevme site sobrani vo krug pokaža so prst kon moite nodze, taka
kon moite čevli i reče “Look!”. I site poglednaa kaj mene dolu vo na
nodzite koga što da vidat... čevlite različni. (Inf. 9, Gen.2, , Age: 51)
I went inside in a mad rush, chose a pair of shoes, tried them on.
Everything was fine. And I gave the woman some money and I took the
shoes with me. I put them on in the car in a hurry. We got to, to the hall,
and just then the presentation finished and afterwards all of us were
standing around, parents, friends of my partner. Then we had some tea
and biscuits and so on. And all of a sudden, just as we had all assembled
in a circle he pointed with his finger at my feet, like at my shoes and said
“Look!”. And everyone looked down at my feet to see... different shoes.
In (10) above, the informant is giving an account of an embarrassing
situation in which an exclamation is relayed that was given by a young by-
stander. The by-stander made this exclamation in English and so the intra-clausal
code-switch into English is motivated firstly by the change in interlocutor
identification, and the (English-origin) item that the interlocutor employed, look.
Further, the nature of the item as reported speech can also be a motivating factor
in the code-switch to English, although there is no automatism to quotes from
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
102 Jim Hlavac
others being represented in their original form. Example (11) below is a clearer
example of sociolinguistically-motivated code-switching the speaker turns to
her husband with whom she now commonly (but not exclusively) uses English:
(11) Ah isto ko A. Od Pireas um setne… What was the name of that
place? Aden, then Colombo, then Freemantle, then Melbourne. That
was the route. (Husband: “Alexandria”). Oh, no, there was some, one
stop along the way. But I remember, go pametvam Suez Canal nogu
čisto, go pametvam Suez Canal, dəgo beše, znaiš ko golema reka, se
znaeše.. široka reka. Od edna strana drugata se pulea, um, krajot. A ama..
golemi, golemi šlapei, našiot brod beše nogu mal, ah mislam, ah kacna the
following trip. So nija, nija bevne kəsmetlii šo stignavne tuka. Um, ne
beše nogu ah dolgo brod, pametvam yeah beše dəg pat i loš pat, nogu,
nogu krlaše. (Inf. 47, Gen.1, , Age: 64)
Oh, the same as A. From Pireas, um then… What was the name of that
place? Aden, then Colombo, then Freemantle, then Melbourne. That
was the route… (Husband: “Alexandria”). Oh, no, there was some, one
stop along the way. But I remember, I remember the Suez Canal very
clean, I remember the Suez Canal, it was long, you know, like a huge river,
you could tell… wide river. From one side you could see the other end.
Ah, but… but huge, huge waves, our boat was very small, ah, I think it
sank on the following trip. So we, we were lucky that we made it here. Um,
it wasn’t a very, ah, long boat, I remember, yeah, it was a long trip and a
bad trip, it rocked a lot, a lot.
As is common in husband-wife situations, narratives are jointly
constructed and the recollection of when this informant, as a young girl, left
Macedonia on a boat is known well to her husband. Although not present with
her on the boat, he is called on to aid her memory in listing the ports of call on
the passage to Australia. This informant speaks both Macedonian and English to
her husband, but the topic of passage to Australia is usually a story that is
narrated to non-Macedonians, and therefore this informant (and her husband too)
are used to performing this narrative in English, not Macedonian. She switches
to English also due to English being the language spoken in the ports of call,
even though at that stage she did not know English. But the critical aspect is the
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 103
change of address for her narrative her husband which accounts for the code-
switch to English at What was the name of that place? Once the informant is able
to recall the ports of call, she is able to proceed with the narrative in Macedonian.
Other code-switches in the turn, such as the following trip, appear as a content-
referential intra-clausal code-switch, which multi-purpose yeah is an extra
clausal code-switch that marks a point of narrative juncture within the turn.
5. Conclusion
This paper has adduced features pertaining to code-switching. Firstly, in
relation to the form of speech that in-group members of a linguistic minority use
with each other, the corpus shows that even after 50 or more years of living in
an allophone environment, monolingual Maced-onian remains the most widely-
used linguistic form amongst both first- and second-generation speakers (at least
when both groups are interacting with other, usually first-generation speakers).
While freely conversing, recourse to both languages available to most speakers
is possible, and this can result in forms from English occurring in otherwise
Macedonian speech, ie. insertions, embeddings or alternations. In an overall
statistical sense their presence is small approx. 1.5% of the total corpus, but
their perceived frequency is greater. This is accounted for by statistical evidence
in this sample that shows that over one-fifth of turns in Macedonian contain some
English-origin code-switches.
