CC BY
16© Zabrodskaja, Anastassia 2007 Research article
This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
Emerging bilingual speech: from monolingualism to code-switching. A case of young Estonian Russian-speakers
Anastassia Zabrodskaja
Russian is one of the 'migrant' languages spoken in Estonia and it has intensive contacts with Estonian, the majority language. The study is concerned with conversational functions of Russian-Estonian code-switching in Kohtla-Jarve, which is a specific region in terms of population structure: Estonians from 20.9 % and Russians 79.1 %. It analyses the data collected between 2000 and 2006 at different occasions: the Estonian language summer camp of Kohtla-Jarve Third Secondary School, the summer camps of Kohtla-Jarve Parna School. The analysis is based on the framework of conversational approach. Many instances of Russian-Estonian code-switching reveal that the grammatical properties of switches are often dictated by pragmatic goals. Seven conversational functions were found in the data in connection with intrasentential/extrasentential switches. Language play and expressive function are encountered most frequently. The language of the quotations is usually Estonian when referring to an interaction with an Estonian-speaking person. Code switches as reiterations are used for clarifying, emphasizing or amplifying a message. The nature of short interactions restricts the possibility of detecting switchings related to the change in participant constellation or topic, but some examples do appear in the data. Quite infrequently, switching may serve to mark side-comments.
Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia
E-mail: anastassia2001@hot.ee, anastaza@tlu.ee
Received: 10 March 2007
Reviewing editor: Andrey G. Kirillov Accepted: 12 March 2007
Published online: 15 March 2007
Abstract
Keywords
code-switching; conversational functions; children; pragmatic; Russian; Estonian
For citation
Zabrodskaja, Anastassia. 2007. "Emerging bilingual speech: from monolingualism to code-switching. A case of young Estonian Russian-speakers." Language. Text. Society 1 (1): e43-e65. https://ltsj.online/2007-01-l-zabrodskaja. (Journal title at the time of publication: SamaraAltLinguo E-Journal.)
1. AIMS AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY
In this study, code-switching is a term that covers the alternating use of two or more "codes" within one conversational episode (Auer 1998, 1). In addition to grammatical factors, sociolinguistic and conversational factors may play a role in code-switching and can override rules of two monolingual grammars (Romaine 2000; Thomason 2001; Zabrodskaja 2005). As many studies have demonstrated, sociolinguistic and pragmatic factors are decisive in code-switching. In conversation analysis (CA), the term 'code-switching' is used in a sense different from that generally accepted in language contact research: specific to CA-type analyses is the requirement of local functionality. The local functionality of code-switching is viewed "as the decisive characteristics to show its differences from other language-contact phenomena, which, taken individually in their specific context, cannot be said to have a specific (conversational) function" (Auer 1984, 8).
It seems that Auer's model that combines the conversational and grammatical points of view is the most appropriate for analysis of the given case. The purpose of this paper is application of Auer's (1984, 1995, 1998) conversational approach to Russian-Estonian data, and the analysis of conversational functions of code-switching.
This study is organized as follows: firstly, the aims of study and the theoretical background are outlined. Then the socio-ethnical and historical issues of Estonia's Russians are described. Part 3 presents the data and subjects included in this study. Part 4 summarizes earlier theories on conversational code-switching. Finally, conversational functions of Russian-Estonian code-switching are shown and analyzed.
The term 'code-switching' is used in two related yet different fields of linguistics: second language acquisition [hereafter SLA] and studies on bilingualism. In the former, code-switching is analyzed in terms of learning strategies, whereas the in latter code-switching is believed to be linked to competence. Arnfast and J0rgensen (2003) intended to detect the borderline between the two approaches by investigating the use of code-switching in first-year learners of Danish. Their study points out that code-switching appears as a skill used in early attempts of playing with the languages involved in the conversation (Danish/English and Danish/Polish/German/English). In the literature on SLA, code-switching is little more than a communication strategy to overcome difficulties with expressing oneself (F^rch, Haastrup and Phillipson 1984; Odlin 2000). For a comprehensive overview of the concept in the two fields see Arnfast and J0rgensen (2003, 24-28). From the sociolinguist's point of view, code-switching is studied to understand why people who are competent in two languages alternate languages in a
particular conversation or situation. Thus, code-switching in sociolinguistics is discussed as conversational phenomenon (Auer 1998).
Whereas a two-year-old child's switching from one language to another has tended to be seen as 'interference' or a lack of differentiation between languages, Deuchar and Quay (2000) have shown that code-switching by two-year-olds can be context-sensitive (for example, according to who is being addressed).
In her paper Reyes (2004) examines the code-switching patterns in the speech of immigrant Spanish-speaking children. Seven- and ten-year-old boys and girls from bilingual classrooms are each paired with a mutually selected friend, and their speech is collected in two contexts: while the children wait for an expected science experiment and when they work together to follow an instruction worksheet about hands-on magnetic materials. Her results challenge the negative view that code switching by children who are learning two languages is due to lack of proficiency, and instead support the view that it is used as a strategy to extend their communicative competence during peer interaction.
Following Arnfast and J0rgensen's (2003) concepts, who believe that code-switching by learners can be considered a skill in the same way as can code-switching among bilinguals, this study intends to:
1. describe the emergence of bilingual communication among Russian-speaking children during the past decade;
2. differentiate Russian-Estonian code-switching patterns from the conversational point of view.
Once the collection of Russian-Estonian code-switching material was completed, a conversation analysis similar to the method used in bilingualism studies such as Auer (1998) was applied. The linguistic context and the reaction of interlocutors as well as their linguistic awareness are taken into consideration.
2. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF RUSSIANS AND RUSSIAN LANGUAGE IN ESTONIA
Before World War II Estonia was a small nation with a homogenous population and one official state language - Estonian. The Estonian majority constituted almost 90% of the population, and the largest minority, Russians, formed approximately 8%. The most "Russian" areas were Narva (29.7%), the territories east of Narva, and the Petseri region (M. Rannut 1995, 195-196).
In the course of the first year of Soviet occupation (1940-41), the population of Estonia decreased by 104,000 (persecution, arrests, deportation of 1941, etc).
World War II overrode Estonia twice. Germany conquered Estonia in 1941, and in 1944 the country was again occupied by the Soviet Union. After the Second World War, Soviet authorities began to encourage the settlement of newcomers or migrants to Estonia. Needless to say that the newcomers considered Estonia as a part of Soviet Union and felt no need or obligation to master Estonian (Verschik 2004, 435). Immigration to Estonia began after World War II and reached its peak only in the last decade of Soviet power. In 1934, 87,000 non-Estonians lived in Estonia but in 1959 this figure was already 304,000 and in 1989 even 602,000, forming 8.34%, 25.41% and 38.47% of the total population, respectively (Viikberg 2000). It should be noted that the share of non-Russians (Ukrainians, Belarusians, Armenians, etc.) among
the Soviet-time newcomers has always been small: near 8 % of total population in 1989 and only 6 % in 2000 (Estonian Statistics Office). Estonia restituted its independence in 1991 after more than 50 years of occupation.
