Advertisement

Estonian–English Code Alternation in Fashion Blogs: Structure, Norms and Meaning

  • Anna VerschikEmail author
  • Helin Kask
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter focuses on code alternation (CA) in English–Estonian language contacts in Estonian fashion blogs. CA has not often been addressed in the contact-linguistic literature. A prototypical CA is a stretch of another language that is more or less syntactically independent (a sentence, a clause, a longer stretch), as opposed to one-word other language items or insertions. Muysken (One speaker, two languages. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 177–198, 1995; Bilingual speech: A typology of code-mixing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000) proposes explanations why CA occurs and our aim is to examine if these explanations work in the case of Estonian–English language contacts. We argue that the presence of CA and insertions cannot be explained only by proficiency in and attitudes towards English. Attitudes and proficiency do count, as positive attitudes enable a greater exposure to English, while proficiency gives more choice. However, it appears that meaning (specific terms and topic), the genre of computer-mediated communication (CMC, i.e., asynchronous, monologic, more written-like) and text-type norms (implicit fashion blogging norms) are factors that also have to be considered when describing structural and sociolinguistic reasons for CA.

Keywords

Code alternation Blogs Language contacts Estonian English 

References

  1. Androutsopoulos, J. (2012). ‘English on top’: Discourse functions of English resources in the German mediascape. Sociolinguistic Studies, 6(2), 209–238.Google Scholar
  2. Androutsopoulos, J. (2013a). Online data collection. In C. Mallinson, B. Childs, & G. Van Herk (Eds.), Data collection in sociolinguistics: Methods and applications (pp. 236–250). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Androutsopoulos, J. (2013b). Code-switching in computer-mediated communication. In S. C. Herring, D. Stein, & T. Virtanen (Eds.), Pragmatics of computer-mediated communication (pp. 667–694). Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  4. Androutsopoulos, J. (2015). Networked multilingualism: Some language practices on Facebook and their implications. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(2), 185–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Auer, P. (1998). Code-switching in conversation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Auer, P. (1999). From code-switching via language mixing to fused lects: Toward a dynamic typology of bilingual speech. International Journal of Bilingualism, 3(4), 309–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Auer, P. (2000). Why should we and how can we determine the ‘base language’ of a bilingual conversation? Estudios de Sociolingüística, 1(1), 129–144.Google Scholar
  8. Auer, P., & Muhamedova, R. (2005). ‘Embedded language’ and ‘matrix language’ in insertional language mixing: Some problematic cases. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 17(1), 35–54.Google Scholar
  9. Backus, A. (1996). Two in one. Bilingual speech of Turkish immigrants in the Netherlands. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Backus, A. (2001). The role of semantic specificity in insertional codeswitching: Evidence from Dutch Turkish. In R. Jacobson (Ed.), Codeswitching worldwide II (pp. 125–154). Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  11. Backus, A. (2015). A usage-based approach to codeswitching: The need for reconciling structure and function. In G. Stell & K. Yakpo (Eds.), Code-switching between structural and sociolinguistic perspectives (pp. 19–37). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  12. Backus, A., & Verschik, A. (2012). Copyability of (bound) morphology. In L. Johanson & M. Robbeets (Eds.), Copies versus cognates in bound morphology (pp. 123–149). Brill’s Studies in Language, Cognition and Culture 2. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  13. Crystal, D. (2007). Language and the internet. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Danet, B., & Herring, S. C. (2007). The multilingual internet: Language, culture, and communication online. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dorleijn, M., & Nortier, J. (2009). Code-switching and the internet. In B. E. Bullock & A. J. Toribio (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic code-switching (pp. 127–141). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dorleijn, M., & Verschik, A. (Eds.). (2016). Using multilingual written internet data in language contact studies [Special issue]. Journal of Language Contact, 9, 5–22.Google Scholar
  17. Doyle, C. J. (2013). To make the root stronger: Language policies and experiences of successful multilingual intermarried families with adolescent children in Tallinn. In M. Schwartz & A. Verschik (Eds.), Successful family language policy: Parents, children and educators in interaction (pp. 145–175). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ehala, M. (2015). Sustainability of Estonian language. In R. Vetik (Ed.), Estonian human development report 2014/2015 (pp. 191–198). Tallinn: SA Eesti Kööstöökoda.Google Scholar
  19. Ehala, M., & Niglas, K. (2004). Eesti koolinoorte keelehoiakud [Language attitudes among Estonian schoolchildren]. Akadeemia, 10, 2115–2142.Google Scholar
  20. Hinrichs, L. (2006). Codeswitching on the web: English and Jamaican Creole in e-mail communication. Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 147. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  21. Igav, R. (2013). Inglise-eesti koodikopeerimine Facebooki vestlustes [English–Estonian code-copying in Facebook conversations]. MA thesis, Institute of Estonian Language and Culture, Tallinn University.Google Scholar
  22. Jaworska, S. (2014). Playful language alternation in an online discussion forum: The example of digital code plays. Journal of Pragmatics, 71, 56–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Johanson, L. (1999). The dynamics of code-copying in language encounters. In B. Brendemoen, E. Lanza, & E. Ryen (Eds.), Language encounters across time and space (pp. 37–62). Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
  24. Kulper, K. (2015, April 13). Eesti keskmine blogija: 29-aastane naine, kes kirjutab toidust, moest ja ilust [Average Estonian blogger: 29-year-old female who writes about food, fashion and beauty]. Postimees, Arter.Google Scholar