In general, code-switching in Australian Macedonian as represented in this
corpus is an unmarked or low-marked occurrence. In interactions with other
Macedonian-English bilinguals, where both languages are activated and
available to interlocutors, code-switching is largely unremarkable. This finding
furthers the existing work on Macedonian as spoken in Australia from Stewart’s
(1995a, 1995b) comprehensive, but loanword-focused collation of English-
origin forms amongst 16 first- and second-generation speakers.
To relate the findings here to Macedonian in a broader sense, as mentioned
in Section 2, Macedonia has been and remains a multi-lingual region. During the
early period of Macedonian’s standardisation in the 19th century, texts written
in supra-regional varieties often featured examples of code-switching. At least
since the work of Thomason and Kaufman (1988) we know that widespread
borrowing usually comes about via code-switching. The linguistic behaviour of
the informants recorded here which features examples of code-switching is
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
104 Jim Hlavac
historically therefore little different from that of Macedonian-speakers in
Macedonia who were themselves bi- or multi-lingual and whose speech was
characterised by insertions from Turkish, Greek, Albanian, Vlah or Romani or
by alternations into these languages.
The occurrence of code-switching in this sample is generally congruent to
those of other speakers of ‘diaspora languages’ in Australia. The frequency of
insertions and alterations is lower amongst this group of first-generation
speakers, compared to the speech of first-generation speakers of Italian (Bettoni,
1981) and German (Clyne, 1985; Pütz, 1994) in Australia. This can partly be
accounted for by the high language maintenance rate over 86% that is
characteristic of Macedonian-speakers in Australia (Hlavac, 2015: 267) where
language shift to English is less common than it is compared to Italian- and in
particular German-speakers (Clyne, 2003). Greater use of English is likely to
contribute to a greater occurrence of code-switching when using the minority
language. The frequency of code-switching in this sample is generally congruent
to that found amongst second-generation speakers of Croatian (Hlavac, 2003),
Vietnamese (Ho-Dac, 2003), Spanish (Gibbons & Ramirez, 2004) and Arabic
(Rieschild & Tent, 2008). All of these are reasonably well-maintained languages
in Australia (Clyne, 2003).
Lastly, this paper has offered a snapshot view of not only what code-
switching amongst Macedonian-English bilinguals (in Australia) is and how
frequent it is, but also in a number of instances why it occurs. Its occurrence can
be attributed to a number of phenomena. Statistically, the single largest group of
code-switches are pragmatically motivated ones, very often discourse markers
and polyfunctional yeah. To a great degree, Australian English pragmatic norms
are present in many speakers’ repertoires. Not only is the function of some of
these norms adopted, eg. circumspection/ hesitancy in commencing a turn, turn-
terminators as a facilitator of turn-changes, but the forms that perform these
functions are adopted such as well for the first function and yeah for the second
function mentioned above. Polyfunctional yeah and other imported discourse
markers account for a large part of the English-origin forms found in the sample.
here are examples of psycholinguistically (ie. ‘unconsciously triggered’)
conditioned code-switching, on the basis of ‘trigger words’, usually proper nouns
and less often through homophonous words common to both languages. The
phenomenon of sociolinguistically motivated code-switching is presented, in
which a change in the addressee of the speaker is shown to bring about a change
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 105
in language, or where quoting an English-speaking interlocutor is shown to lead
to inclusion of English-origin items. Overall, this motivation accounts for still
only a relatively small number 21 of the 1466 English code-switches in a
sample of over 90,000 words from interviews conducted with 103 informants.
The frequency of discourse markers from English, as extra-clausal code-switches
still accounts for the vast majority of transferred items. The examination of
pragmatically-, psycholinguistically- and sociolinguistically- motivated code-
switches in this chapter provides the field of contact linguistics with comparative
data on conversational motivations that have been identified for other languages
in a diaspora setting such as Croatian (cf. Hlavac, 2012). This paper is also a
contribution to the typological variety of language pairs that have been studied
in code-switching research, where Macedonian, despite high rates of emigration
and its large diaspora population, has been under-represented in linguistic studies
of transposed, immigrant languages.
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
106 Jim Hlavac
References
ABS [Australian Bureau of Statistics]: Data analysis of 2011 Census.
<http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/Data>, 2012a.