M. Rannut (1995) describes the Russian migration to Estonia in detail. The immigrants settled mainly in: 1) the town of Narva (North-East Estonia), which was bombed by the Soviet air force, and lay in ruins, and where during the post-war years resettlement of Estonians was restricted by the central authorities; 2) Sillamae, an area closed to Estonians as members of a "suspect" ethnic group, due to the uranium mining, and, later, uranium processing; 3) the Kohtla-Jarve oil-shale mines; 4) the country's capital, Tallinn (large factories and Soviet bases), and 5) the submarine base Paldiski, where for Estonians were prohibited to live, and where all monuments reminiscent of Estonia, including cemetery squares, were demolished (M. Rannut 1995, 198-199).
The language situation was made particularly complicated because the migrants were encouraged to settle in a concentrated manner in the north-eastern Estonian industrial area and in the major towns. Only some of the later migrants could speak Estonian. The Soviet language policy sought to promote Russian at the expense of other languages, especially in the Baltic countries, whose population was the least loyal to the Soviet cause. Thus, Russians were privileged to remain monolingual. The newcomers considered Estonia as the part of their country and, as long as everything between Sakhalin and Saaremaa was claimed to constitute the same country, albeit federal, the newcomers did not think they need to learn another language. Verschik (2004, 135) describes Russification policy up to 1991, the aims of which was to establish Russian as not only single official language but also as the most popular and widely used language in daily communication among non-Russians in the Soviet Union. Officially, Estonian was taught in Russian-medium schools as a subject, but this was a mere formality because Russians were not expected to master Estonian. As communication between the two groups was limited and "everybody knew Russian anyway", as the popular perception was, there was no real need to practice Estonian. Except for the members of indigenous minorities, so-called third ethnicities (i.e., neither Russians nor Estonians) who had only a small share in the population would typically send their children into Russian-medium schools for the following reason: as education in languages other than Russian and Estonian was not provided, they had to choose between Russian and Estonian future for their children and opted for the former because they had some proficiency in Russian as all-union lingua franca, while being completely unfamiliar with Estonian (see Verschik 2005).
At present Russians constitute the largest minority group with 26% of the entire population of almost 1.4 million inhabitants of Estonia [Estonian Statistics Office]. It must be specified that Soviet-time newcomers are not a minority in a conventional sense. Russians in the post-Soviet countries cannot be treated as minorities. Further in the article will be explained the difference between the indigenous Russians who are indeed a minority and the rest of the Russian-speaking population. Verschik (2005, 300) finds it helpful to use the notions of majoritized minority (Russians) and endangered minoritized majority (non-Russians), suggested by Skutnabb-Kangas (1992, 178).
Russians of Estonia do not form a homogenous social or ethnic community. One can draw a line between the two groups - notably, indigenous Russians, or Estonian Russians, and non-
indigenous Russians, the settlers of the Soviet era. Therefore, in general terms the former do not identify themselves with the Russians: they have formed a distinct group in today's Estonia with its defined local identity. Indigenous Russians are so called Old Believers, whose ancestry settled down on the coast of Lake Peipsi in the 18th century (Viikberg 2000, 476-477) and also old-time inhabitants of Eastern Estonia, descendants of post-1917 emigrants from Russia. For more detailed discussion, see Verschik (2005).
The group of indigenous Russians in Estonia numbers about 50 thousand, which is a tenth of Estonia's Russians. Thus indigenous Estonian Russians form a distinct minority group and it is correct to call this group Estonian Russians. At the same time, they are not able to shape the ethno-cultural character of the whole body of Russians among whom recent soviet-time migrants dominate. For instance, of the Russians living in Estonia only up to 40 percent are born in Estonia (by 1989 census - 38 %). According to the census of 2000 the percentage was 17 (it is important to note, that Belarusians, Ukrainians and other Russian-speaking inhabitants who are not ethnic Russians are not taken into consideration here). Almost 44% of Russian-speakers have some kind knowledge of Estonian (Estonian Statistics Office: Population Census 2000). In 1989 the percentage was 15. One can conclude that language situation has changed: there is more and more Estonian in everyday life.
Thus, there are two groups of Russians in Estonia: indigenous Russians, or Estonian Russians, and non-indigenous Russians. It is interesting to note that some Russians already view themselves as different from Russia's Russians in whatever respect (language use, material culture, identity, customs, etiquette, etc.): so called estonskije russkije 'Estonian Russians'. It can be suggested that Estonian Russians is a vague and a broad category that includes any Russian-speaker who identifies himself (herself) as different from Russia's Russian in whatever aspect (language use, customs, etiquette, material culture, etc.).
The informants of the present study represent mostly the second and the third generation of non-indigenous Russians and Russian-speaking population (so-called third ethnicities that have shifted to Russian during the Soviet era: Ukrainians, Belarusians, etc) living in Kohtla-Jarve. Thus, the notions 'non-indigenous Russians' and 'Russian-speakers' are synonymous in this research.
3. SOME SOCIOHISTORICAL FACTS ABOUT KOHTLA-JARVE
According to the census of population and residential premises of 2000, Estonia is home to predominantly (91%) urbanized Russians who constitute 25.6% of the total population. There are altogether 15 counties in Estonia, whereas 85% of the Russian population is residing in two counties: Ida-Virumaa and Harjumaa.
Kohtla-Jarve is located in the North-Eastern part of Estonia in the county of Ida-Viru. It has always been an industrial town that has become widely known as the capital of the oil basin and the chemical industry. Kohtla-Jarve is one of the youngest towns in Estonia. It received its designation as a town on June 15th, 1946. Its origin is due to the discovery of the largest recoverable deposit of oil shale in Estonia and the former Soviet Union.
Table 1 shows the ethnic composition in Kohtla-Jarve according to the 2000 census (Estonian Statistics Office).
Table 1. Mother tongue of Kohtla-Jarve inhabitants (males and females)
Russian 38 355
Estonian 7 010
Belarusian 567
Ukrainian 469
Finnish 269
Latvian 26
Other mother tongue 371
Mother tongue 612
unknown
Mother tongue total 47 679
Although the representatives of about 40 ethnic groups and various religious confessions are living here, only Estonians and Russians have generally retained their mother tongue (Estonian Statistics Office, Population Census 2000).
Standard Estonian is now the language used and accepted at all levels of society. Even children of Russian/Estonian mixed marriages tend to grow up speaking Estonian (Daskalovski 2003). This is especially true of Ida-Virumaa where such an assumption can be confirmed through my own experience of fieldwork.
While Russian is still being used very frequently in everyday communication, Estonian is taught as a compulsory subject and several models of bilingual education are available (Verschik 2005). Competency in the Estonian language is a requirement of Estonian citizenship (Hint 1991; M. Rannut 1995).