  25. Leemets, T. (2003). Inglise laenud sajandivahetuse eesti keeles [English borrowings in Estonian at the turn of century]. Keel ja Kirjandus, 8, 571–584.Google Scholar
  26. Leppänen, S. (2007). Youth language in media contexts: Insights into the functions of English in Finland. World Englishes, 26(2), 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liiv, S., & Laasi, B. (2006). Attitudes towards the English language influence on Estonian. Journal of Baltic Studies, 37(4), 482–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maschler, Y. (2000). What can bilingual conversation tell us about discourse markers?: Introduction. International Journal of Bilingualism, 4(4), 437–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Maschler, Y., & Shiffrin, D. (2015). Discourse markers. Language, meaning, and context. In D. Tannen, H. E. Hamilton, & D. Schiffrin (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (2nd ed., pp. 189–221). Chichester: Wiley. Google Scholar
  30. Matras, Y. (1998). Utterance modifiers and universals of grammatical borrowing. Linguistics, 36(2), 281–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. MeeMa. (2014). Keeleoskus ja võõrkeelte kasutamine Eestis eestlaste ja mitte-eestlaste seas. Mina. Maailm. Meedia (TÜ Ühiskonnateaduste Instituudi sotsioloogiline uuring). Tartu: Saar Poll.Google Scholar
  32. Metslang, H. (1994). Kielet ja kontrastit [Languages and contrasts]. Virittäjä, 98(2), 203–226.Google Scholar
  33. Muysken, P. (1995). Code-switching and grammatical theory. In L. Milroy & P. Muysken (Eds.), One speaker, two languages (pp. 177–198). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Muysken, P. (2000). Bilingual speech: A typology of code-mixing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Paljasma, V. (2012). Prantsuse-eesti koodikopeerimine blogides [French–Estonian code-copying in blogs]. MA thesis, Institute of Estonian Language and Culture, Tallinn University.Google Scholar
  36. Puschmann, C. (2013). Blogging. In S. Herring, D. Stein, & T. Virtanen (Eds.), Pragmatics of computer-mediated communication (pp. 83–108). Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  37. Roosileht, H. (2013). Inglise-eesti koodikopeerimine blogides [English–Estonian code-copying in blogs]. MA thesis, Institute of Estonian Language and Culture, Tallinn University.Google Scholar
  38. Salmons, J. (1990). Bilingual discourse marking: Code switching, borrowing and convergence in some German-American dialects. Linguistics, 28, 453–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sarhimaa, A. (1999). Syntactic transfer, contact-induced change, and the evolution of bilingual mixed codes: Focus on Karelian–Russian language alternation. Studia Fennica Linguistica 9. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society. Google Scholar
  40. Sebba, M., Mahootian, S., & Jonsson, C. (Eds.). (2012). Language mixing and code-switching in writing: Approaches to mixed-language written discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Soler-Carbonell, J. (2014). University language policy and language choice among PhD graduates in Estonia: The (unbalanced) interplay between English and Estonian. Multilingua, 33(3/4), 413–436.Google Scholar
  42. Soler-Carbonell, J. (2015). Tallinn, a multilingual city in the era of globalisation: The challenges facing Estonian as a medium-sized language. In E. Boix-Fuster (Ed.), Urban diversities and language policies in medium-sized linguistic communities (pp. 85–111). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Soler-Carbonell, J., Saarinen, T., & Kibbermann, K. (2016). Multilayered perspectives on language policy in higher education: Finland, Estonia and Latvia in comparison. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 38(4), 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stell, G. (2015). Towards an integrated approach to structural and conversational code-switching through macrosociolinguistic factors. In G. Stell & K. Yakpo (Eds.), Code-switching between structural and sociolinguistic perspectives (pp. 117–138). Berlin, Munich and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  45. Stell, G., & Yakpo, K. (2015). Elusive or self-evident? Looking for common ground in approaches to code-switching. In G. Stell & K. Yakpo (Eds.), Code-switching between structural and sociolinguistic perspectives (pp. 1–16). Berlin, Munich and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  46. Tammemägi, A., & Ehala, M. (2012). Koolinoorte keelehoiaud 2011. aastal. Keel ja Kirjandus, 4, 241–260.Google Scholar
  47. Vaba, M. (2010). Inglise-eesti koodikopeerimisest Tallinna Skype’i kontori kahe vestlusgrupi näitel [English–Estonian code-copying on the example of two chat groups at Skype Tallinn office]. MA thesis, Institute of Estonian Language and Culture, Tallinn University.Google Scholar
  48. Verschik, A. (2004). Aspects of Russian-Estonian code-switching: Research perspectives. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8(4), 427–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Verschik, A. (2010). Estonian-Russian code-copying in blogs: A preliminary overview. Slavica Helsingiensia, 40, 355–365.Google Scholar
  50. Verschik, A. (2014). Estonian-Russian code-copying in Russian-language blogs: Language change and a new kind of linguistic awareness. In V.-A. Vihman & K. Praakli (Eds.), Negotiating linguistic identity (pp. 59–87). Oxford: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  51. Verschik, A. (2016). Mixed copying in blogs: Evidence from Estonian-Russian Language contacts. Journal of Language Contact, 9, 186–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vertovec, S. (2007). Super-diversity and its implications. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 29(6), 1024–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wertheim, S. (2003). Discourse pragmatics as a means of contact-induced change. Selected Proceedings of the CLIC-LISO Ninth Annual Conference on Language, Interaction and Culture, 1–18.Google Scholar
  54. Wertheim, S. (2006). Cleaning up for company: Using participant roles to understand fieldworker effect. Language in Society, 35, 707–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zabrodskaja, A., & Verschik, A. (2014). Morphology of Estonian items at the interface of Russian-Estonian language contact data. Sociolinguistic Studies, 8(3), 449–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tallinn UniversityTallinnEstonia

Personalised recommendations