Accessed: 12.04.2015
Auer, Peter: The pragmatics of code-switching. In: Leslie Milroy and Pieter
Muysken (Eds.): One Speaker, Two Languages: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives
on Code-Switching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1995, 115
135.
Bettoni, Camilla: Italian in North Queensland. Changes in the Speech of First-
and Second-Generation Bilinguals. Townsville: James Cook University of North
Queensland. 1981
Čašule, Ilija: The Interplay of the Macedonian Standard and Dialect in a
Bilingual Setting. Macedonian Language Maintenance in Australia. In:
International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 131 (1998) 105124.
Cepenkov, Marko: Makedonski narodni umotvorbi [Macedonian folklore]. In:
Kiril Penušliski (Ed.): Narodni prikazni [National folk tales]. Skopje:
Makedonska kniga, 1972.
Clyne, Michael: Transference and Triggering. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1967.
Clyne, Michael: Language Maintenance and Language Shift: Some Data from
Australia. In: Nessa Wolfson and Joan Manes (Eds.): The Language of
Inequality. Berlin: Mouton, 1985, 195206.
Clyne, Michael: Dynamics of Language Contact. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2003.
Clyne, Michael and Sandra Kipp: Tiles in a Multilingual Mosaic. Macedonian,
Filipino and Somali in Melbourne. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2006.
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 107
Friedman, Victor: Persistence and Change in Ottoman Patterns of Code-
switching in the Republic of Macedonia: Nostalgia, Duress and Language Shift
in Southeastern Europe. In: Summer School Code-Switching and Language
Contact. Network on Code-Switching and Language Contact.
Ljouwert/Leeuwarden, 1417 September 1994. Fryske Akademy. (1995).
5867.
Friedman, Victor: The Effects of the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest on the Languages
Spoken in Macedonia. In: Jim Hlavac and Victor Friedman (Eds.): On
Macedonian Matters: From the Partition and Annexation of Macedonia in 1913
to the Present. A Collection of Essays on Language, Culture and History.
Munich: Verlag Otto Sagner, 2015, 133160.
Gardner-Chloros, Penelope: Code-switching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2009.
Gibbons, John/Elizabeth Ramirez: Maintaining a Minority Language. A Case
Study of Hispanic Teenagers. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 2004.
Gregor, Esma: Russian-English Code-switching in New York City. Berlin: Peter
Lang, 2003.
Gumperz, John: The Sociolinguistic Significance of Conversational Code-
Switching. In: Jenny Cook-Gumperz and John. Gumperz (Eds.): Papers on
Language and Context. Berkeley: University of California Working Papers,
1976, 243.
Hasselmo, Nils: Some Problems in Immigrant Bilingualism: Quantitative and
Qualitative Constraints. In: Journal of Intercultural Studies. 1 (1980) 1529.
Halmari, Helena: Government and Codeswitching. Explaining American
Finnish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1997.
Hill, Peter: Zur Erforschung der Rede australischer Makedonen. [On studying
the speech of Australian Macedonians.] In: Jochen Raecke and Christian Sappok
(Eds.): Slavistische Linguistik 1978. Munich: Otto Sagner, 1979, 3963.
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
108 Jim Hlavac
Hill, Peter: The Macedonians in Australia. Perth: Hesperian Press, 1989.
Hlavac, Jim: 32 Years on and Still Triggering: Psycholinguistic Processes as
Motivation for Switching amongst Croatian-English Bilinguals. In: Monash
University Linguistics Papers. 2 (1999) 1, 1124.
Hlavac, Jim: Second-generation Speech. Lexicon, Code-switching and Morpho-
syntax of Croatian-English Bilinguals. Bern: Peter Lang, 2003.
Hlavac, Jim: Bilingual Discourse Markers: Evidence from Croatian-English
Code-switching. In: Journal of Pragmatics, 38 (2006) 1870-1900.
Hlavac, Jim: Psycholinguistic, Metalinguistic and Socio-psychological
Accounts of Code-switching: A Comparative Analysis of Their Incidence in a
Large Croatian-English Sample. In: Suvremena lingvistika / Contemporary
Linguistics, 73 (2012) 4771.
Hlavac, Jim: Partition without Fragmentation: A Cross-Perspective Analysis of
Macedonian Language Maintenance in Australia. In: Jim Hlavac and Victor
Friedman (Eds.): On Macedonian Matters: From the Partition and Annexation of
Macedonia in 1913 to the Present. A Collection of Essays on Language, Culture
and History. Munich: Verlag Otto Sagner, 2015, 255302.