For Russian-speaking youth in central and southern regions of Estonia the Estonian language is more available, because Estonian-speakers prevail there (U. Rannut 2005). In those language environments the Estonian language is needed everywhere, it is highly valued and used in everyday situations. However, in Kohtla-Jarve the language environment is almost completely Russian (U. Rannut 2005, 37-130). Estonians constitute a minority here, making 20.9 % of the whole population. Thus, the most frequent language of communication used to be Russian, in which both Russians and Estonians are fluent.
After Estonia regained it independence, Russian-speakers of Kohtla-Jarve began to use more Estonian, whose prestige has increased since it became an official language.
4. DATA
The research is micro-sociolinguistic, dealing with everyday linguistic behaviour. The data was collected in: Estonian-language summer camp of Kohtla-Jarve Third Secondary School (June 2000) and summer camps of Kohtla-Jarve Parna School (June 2003, June 2004, June 2005, and June 2006). The observations are made from this period are not the result of intensive or complete analysis of the behaviour. They are the product of many hours viewing at children during their interactions outside the classroom setting.
The sociolinguistic profile of the informants, 77 Russian-speaking primary school pupils, can be described as follows: The age of children is seven-years-old, eight-years-old, nine-years-old and ten-years-old (it is specified before the each example). They all come from Russian-speaking families and live in Russian-speaking Jarve area of Kohtla-Jarve. The basic language of communication among Kohtla-Jarve residents is Russian, in which Estonians are also fluent.
As it was mentioned above, the children attend two Russian-speaking schools: Kohtla-Jarve Third Secondary School and Kohtla-Jarve Parna School. The traditional method of Estonian language teaching is prevailing there. Children attend Russian schools where all the subjects are taught in Russian, Estonian is taught as a foreign language five times per week. Estonian is as a school subject taught from the first grade; in the kindergarten children learn the basics of the language. Based on this, it can be suggested that all informants have a more or less equal proficiency in Estonian.
As the analyses presented below focuses on the conversational functions of code-switching in general and not on the linguistic repertoire of a particular participant, the speakers are coded as follow: a girl - G; a boy - B; a teacher - T. If there are many participants in the conversation, then the following abbreviations are used G1, G2, B1, B2, T1, T2 etc.
5. CURRENT CONVERSATION ANALYTIC APPROACHES TO CODE-SWITCHING
In the 1960s-1970s most of the sociolinguistic research on code-switching has looked at adult-adult interaction (Clyne and Moser 1967; Gumperz 1967, 1972). Then a number of investigations on bilingual language use have been carried out since the mid 1980s which all apply the model proposed by Auer, but which, in addition, have contributed to the development and/or innovation of this approach. There exists for example, a number of studies on code-switching where the functions and patterns of language alternation have been connected to the ideas of conversational functions of code-switching (Appel and Muysken 1992, 118-120; Auer 1995, 120; Baker 1995, 77; Grosjean 1982, 152). According to Grosjean (1982, 152), bilingual speakers seem to combine languages in order to: fill in a lexical gap, set phrase, discourse marker, or sentence filler; continue the last language used (triggering); quote someone; specify addressee; qualify message: amplify or emphasize ("topper" in argument); specify speaker involvement (personalize message); mark and emphasize group identity (solidarity); convey confidentiality, anger, annoyance; exclude someone from conversation; change role of speaker: raise status, add authority, and show expertise.
Similar results have been demonstrated by Appel and Muysken (1992, 118), who discuss the question why people switch between languages. Using the functional framework of Jakobson
(1960) and Halliday et al. (1964), switching can be said to have the following functions: (1) referential function, (2) directive function, (3) expressive function, (4) phatic function, (5) metalinguistic function, and (6) poetic function.
According to Baker (1995, 77), code-switching has such functions that would vary with age and change with increasing age and experience. For example, code-switching may be used to: (1) emphasize a point, (2) because a word is not yet known in both languages, (3) for ease and efficiency of expression, (4) repetition to clarify, (5) to express group identity and status, to be accepted by a group, (6) to quote someone, (7) to interject in a conversation, (8) to exclude someone from an episode of conversation, (9) to cross social or ethnic boundaries, and (10) to ease tension in a conversation.
Baker (2006, 111-113) considers twelve over-lapping functions of code-switching (in Baker's terminology purposes). He stresses that code-switching is not just a linguistic phenomenon; it indicates important social and power relationships (see Martin-Jones 2000; Romaine 2000; Simon 2001 for discussion).
Auer (1995, 119-120) suggests, that code-switching requires a sequential account of language choice, in which the language chosen for one speech activity must be seen against the background of language choice in the preceding utterance. From this perspective, the question is not what verbal activities are associated with one language or the other, rather during which activities do bilinguals tend to switch from one language to the other. In answering this question, Auer (1995, 120) shows such conversational categories: reported speech; change of participant constellation; parentheses or side-comments; reiterations; change of activity type; topic shift; puns, language play, shift of "key"; topicalization, topic/comment structure.
The early 1980s witnessed increased interest in studying children's code-switching (Alvarez 1979; Genishi 1976; Zentella 1982, 1997). These sociolinguistic studies have shed some light on how bilingual children use different languages according to addressee and context. However, these studies do not describe how children develop code-switching over the years, and how code-switching is used to extend communicative competence for achieving conversational goals during peer interaction. In the classic code-switching study on Puerto Rican American bilinguals, Poplack (1980) analyzed adults' conversations in natural settings and their speech during a sociolinguistic interview to learn about bilinguals' linguistic competence and their use of code-switching. Poplack's findings point out that code-switching is used by those individuals whose language skills in both languages were balanced. While code-switching might be an indicator of bilingual ability in adults (Poplack 1980), it may indicate development of bilingual communicative competence in children who are still learning a second language (Reyes 2001).
Some of the research on conversational code-switching among children raised as bilinguals have assumed code-switching to be pragmatically differentiated.
Genesee, Boivin and Nicoladis (1996) have found that French-English bilinguals as young as two-year-old develop the ability to use and adjust each of their languages differentially and appropriately with parents and an unfamiliar interlocutor as part of their communicative competence. Genesee (2002, 174) goes further to state that "true bilingual communicative competence entails the ability to adapt one's language use on-line in accordance with relevant characteristics of the situation, including the preferred or more proficient language of one's interlocutor".
Studies with young Spanish-English bilinguals report that younger children show more code-switched lexical items than older children (McClure 1981; Zentella 1997). A common assumption to explain this finding is that children code switch when they do not know the word in one language.
Hence, they draw on the other language. It is incorrect, however, to assume that all cases of this type of code switch are the result of incomplete knowledge of one of the languages. In some cases, children might be momentarily unable to access a word for a concept in the language in use, but can access one more readily in the other language. On the other hand, older children seem to manipulate their linguistic codes for a wider variety of stylistic purposes and situational demands than younger children do (Zentella 1997). In a study with peer Turkish-Danish bilinguals, J0rgensen (1998) found that seven- to ten-year-olds could manipulate their two languages for power-wielding purposes. The children in his study strove to gain control of the conversation when involved in problem-solving tasks. Research findings also indicate that older children code switch when they learn that elements of the other language convey the meaning of the intended idea more accurately (Halmari and Smith 1994; Zentella 1997). However, we do not know well how "developing bilingual children" develop the ability to code switch over the years and how they make use of this strategy during peer interaction.
Analyzing code-switching patterns of both bilingual adults and children, Bani-Shoraka (2005) has found that code-switching is used for a variety of purposes in argumentative and narrative opposition. The pragmatic role of code-switching among bilingual children was demonstrated by Shin and Milroy (2000), Bauer et al (2002). Ervin-Tripp and Reyes (2005) discuss link between children's code-switching as an aspect of pragmatic developing and the adult division between both languages.
Reyes (2004) presents data on the discourse characteristics of children's code switching and the functions that Spanish and English fulfill according to context. In addition, the data are described in relation to children's language competence and preference. The research finds that code switching occurs both within and across turns. The older children's switches are more frequent and are deployed for a wider variety of functions than the younger children's.
The present study attempts to fill the gap in research on conversational code-switching among bilingual children (see Skutnabb-Kangas 2000, 106, 573 on definitions of bilingualism), who are not simultaneous bilinguals but they study the second language at school. For the qualitative study of Russian-Estonian code-switching a conversation analytic approach has been chosen to analyze the bilingual interaction (Zabrodskaja 2005; for review see Verschik 2006). This means that context is regarded as something essential.
5.1. Conversational functions of Russian-Estonian code-switching
In the data Russian-Estonian switches are intrasentential: they take place within a sentence or rather within a clause; or, more seldom, extrasentential (occur between the sentences or clauses). In Muysken's (2000) terminology those types of switching are referred to as insertion: a base language structure - Russian - is a preliminary condition, into which lexical items or entire constituents are inserted from another language, Estonian. Longer stretches of Estonian within Russian occur quit rarely.
Linguistic interaction has typically multiple functions (Duranti 1991; Duranti and Goodwin 1992; Kalliokoski 1989). Also code-switching may fulfill more than one function at a time, according to the interactionalists' view of code-switching (Auer 1992, 32; Gumperz 1982, 97; Kalliokoski 1995; Wei 1995; Stroud 1998).
The data presented below are a bit reminiscent of those collected and discussed by Rampton (1999) who concentrates on a curriculum foreign language in unofficial talk, staying in familiar sociolinguistic territory, where informal vernacular discourse is often privileged. In his assumptions is the same playful integration of foreign words learned at school into English.
Most code-switching functions from Auer's list occur in Russian-Estonian bilingual data: language play, quotations, reiteration, topic shift, change in participant constellation, parentheses or side-comments, and expressive function. The different functions will be illustrated in what follows. As this study is qualitative, statistical analysis was not carried out. Here their occurrence will only be referred with categories "a lot", "often", "rarely".
5.1.1. Language play
The reasons for language play can be numerous. Through different examples it will be possible to show how puns impact on the process of code-switching.
In this switch type children use a lot of diminutives: they add to Estonian word in nominative Russian diminutive suffix. Excerpt 1 contains an example of such language play.
Excerpt 1
Estonian-language summer camp of Kohtla-Jarve Third Secondary School (June 2000), primary school pupil, seven-years-old (the Russian parts are given in italics and the Estonian parts in bold typeface):
During an excursion to Toila [a small town near Kohtla-Jarve], after a long walk in the park, one of the children says:
1. B1: Ja tak progolodalsja. Vot by seicas voileib-cik s'jest'.
I so hungry. If PRT now sandwich-DIM to eat
'I am so hungry. If only I could eat a small sandwich'
A common laugh follows it.
In Estonian -ke(ne) derives diminutives mostly hypocoristically: pojake 'sonny' from poeg 'son'. In Russian the same function is served by suffix -cik. It can be claimed that the integration of the Russian word into Estonian is thinkable. At least theoretically, a Russian noun buterbrod 'bread and butter' can be re-interpreted in the terms of Estonian grammar (foreign word, 2nd declension class, Genitive case with i-ending) and, therefore, a form buterbrodikene would be possible but, nevertheless, it does no occur. While Estonian has only semantic gender assignment (Erelt 2003), Russian gender assignment system is based on a complex set of semantic, phonological and morphological rules (Corbett 1999). Like other Uralic languages, Estonian nouns are not marked for gender, suffixes -nna and -tar derive nouns emphasising that a person is female (Erelt 2003, 82). The Russian language has three genders. In addition, each of the three genders has two subgenders (animate - inanimate). The Estonian-language item voileib 'bread
and butter' can be interpreted in the terms of Russian morphology as a masculine substantive with zero ending (2nd declension class). The adding of suffix -cik is a convenient grammatical strategy for integrating an Estonian word: cf Russian culan 'store room' - culan-cik 'small store room'. At the same time, the children realize that adding of a Russian suffix to an Estonian stem is funny. They wish to mark code-switched word, to emphasize it using language elements that add to code-switching some kind of pun. It is therefore hard to decide which phenomenon appears in this particular example. It can be proposed that for the speakers adding of Russian markers to Estonian items is more fascinating, than using of bare Russian or Estonian stems. This process does not require very high proficiency of Estonian (also as double marking, see Zabrodskaja 2005, 80). Thus, grammar is closely connected to pragmatics.
In the second type of language play, trilingual sentences are produced. Excerpt 2 contains an example of such an activity. Here the teacher and children are talking. As we see in line 1, the teacher asks the question in monolingual Russian. In fact, even though the girl repeats it using elements of three languages - Russian, Estonian and English.
Excerpt 2
Summer camp of Kohtla-Jarve Parna School (June 2004). Pupils of the 3rd form (nine-years-old G and nine-years-old B):
1.T: Tak, a kto segodnja u nas dezurnyi? So but who today at we on duty 'Who is on duty today?'
2.G: Segodnja kes on on duty? Today who is on duty 'Who is on duty today?'
3.B: Sergej. Sergej 'Sergej'
This trilingual question is directed to the co-pupils. The girl is sure that it would be understandable. Code-switching takes place after the ambiguous lexical item on, meaning in Estonian 'is', and English 'on'. Clyne (2003, 168) views such instances as lexical facilitation. This complicated example shows that even a not very proficient speaker can switch three languages in one sentence. Accidental close resemblance, bilingual homophones, facilitates a transversion like stems and suffixes of related languages.
5.1.2. Quotation
Direct quotations or reported speech occur often in the data. The language of the quotations is Estonian as it was in the situation described by the Russian-speaking child. Excerpt 3 presents the clear example of quotation. Boys want to play football, but they can not find the ball (lines 1, 2, 3). They are looking for it everywhere. In line 4 the teacher helps, offering the potential location of the ball in Estonian. When asking for the result of searching in line 6, B1 answers in Estonian in line 7.