Hlavac, Jim: Three Generations, Two Countries of Origin, One Speech
Community: Australian-Macedonians and Their Language(s). Munich: Verlag
Otto Sagner, 2016.
Ho-Dac, Tuc: Vietnamese-English Bilingualism. Patterns of Code-Switching.
London: Routledge, 2003.
Jašar-Nasteva, Olivera: Turski elementi vo jazikot na makedonska narodna
poezija. [The Turkish element in the language of Macedonian folk poetry].
Skopje: MANU, 1987.
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 109
Kottke.org Bilingual Conversations 11 Sep 2003, <http://kottke.org/03/09
/bilingual-conversations>, Accessed: 3.12.2015
Kramer, Christina: Language in Exile. The Macedonians in Toronto. In: Eran
Fraenkel and Christina Kramer (Eds.): Language Contact Language Conflict.
Bern: Peter Lang, 1993, 157183.
Kramer, Christina: The Role of Macedonian Language in the Preservation of
Ethnic Identity in Toronto. In: Benjamin Stolz (Ed.): Studies in Macedonian
Language, Literature and Culture. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Slavic Publications,
1995, 101114.
Kramer, Christina: Accommodating Dialect Speakers in the Classroom:
Sociolinguistic Aspects of Textbook Writing. In: Canadian Slavonic Papers, 46
(2004) 12, 5972.
Mišeska-Tomić, Olga: Minority Language Maintenance and Learning as
Instruments for Improving the Status of the Minority Group. In: Willem Fase,
Koen Jaspaert, Sjaak Kroon (Eds.): Maintenance and Loss of Minority
Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1992, 385391.
Myers-Scotton, Carol: Social motivations for codeswitching. Evidence from
Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993a.
Myers-Scotton, Carol: Duelling Languages: Grammatical Structure in
Codeswitching. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993b.
Myers-Scotton, Carol: Multiple Voices. An Introduction to Bilingualism.
Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2006.
Myers-Scotton, Carol and Janice Jake: Cross-language Asymmetries in Code-
switching Patterns. Implications for Bilingual Language Production. In: John
Schwieter (Ed.): The Cambridge Handbook of Bilingual Processing. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 2015, 416458.
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
110 Jim Hlavac
Najdovski, Ico: Integration of Assimilation. The First Macedonian Generation
in Melbourne. BA (Hons) Thesis, Victoria University, Melbourne, 1995.
Poplack, Shana. Sometimes I’ll Start a Sentence in Spanish y termino en
español: Toward a Typology of Code-switching. Linguistics, 18 (1980)
581618.
Pütz, Martin: Sprachökologie und Sprachwechsel: Die deutsch-australische
Sprech- gemeinschaft in Canberra. [Language and ecology and shift: the
German-Australian speech community in Canberra.] Frankfurt am Main: Peter
Lang, 1994.
Rieschild, Verna R. and Jan Tent: Bilinguality, Gender, and Religion as
Influences on Arabic-Heritage Australian Youths’ Attitudes to their Ambient
Languages and Cultures. [Conference paper presentation] Sociolinguistics
Symposium 17: Micro and Macro Connections, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam,
The Netherlands, 35 Аpril 2008.
Rindler Schjerve, Roswita: Codeswitching as an Indicator for Language Shift?
Evidence from Sardinian-Italian Bilingualism. In: Rudolfo Jacobson (Ed.):
Codeswitching Worldwide. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1998, 221248.
Schmid, Monika/Merel Keijzer, Merel: First Language Attrition and Reversion
among Older Migrants. In: International Journal of the Sociology of Language,
200 (2009) 83101.
Stewart, Betty: Some Observations on the Speech of Bilingual Macedonian-
Australians. In: Victor Bivell (Ed.): Macedonian Agenda. Sydney: Pollitecon,
1995a, 1526.
Stewart, Elizabeth: Lexical Transference in the Speech of Macedonian English
Bilingual Speakers in the Illawarra Region of NSW. M.A. thesis, Macedonian
Studies, School of Modern Languages, Macquarie University. 1995b.
Thomason, Sarah and Terrence Kaufman: Language Contact, Creolization, and
Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988.
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonian-English Discourse 111
Weinreich, Uriel: Languages in Contact. The Hague: Mouton, 1953.
Zentella, Ana Celia: Growing up Bilingual. Malden, MA.: Blackwell, 1997.