Excerpt 3
Summer camp of Kohtla-Jarve Parna School (June 2003). Pupils of the 3rd form (three nine-years-old boys):
1.B1: Gde mjac? My ze vcera igrali. Where ball? We just yesterday played 'Where is the ball? We were playing yesterday.'
2.B2: Da ne znaju ja. Yes not know 1 SG I 'I do not know'
3.B1: Kuda ty ego polozil? Where you it put 'Where did you put it?'
4.T: Kas see voib kapi-s olla? If it can closet-INESS be
'Can it be in the closet?'
5.B1: Oi nasel! Aitah!
Oh, found! Thanks
'Oh, I have found it! Thank you!'
6.B3: [entering the room] Nu? Gde on byl?
So? Where it was 'So? Where was it?'
7.B1: V kapi-s!
In closet-INESS 'In the closet!'
To recap, this function is very frequent in the type of situation involved an Estonian-speaking adult and a Russian-speaking child.
It is interesting to note that in the line 7 double marking of adverbial modifier of place by functionally equivalent but structurally divergent strategies occurs: the same case relation is marked both by the Russian preposition v 'in' and the Estonian inessive case marker -s (Excerpt 3 a).
This is the instance where a Russian prepositional phrase corresponds to Estonian noun in the local case. In Russian, the preposition v 'in' carries the semantics of spatial relations, and the choice of an oblique case is secondary; that is, if the case marker is erroneously chosen or lacks altogether, this does not affect intelligibility of the utterance (Excerpt 3 b). In Estonian, local cases belong to the group of so-called semantic cases whose meaning is not merely abstract, unlike that of the three grammatical cases (nominative, genitive and partitive), as in Excerpt 3 c. Thus, the same meaning of internal local case is rendered by the function markers of both languages (Russian preposition and Estonian case-marker).
Excerpt 3 a code-switched v kapi-s in closet-INESS
'in the closet'
monolingual Russian v skaf-u in closet-LOC
monolingual Estonian kapi-s closet-INESS
This example can be analysed from the different point of view. It can be a language negotiation sequence plus cohesive lexical insertion in line 7. Such examples are treated by Angermeyer (2002) who suggests that sentences cannot be interpreted in isolation. An utterance in a conversation makes sense only if it can be connected to the preceding utterances in a meaningful way. He describes this relationship as coherence (Angermeyer 2002, 364). The insertion v kapi-s 'in the closet' may reflect nothing more than a temporary gap in the lexicon. This can be interpreted as an indication of the speaker's confidence that the interlocutor will find the use of the Estonian ending appropriate. In other words, the boy does not expect other participants to be surprised that such phrase is used in this context.
Auer (1999) describes the evolution of bilingual speech as a movement along the continuum that starts with code-switching and via code-mixing arrives over a period of time to a conventionalized fused lect. In the model of bilingual speech evolution Auer (1999) proposes different stages of conventionalization (he calls it grammaticalization) of code-switching. When a pattern of code-switching is grammaticalized, it becomes obligatory and ordinary, and the contrast between new and old items fades away. The example of double marking (v kapi-s) represents the third stage in the Auer's continuum between code-switching, code-mixing and fused lects. According to Auer (1999, 323-329) who also discusses examples of double marking as in Excerpt 3 a, this strategy is characteristic of a more advanced stage of proficiency in two languages (the stage of 'code-mixing' as opposed to the earlier stage of 'code-switching' and the later one of the 'fused lects' in his terminology). There is no any evidence either to proof or to disproof this claim. Note, however, that the strategy employed in Excerpt 3 occurs in speech of Russian-speaking child who is merely fluent in Estonian.
5.1.3. Reiteration
In this more or less frequent function of code-switching the followings patterns are found:
1) by the means of repetition in Estonian a speaker emphasizes his/her solidarity, helpfulness, a wish to support the interlocutor,
2) a code-switched reiteration serves to clarify the message.
Excerpt 4 shows how two girls are looking for the keys one has lost. In line 1 the question represents monolingual Russian. It was difficult to distinguish the switch in line 2. But the adverb tipp-topp 'tip-top' belongs to Estonian. However, this expression has become very popular in local Russian. Pragmatic particles are an important form of expressive lexicon. Estonian pragmatic
Excerpt 3 b
Excerpt 3 c
particles in Russian speech are used to express politeness, solidarity, emotions, irony etc (Zabrodskaja 2006, 743-745).
Excerpt 4
Summer camp of Kohtla-Jarve Parna School (June 2004). Pupils of the 3rd form (two nine-years-old girls):
1.G1: Kak ja teper' domoi popadu? Mamy do vos'mi How I now home get Mother till eight ne budet.
not be
'How will I get to home? Mother will be away till 8 p.m.'
2.G2: Ne plac'! My ih seicas naidjom. Vsjo budet Not cry! We them now find. All will normal'no, tipp-topp
normally, tip-top.
'Do not cry! We will find them now! All will be OK, tip-top'
5.1.4. Topic shift
The nature of short interactions constraints to a certain extent the possibilities to detect this conversational function. Nevertheless, some examples do exist in the data. It can be claimed that children switch code when speaking about topics referred to their studies.
In the Excerpt 5 two boys are talking about half term marks (lines 1-4). Then topic shifts and they begin to speak about Christmas (line 5-7).
Excerpt 5
Kohtla-Jarve Parna School (December 2003). Pupils of the 4th form (two ten-years-old
boys):
1.B1: Kak ocenki? How marks
'What are your marks?'
2.B2: V norme.
In norm LOC 'Normal'
3.B1: U tebja cto v cetverti po estonskomu? At you what in term on Estonian 'What half term mark do you have in Estonian?'
4.B2: Cetyre. A u tebja? Four. But at you 'Four. And you?'
5.B1: Da, tri. Teper' menja k babuske na Well, three. Now me to grandmother on Cudskoje ne otpustjat na joulud
Peipus not let 3 PL FUT on Christmas.
'Oh, three. I shall not be allowed to the Lake Peipus to visit my grandma on Christmas'
6.B2: Daaa. Joulud, pakapikud, piparid. Tore pidu!
Yeee. Christmas, gnomes, gingerbread. Good feast 'Yes. Christmas, gnomes, gingerbread. A good feast!'
7.B1: Vot i uus aasta s knizkoi, a ne na jarve Here and new year with book, but no on lake 'Here a New Year with a book, not by the lake'
8. B2: Ran'se nado bylo dumat'!
Earilier necessary was to think 'You had to think earlier!'
Here is an instance of alternation where the switched strings are preceded and followed by elements not structurally related from the other language.
Such nouns as joulud 'Christmas', pakapikk 'gnome', piparid 'gingerbread, pepper-cookie', tore pidu 'good feast', uus aasta 'New Year' unquestionably have been acquired during the Estonian language lessons. They belong to Estonian context and culture. All the words inserted are in Nominative, except pipari-d 'gingerbread'. Lexical item piparid 'gingerbread' can be perceived as a good example of linguistic creativity. Estonian compound noun is reduced, the boy uses only its first part, adding Estonian end in plural. A case of piparid 'gingerbread' offers some support to the proposal of continuum between code-switching and borrowing: Estonian pipar-koogi-d 'pepper-cookie-PL' (Estonian noun in plural) - code-switched pipar-y 'gingerbread' (an Estonian stem with Russian y-ending of plural Nominative, 2nd declension class) - Russian-Estonian mixed pipar-id 'gingerbread' (a reshaped/reconceptualized Estonian stem with Estonian Nominative's ending in plural). Following Thomason's (2000) concepts it could be analyzed as an example of bilingual creativity rather than of code-switching ~ borrowing continuum: Estonian lexical item piparkoogid is abridged and integrated into local Russian as pipar-y (gingerbread-NOM PL), then it is re-conceptualized as an Estonian noun which becomes integrated into Estonian (stem formant -i- + NOM PL). In both cases this lexeme can be analyzed as a switch from monolingual Estonian into a mixed Estonian/Russian style. Thus, bidirectionality has to be taken into consideration. Whether linguistic creativity is a relevant factor in this example or not, depends on the interest of a particular researcher.
5.1.5. Change in participant constellation
Code-switching can be rarely used in situations where a certain speaker is connected with use of the Estonian language. In relating a conversation held previously, a child may report the conversation in the language used. For example, children may be speaking Russian together. When one reports a previous conversation/situation with an Estonian monolingual/dominate Estonian person, that interaction comprises Russian-Estonian code-switching (one word, one phrase or even one sentence code-switching is very common in such instances).
Excerpt 6 describes the switches occurred in children's speech quit unexpectedly. After the camp the boys are going home. One of them is going to the library (see line 2). A new child
interjects in a conversation in line 4. For him the term raamat 'book' comes from an Estonian-related domain. He wants to know who is going there and in the question Estonian noun raamat 'book' is used. This may be caused by the fact that some librarians are dominant Estonian speakers. They tend to talk to children in Estonian or in Russian but still using a lot of Estonian words. Maybe the speaker wanted to borrow an Estonian book. In theory, Estonian raamat 'book' can be successfully reinterpreted in the terms of Russian noun morphology (masculine, 2nd declension). In the sentence the noun is morphologically integrated into Russian: raamat 'book' receives the appropriate Instrumental marker -om.
Excerpt 6
Summer camp of Kohtla-Jarve Parna School (June 2004). Pupils of the 2nd form (three eight-years-old boys):
1.B1: Ty seicas kuda? You now where 'Where are you going?'
2.B2: V biblioteku, a cto? In library but what 'To the library. Why?'
3.B1: Ja dumal, cto my vmeste domoi poidjom.
I thought that we together home go 'I thought that we would go home together'
[B3 hears that B1 and B2 are speaking about the library.]
4. B3: Tak. Éto kto iz vas toze za raamat-om?
So. This who from you also after book-INSTR 'So. Who is going to get a book too?'
5.B2: Mina-mina.
II 'It's me'
6.B3: Vot i posli togda. Well and go then 'Let's go then'
In line 5 B2 responds in Estonian. Thus, Estonian language functions as a tool for specifying the addressee. But the conversation ends in Russian, the language which was mainly used.
5.1.6. Parentheses or side-comment
Code-switching is also sometimes used to distinguish general talk and comment. Parentheses or side-comments are very close to this function. In many cases, the switched Estonian comment contains the same semantic information as Russian lexical item and the purpose of switch can be hardly identified.
In Excerpt 7 two boys are talking about their mothers' birthdays. In line 3 side-comment represent a well-known Estonian song "Valgeid roose" 'White roses'.
Excerpt 7
Summer camp of Kohtla-Jarve Parna School (June 2004). Pupils of the 4th form (two ten-years-old boys):
1.B1: Ty cto mame na den' rozdenija daris? You what to mother on birthday present 'What will you give your mother on her birthday?'
2.B2: Tri rozy. Three roses 'Three roses'
3.B1: [singing softly] Roosid, valged roosid... A ja vot
Roses white roses. But I here
ne znaju cto.
not know what
'Roses, white roses. But I do not know what to give'
4.B2: Da cvety vsegda normal'no. Yes flowers allways normally 'Flowers are always good'
As the interlocutor B2 ends the conversation in monolingual Russian (line 4), it can be assumed that passing done comment in Estonian (line 3) does not motivate him to switch code.
5.1.7. Expressive function
The expressivity can make the speaker to use an appropriate word in the other language than mother tongue. Children wish to express different emotions from anger to sadness. Pupils differentiate between Estonian and Russian and make effectively profit on the resources of both.
Excerpt 8 contains an example of astonishment. Two boys are about to go home. They are packing their things into schoolbags. Suddenly one of them produces 25 crowns from his pocket. In line 1 the other boy begins to wonder.
Excerpt 8
Summer camp of Kohtla-Jarve Parna School (June 2004). Pupils of the 2nd form (two eight-years-old boys):
1.B1 [astoniched]: Otkuda u tebja takoi raha?
Where at you such money
'Why do you have such a big money?'
2.B2 [proudly]: Eto mne babuska dala.
This to me grandmother gave 'My grandma gave me'
3.B1: Eto po kakomu povodu? This on what reason
4.B2:
'For what reason?' Nu eto papina Well this father's priezzajet. Vot i come 3 SG. Here and vkusn en 'koje". Teper' delicious. Now
mama iz Tartu. Ona redko
mother from Tartu. She rarely
dala mne na "cto-nibud'
give 3 SG PAST I DAT on some-thing
dumaju, cto kupit'.
I think what to buy
5.B1:
'This is my daddy's mother from Tartu. She comes here rear. That's why she gave me it for
„something delicious". Now I am thinking what to buy'
Ogo, zdorovo! A mne tak mnogo esce nikogda
Oho great! But to me so much more never
ne darili.
not gave
'Wow, good! Nobody has yet given me so much money!'
The whole conversation is in Russian. Again, this is one example of an instance of code-switching consisting of one word. So, code-switching may be used to introduce humor into interaction. A switch in language may indicate a need to change mood expressing astonishment within the conversation.
6. CONCLUSION
The object of the present research is multilingual communication among Russian-speaking schoolchildren with a special focus on Russian-Estonian code-switching in the town of Kohtla-Jarve. The data confirm Arnfast and J0rgensen's (2003) opinion that code-switching is possible even if learners have only a basic proficiency in the second language. Numerous examples demonstrate how Russian-speaking children use different opportunities to incorporate what they know into their Russian speech. Code-switching is very typical in pear interactions and has many valuable advantages in ways of communicating (asking, commenting, relaying etc.) and expressing roles, feelings, norms and values.