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
112 Jim Hlavac
Appendix 1: Transliteration of Cyrillic-script Macedonian into Roman-
script letters
Macedonian Cyrillic-script letters are transliterated with the following Roman-
script letters, including letters with diacritic marks. This convention of
Romanisation is defined in ISO 9: 1995 (ISO, 1995), and officially adopted by
the Macedonian Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Cyrillic
а
б
в
г
д
ѓ
е
ж
з
ѕ
и
ј
к
л
љ
Roman
a
b
v
g
d
ǵ
e
ž
z
dz
i
j
k
l
lj
Cyrillic
н
њ
о
п
р
с
т
ќ
у
ф
х
ц
ч
џ
ш
Roman
n
nj
o
p
r
s
t
u
f
h
c
č
dž
š
An apostrophe shows ellipsis, eg. ’i (gi). The central vowel which is not a feature
of Standard Macedonian is rendered with schwa, <ə>
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:56AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements iii
Introduction
Victor Friedman, Goran Janev & George Vlahov v
A Question of Language
1. “Come Over into Macedonia and Help Us” Evidence for the Macedonian
Language in the 19th Century.
Grace E. Fielder 1
2. The Name Dispute between Greece and Macedonia: Macedonian Identity via
the Prism of Greek Policy in Relation to the Macedonian Language in
Ottoman Macedonia
Dimitar Ljorovski Vamvakovski & Donche Tasev 33
3. Macedonian at the Margins: The Dialects of Kostur (Καστοριά)
Victor A. Friedman 61
4. Features of Macedonian-English Discourse: Code-switching as a (not so)
Peripheral Attribute of Australian-Macedonians’ Vernaculars.
Jim Hlavac 81
Genealogies & Consequences
5. Jewels, Bats, and Shamans: Asian Seeds on the Soil of Greek Modernity
Akis Gavriilidis 115
6. Yugoslav Communism and the Macedonian Question: The Metodija Andonov-
Čento Affair, 1946
Andrew Rossos 155
7. The Uses and Abuses of Neoliberalism and Technocracy in the Post-totalitarian
Regimes in Eastern Europe: The Case of Macedonia
Katerina Kolozova 185
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:49AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Human Rights & Wrongs
8. Persecution of the “Non-Existent”: Repression of Macedonians in Bulgaria
during the Communist Period (19441989)
Stojko Stojkov 205
9. Forced Assimilation and Discursive Hegemony: Why the Macedonian
Minority Continues to be Oppressed in Greece
George Vasilev 257
10. Europe's Margin of Appreciation for Greece: Is it Time for a New Approach?
Vasko Nastevski 293
11. The Prespa Agreement & Misrecognition
George Vlahov 327
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:49AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:41AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:41AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Macedonia & Its Questions
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:41AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Studies on Language and Culture
in Central and Eastern Europe
Edited by
Christian Voß
Volume 34
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:41AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
Victor Friedman / Goran Janev / George Vlahov (eds.)
Macedonia & Its Questions
Origins, Margins, Ruptures & Continuity
Victor A Friedman, Goran Janev and George Vlahov - 9783631821213
Downloaded from PubFactory at 07/16/2020 04:59:41AM
via Monash University (CEIRC)
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Book
Full-text available
This book examines speakers of Macedonian as a transposed, immigrant language in Australia. Speakers’ reported use of Macedonian, English and other languages is presented through domain-based sociolinguistic analysis. This is augmented by data on the ethnolinguistic vitality of Macedonian-speakers and by language attitude responses that record speakers’ affective feelings towards different language varieties. This description is based on data gained from 103 speakers across three generations and from two countries of origin: northern Greece and the Republic of Macedonia. The statistical data are complemented by excerpts taken from longer interviews and by vignettes that give an insight into the lives of Macedonian-speakers in Australia. This book focuses on a group that records one of the highest levels of language maintenance amongst Australia’s ethnolinguistic minorities and is a contribution to the fields of sociology of language, maintenance of minority languages and language attitudes.
Book
Full-text available
This book examines the Croatian speech of 100 Croatian-English bilingual adults in Melbourne. The focus of this study is directed at the transference of English words and forms in otherwise Croatian speech. An examination of English-origin forms, whether single or multiple items, is matched against various contemporary models of code-switching. Further, grammatical structures divergent from those found in homeland Croatian are presented. They reveal possible consequences of conduct-induced language change. As such, this work represents a recent contribution to the study of code-switching and languages in contact.
Article
Full-text available
The occurrence of codeswitching, or the seemingly random alternation of two languages both between and within sentences, has been shown (Gumperz, 1976; Pfaff, 1975; Wentz, 1977) to be governed not only by extralinguistic but also linguistic factors. For the balanced bilingual, codeswitching appears to be subject to an ‘equivalence constraint’ (Poplack, 1978): i.e. it tends to occur at points in discourse where juxtaposition of L1 and L2 elements does not violate a surface syntactic rule of either language. If correct, the equivalence constraint on codeswitching may be used to measure degree of bilingual ability. It was hypothesized that equivalence would either be violated by non-fluent bilinguals, or that switch points which are ‘risky’ in terms of syntactic well-formedness (i.e. those which occur within a sentence) would tend to be avoided altogether. To test this hypothesis, I analysed the speech of 20 Puerto Rican residents of a stable bilingual community, exhibiting varying degrees of bilingual ability. Quantitative analysis of their switches revealed that both fluent and non-fluent bilinguals were able to code-switch frequently and still maintain grammaticality in both Lx and L2. While fluent bilinguals tended to switch at various syntactic boundaries within the sentence, non-fluent bilinguals favoured switching between sentences, allowing them to participate in the codeswitching mode, without fear of violating a grammatical rule of either of the languages involved. These results suggest that the codeswitching mode proceeds from that area of the bilingual's grammar where the surface structures of Lx and L2 overlap, and that codeswitching, rather than representing debasement of linguistic skill, is actually a sensitive indicator of bilingual ability.
Article
Full-text available
This paper examines the presence of English-origin discourse markers in otherwise Croatian speech. Previous examinations of bilingual discourse marking have focused on habitualisation, pragmatic transference, cognitive processes (in terms of reducing the ‘mental load’ of distinguishing between two systems) or psycholinguistic factors (e.g. ‘non-deactivation’ of pragmatic forms from one language which speakers habitually speak). However, such studies only address transference of pragmatic norms, whether features and/or forms. They have limited explanatory power where speakers employ discourse forms from one language and equivalent forms from the other language. This study examines the frequency and functionality of English-origin forms compared to Croatian ones in a sample based on speech recordings of 100 Croatian–English bilinguals. Findings here show that English forms generally co-occur with Croatian forms in a statistical sense and only displace Croatian ones where English forms are polyfunctional or perform more functions that their Croatian counterparts. This accounts for the higher statistical frequency of forms such as yeah and so, while forms such as no and you know co-occur to the same degree as their Croatian equivalents. Where a Croatian item such as kao (‘like’) can fulfil more functions than its English equivalent it is shown to have a higher incidence than like. Thus, linguistic, in particular micro-discourse, features are shown to influence selection of discourse markers.
Article
This paper discusses the special problems of developing teaching materials for less commonly taught languages—Macedonian, in particular. I consider materials designed for mixed groups of students with varying degrees of linguistic knowledge and with differing goals for language acquisition, which range from a desire for greater oral fluency in the home environment to rapid acquisition of reading knowledge for scholarly research. I discuss both the choice of pedagogical method and linguistic code. Through the description of course materials I show how to provide access to the standard language, while erecting a bridge from dialect to standard language. I maintain that, while focusing on standard forms, it is particularly helpful to (a) provide cultural support and recognition of dialect variation, and (b) to rely on mixed pedagogic techniques and strategies. Because many heritage speakers come from families of rural background, which left Europe in the early- to mid-twentieth century, many students cannot envision Macedonia as a modern state. Thus, teaching materials need to fill in the cultural gaps, building on students’ home knowledge, while providing a contemporary picture of Macedonia as a modern, multi-ethnic, multi-lingual state. The teaching of history also needs to be integrated in the texts, drills, and supplementary readings. In areas where pronunciation, morphology, and syntactic patterns are in transition, I discuss variation and sociolinguistic factors, but do insist on an understanding of the standard. If we as teachers do not require knowledge of the standard, we perpetuate illiteracy and the use of home language in limited domains.
Article
Using the example of the position of the Macedonian language in Australia, the author discusses the essential linguistic developments among Macedonian migrants in order to establish a framework for the analysis of a very complex picture of language contact, with special reference to the interplay between the standard language and dialects and its relevance to language maintenance (LM) in an English-speaking environment. In analyzing the contact situation among both Macedonians from the Republic of Macedonia and those from Aegean Macedonia in Greece and the factors involved in LM, the author explores the notion of interdialectal approximation transitional in relation to the standard as an important development in LM and in reversing language shift.