This paper focuses only on the conversational functions of code-switching. Conversation-analytic method used claims to interactional meanings and shows that functions of Russian-Estonian code-switching are closely tied to the turn-by-turn development of the interaction.
The study demonstrates that the classical conversational functions are well represented in the data. Also it is suggested and proved that Russian-Estonian code-switching is used for expressive reasons too. The results of the present study may be summarized as follows: The code-switching data is analyzed from the conversational and, when appropriate, from the grammatical point of view. The starting point of conversational code-switching is that code-switching is a conversational event which has, first and foremost, conversational functions (Auer 1984, 1998, 1999).
Most conversational functions are found in the data in connection with switches, whereas language play occurs most frequently. Unexpectedly, expressive function is present in the data in to a great extent. Russian-speaking children of Kohtla-Jarve emphasize their emotions through
the use of two languages in the same discourse. Direct quotations or reported speech occur often in the data. The language of the quotations is often the same as it was in the situation described by the child. Thus, the quotations are usually in Estonian when describing a situation with an Estonian-speaking person. Code switches as reiterations are also often used for clarifying, emphasizing or amplifying a message. As this study deals with short conversations, switching when changing topic is very rare in the data. The nature of the setting (short interactions) restricts the possibility of detecting switching related to the change in participant constellation. However, some examples do appear in the data. Code-switching may also serve to mark side-comments. This type of switch is rare but still observable in the data. Conversational functions that occur more often: language play, quotation, reiteration, expressive function.
The analysis reveals a connection between grammar and pragmatics. In Auer's (1998, 1999) continuum model from switching to fused lects via mixing, insertional and alternational switching represent phase one on the continuum.
In the quest of communicating meaning, children use different code-switching strategies. It should be emphasized that whatever strategy is employed, it is the innovative character of its use that attests to the fact that Kohtla-Jarve Russian-speaking children are creative communicators. Russian-Estonian code-switching in the data is clearly insertional. Taking this point to account, the main future research question is investigation of differences and similarities in code-switching among Russian-speaking children in other areas of Estonia, with special emphasis on its conversational functions and type.
References
Alvarez, Ana Isabel. 1979. Code-switching among bilingual children. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/1371. Angermeyer, Philipp Sebastian. 2002. "Lexical Cohesion in Multilingual Conversation." International Journal of Bilingualism 6 (4): 361-393. doi:10.1177/13670069020060040101. Appel, Rene, and Pieter Muysken. 1992. Language Contact and Bilingualism. London, New-York,
Melbourne, Auckland: E. Arnold, a division of Hodder & Stroughton. Arnfast, Juni Soderberg, and J. Normann J0rgensen. 2003. "Code-Switching as a Communication, Learning, and Social Negotiation Strategy in First-Year Learners of Danish." International Journal of Applied Linguistics 13 (1): 23-53. doi:10.1111/1473-4192.00036. Auer, Peter. 1984. Bilingual Conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Auer, Peter. 1992. "Introduction: John Gumperz's approach to contextualization." In The Contextualization of Languages, edited by Peter Auer and Aldo Di Luzio, 1-38. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Auer, Peter. 1995. "The pragmatics of code-switching: a sequential approach." In One Speaker, Two Languages: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Code-Switching, edited by Lesley Milroy and Pieter Muysken, 115-135. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Auer, Peter. 1998. "Introduction: Bilingual Conversation revisited." In Code-Switching in Conversation. Language, Interaction and Identity, edited by Peter Auer, 1-24. London and New York: Routledge.
Auer, Peter. 1999. "From Codeswitching via Language Mixing to Fused Lects: Towards a Dynamic Typology of Bilingual Speech." International Journal of Bilingualism 3 (4): 309-332. doi:10.1177/13670069990030040101.
Baker, Colin. 1995. Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Clevedon, Philadelphia, Adelaide: Multilingual Matters LTD.
Baker, Colin. 2006. Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 4th ed. Clevedon; Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.
Bani-Shoraka, Helena. 2005. Language choice and code-switching in the Azerbaijani community in Tehran: a conversation analytic approach to bilingual practices. Doctoral dissertation. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Iranica Upsaliensia 9. Uppsala: Uppsala University Press.
Bauer, Eurydice Bouchereau, Joan Kelly Hall, and Kirsten Kruth. 2002. "The Pragmatic Role of Codeswitching in Play Contexts." International Journal of Bilingualism 6 (1): 53-74. doi:10.1177/13670069020060010401.
Clyne, Michael, and H Moser. 1967. Transference and Triggering. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Corbett, Greville G. 1999. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Daskalovski, Zidas. 2003. Liberalism and Nation-building. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Central European University. Accessed March 5, 2007. http://www.ceu.hu/polsci/dissertations/daskalovski.doc.
Deuchar, Margaret, and Suzanne Quay. 2000. Bilingual Acquisition: Theoretical Implications of a Case Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Duranti, Alessandro. 1991. "Four properties of speech-in-interaction and the notion of translocutionary act." In Pragmatics at Issue. Selected papers of the International Pragmatics Conference, edited by Jef Verschueren, 133-150. Antwerp, August 17-22, 1987. Vol. 1. Pragmatics & beyond. New series 6/1. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Duranti, Alessandro, and Charles Goodwin. 1992. "Rethinking context: an introduction." In Rethinking Context. Language as an Interactive Phenomenon. Studies in the Social and Cultural Foundations of Language no. 11, edited by Alessandro Duranti and Charles Goodwin, 1-42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Erelt, Mati, ed. 2003. Estonian Language. In Series: Linguistica Uralica. Supplementary Series / Volume 1. Tallinn: Estonian Academy Publishers.
Ervin-Tripp, Susan, and Iliana Reyes. 2005. "Child Codeswitching and Adult Content Contrasts." International Journal of Bilingualism 9 (1): 85-102. doi:10.1177/13670069050090010601.
Estonian Statistics Office. Accessed March 5, 2007. www.stat.ee.
F^rch, Claus, Kirsten Haastrup, and Robert Phillipson. 1984. Learner Language and Language Learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Genesee, F. 2002. "Portrait of the bilingual child." In Perspectives on the L2 user, edited by Vivian James Cook, 170-196. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Genesee, Fred, Isabelle Boivin, and Elena Nicoladis. 1996. "Talking with Strangers: A Study of Bilingual Children's Communicative Competence." Applied Psycholinguistics 17 (4): 427442. doi:10.1017/s0142716400008183.
Genishi, Celia Shinobu. 1976. Rules for code-switching in young Spanish-English speakers: An exploratory study of language socialization. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Grosjean, François. 1982. Life with Two Languages. An Introduction to Bilingualism. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Gumperz, John J. 1967. "On the Linguistic Markers of Bilingual Communication." Journal of Social Issues 23 (2): 48-57. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1967.tb00575.x.
Gumperz, John J. 1972. "The Communicative Competence of Bilinguals: Some Hypotheses and Suggestions for Research." Language in Society 1 (1): 143-154. doi:10.1017/s0047404500006606. www.jstor.org/stable/4166675.
Gumperz, John J. 1982. Discourse strategies. Studies in interactional sociolinguistics 1. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press
Halliday, M. A. K., Angus Mcintosh, and Peter Strevens. 1964. The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. (Longmans' Linguistic Library.) London: Longmans.
Halmari, Helena, and Wendy Smith. 1994. "Code-Switching and Register Shift: Evidence from Finnish-English Child Bilingual Conversation." Journal of Pragmatics 21 (4): 427-445. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(94)90013-2.
Hint, Mati. 1991. "The Changing Language Situation: Russian Influences on Contemporary Estonian." Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 12 (1-2): 111-116. doi:10.1080/01434632.1991.9994451.
Jakobson, Roman. 1960. "Linguistics and poetics." In Style in Language, edited by Thomas Albert Sebeok, 350-377. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; New York and London: John Wiley & Sons.
J0rgensen, J. Normann. 1998. "Children's Acquisition of Code-Switching for Power-Wielding." In Code-Switching in Conversation. Language, Interaction and Identity, edited by Peter Auer, 237-261. London and New York: Routledge.
Kalliokoski, Jyrki. 1989. Ja. Rinnastus ja rinnastuskonjunktion kaytto [Coordination and the use of coordinating conjunction]. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran Toimituksia 497. Helsinki.
Kalliokoski, Jyrki. 1995. "Koodinvaihto ja keskustelun moniaanisyys" [Code-switching and the polyphonicity of conversation.] Virittaja 99: 2-24.
Martin-Jones, Marilyn. 2000. "Bilingual Classroom Interaction: A Review of Recent Research." Language Teaching 33 (1): 1-9. doi:10.1017/s0261444800015123.
McClure, E. 1981. "Formal and functional aspects of the code switched discourse of bilingual children." In Latino Language and Communicative Behaviour (Advances in Discourse Processes, Vol. 6), edited by Richard P. Duran, 69-84. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Muysken, Pieter. 2000. Bilingual Speech: A Typology of Code-Mixing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Odlin, Terence. 2000. Language Transfer. Cross-Linguistic Influence in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Poplack, Shana. 1980. "Sometimes I'll Start a Sentence in Spanish y termino en espanol: Toward a Typology of Code-Switching." Linguistics 18 (7-8): 581-618. doi:10.1515/ling.1980.18.7-8.581.
Rampton, Ben. 1999. "Deutsch in Inner London and the Animation of an Instructed Foreign Language." Journal of Sociolinguistics 3 (4): 480-504. doi:10.1111/1467-9481.00092.
Rannut, Mart. 1995. "Beyond linguistic policy: the Soviet Union versus Estonia." In Linguistic Human Rights. Overcoming Linguistic Discrimination, edited by Tove Skutnabb-Kangas and Robert Phillipson, 179-208. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Rannut, Lille. 2005. Keelekeskkonna moju vene opilaste eesti keele omandamisele ja integratsioonile Eestis [Language environment impact on Russian students' acquisition of Estonian and integration in Estonia]. Doctoral thesis. Tallinn: Tallinn University Press.
Reyes, Iliana. 2001. The development of grammatical and communicative competence in bilingual Spanish speakers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Reyes, Iliana. 2004. "Functions of Code Switching in Schoolchildren's Conversations." Bilingual Research Journal 28 (1): 77-98. doi:10.1080/15235882.2004.10162613.
Romaine, Suzanne. 2000. Bilingualism. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Shin, Sarah J., and Lesley Milroy. 2000. "Conversational Codeswitching Among Korean-English Bilingual Children." International Journal of Bilingualism 4 (3): 351-383. doi:10.1177/13670069000040030401.
Simon, D.-L. 2001. "Towards a new understanding of codeswitching in the foreign language classroom." In Codeswitching Worldwide II, edited by Rodolfo Jacobson, 311-342. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 1992. Linguistic Human Rights in Education. Language Policy in the Baltic States. Conference papers, 173-191. Riga: Gara pupa.
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 2000. Linguistic genocide in education, or worldwide diversity and human rights? Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Stroud, Christopher. 1998. "Perspectives on cultural variability of discourse and some implications for code-switching." In Code-Switching in Conversation. Language, Interaction and Identity, edited by Peter Auer, 321-348. London and New York: Routledge.
Thomason, Sarah G. 2000. "On the unpredictability of contact effects." In Estudios de sociolinguistica 1 (1), edited by Xoan Paulo Rodriguez Yanez, Anxo M. Lorenzo Suarez, Maria del Carmen Cabeza Pereiro, 173-182.
Thomason, Sarah G. 2001. Language Contact. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Verschik, Anna. 2004. 'Aspects of Russian-Estonian Codeswitching: Research Perspectives." International Journal of Bilingualism 8 (4): 427-448. doi:10.1177/13670069040080040201.
Verschik, Anna. 2005. "The Language Situation in Estonia." Journal of Baltic Studies 36 (3): 283316. doi:10.1080/01629770500000111.
Verschik, Anna. 2006. "Recent contributions to Estonian sociolinguistics." Estudios de Sociolinguistica 7 (1): 122-126.
Viikberg, Juri. 2000. "Estonian National Minorities: Past and Present." In Integracija un Etnopolitika [Integration and Ethnopolitics], edited by E. Vebers, 470-482. Riga: University of Latvia, Institute of Philosophy and Sociology.
Wei, Li. 1995. "Code-Switching, Preference Marking and Politeness in Bilingual Cross-Generational Talk: Examples From a Chinese Community in Britain." Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 16 (3): 197-214. doi:10.1080/01434632.1995.9994600.
Zabrodskaja, Anastassia. 2005. Vene-eesti koodivahetus Kohtla-Jarve vene emakeelega algkoolilastel. [Russian-Estonian code-switching among Russian-speaking schoolchildren in Kohtla-Jarve.] (= Tallinna Ulikooli eesti filoloogia osakonna toimetised 6). Tallinn: Tallinn University Press.
Zabrodskaja, Anastassia. 2006. "Eestivene keel(evariant): kas samm segakoodi poole?" [Estonian Russian language(variety): a step towards fused lects?] Keel ja Kirjandus 9: 736-750.
Zentella, Ana Celia. 1982. "Code-switching and interaction among Puerto Rican children." In Spanish in the United States: Sociolinguistic Aspects, edited by Lucia Elias-Olivares and Jon Amastae, 354-385. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zentella, Ana Celia. 1997. Growing up bilingual: Puerto Rican children in New York. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 1997.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
This research was supported by Estonian Science Foundation, grant 6151 "Child language, interlanguage and code-switching corpora creation and description".
Author information
Anastassia Zabrodskaja is a Doctoral student, Chair of General and Applied Linguistics, Department of Estonian Philology, Faculty of Philology, Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia.
Copyrights
Copyright for this article is retained by the author, with publication rights granted to the journal.
