Mixed Languages

Meakins, Felicity

doi:10.1515/9781614513711.159

Cited by 188 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the rarest forms of language contact involves mixed languages, which form under situations of advanced bilingualism and often involve the wholesale exchange of entire word classes or the complete replacement of an entire lexicon with another (see Bakker & Mous 1994, Bakker 2003, Matras & Bakker 2003, Meakins 2013. One of the most interesting areas in mixed language research involves the interactions and subsequent arrangements of their source phonologies.…”

Section: Vot Production In Mixed Languagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voice onset time production in Ecuadorian Spanish, Quichua, and Media Lengua

Stewart

2017

Journal of the International Phonetic Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Ecuador there exists a dynamic language contact continuum between Urban Spanish and Rural Quichua. This study explores the effects of competing phonologies with an analysis of voice onset time (VOT) production in and across three varieties of Ecuadorian highland Spanish, Quichua, and Media Lengua. Media Lengua is a mixed language that contains Quichua systemic elements and a lexicon of Spanish origin. Because of this lexical-grammatical split, Media Lengua is considered the most central point along the language continuum. Native Quichua phonology has a single series of voiceless stops (/p/, /t/, and /k/), while Spanish shows a clear voicing contrast between stops in the same series. This study makes use of nearly 8,000 measurements from 69 participants to (i) document VOT production in the aforementioned language varieties and (ii) analyse the effects of borrowings on VOT. Results based on mixed effects models and multidimensional scaling suggest that the voicing contrast has entered both Media Lengua and Quichua through Spanish lexical borrowings. However, the VOT values of voiced stops in Media Lengua align with those of Rural and L2 Spanish while Quichua shows significantly longer prevoicing values, suggesting some degree of overshoot.

show abstract

Section: Vot Production In Mixed Languagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voice onset time production in Ecuadorian Spanish, Quichua, and Media Lengua

Stewart

2017

Journal of the International Phonetic Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The lower-level analysis of Сашко-lect will be concerned with unstable and/or fragmentary grammatical and lexical combinations and amalgamations that take place in Сашко's discourses, using the current approaches to code-switching (Myers-Scotton 1993a, 1993bMuysken 2000;Matras 2009) and borrowing (Aikhenvald, Dixon 2001;Field 2002;Aikhenvald 2006;Sakel 2007;Matras 2007Matras , 2009. The intermediate-level analysis will examine the language-contact profiles of more individual lects employed by Сашко, drawing on a mixed-language approach to language interaction (Bakker, Muysken 1995;Matras, Bakker 2003;Matras 2009;Meakins 2013;Velupillai 2015). The higher-lever analysis will focus on holistic grammar characterizing Сашко-lect in its integrity, making use of a translanguaging approach to multilingualism (Makoni, Pennycook 2007;García 2009;Li 2011Li , 2018García, Li 2014;Otheguy, García, Reid 2015;Mazzaferro 2018;Sabino 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Each feeding system contributes, however, to the distinct parts of the resultant system. The following splits or compartmentations of source languages are possible: grammar vs. lexicon (Bakker 2003;Meakins 2013: 159, 189, 213;Velupillai 2015: 71-73); noun(phrase) vs. verb(-phrase) (Bakker 2003;Meakins 2013;Velupillai 2015: 71, 73-74); form (free content morphemes) vs. structure (bound morphemes and syntax) (Field 2002: 13;Bakker, Mous 1994: 5;Bakker 1997: 213;Velupillai 2015: 75); and "contentreference" (referential lexical vocabulary) vs. "predication-anchoring" (finite verb inflections) (Matras 2009: 305). Such splits are seldom neat -the intertwining usually being more intense (Matras 2000: 79) and the compartmentalization of the source languages being messier (Field 2002: 14).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Сашко-lect: The translanguaged grammar of a hyper multilingual global nomad. Part 1 – Methodological considerations

Andrason¹

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the idiolect of Сашко – a hyper-multilingual global nomad whose language repertoire draws on forty languages, ten of which he speaks with native or native-like proficiency. By analyzing grammatical and lexical features typifying Сашко’s translanguaging practices (code-switches, code-borrowings, and code-mixes), as documented in the corpus of reflexive notes that span the last twenty-five years, the author designs Сашко’s translanguaged grammar. Instead of being a passive additive pluralization of separated, autonomous, and static monolects, Сашко’s grammar emerges as a deeply orchestrated, unitary, and dynamic strategy. From Сашко’s perspective, this grammar constitutes a tool to express his rebellious and defiant identity; a tool that – while aiming to combat Western mono-culturalisms, compartmented multilingualisms, and nationalisms – ultimately leads to Сашко’s linguistic and cultural homelessness. This paper – the first in the series of three articles – is dedicated to methodological issues: the frameworks that are adopted in the different parts of the study, the method with which the description and analysis of Сашко’s idiolect is developed, and the corpus that underlies the empirical research of Сашко-lect.

show abstract

“…The extent and frequency of such mingling are much greater than in ordinary code switching–as, for example, if in discussing Peruvian cuisine I insert the term aji amarillo (a variety of pepper), complete with Spanish phonology, into an English sentence or perhaps put the entire phrase or sentence containing it into Spanish (as is possible and not uncommon if both the interlocutor and I know Spanish well). Symbiotic intermingling, in contrast, may be so thoroughgoing that it is difficult for a linguist to decide which of the languages an utterance is in, though the languages actually remain discrete (i.e., they do not merge to create a single mixed language, as occasionally happens under somewhat different sociolinguistic conditions: see e.g., Bakker and Mous, 1994 ; Meakins, 2013 ). The main sociolinguistic conditions that make symbiosis possible are lack of a standard or prestige language (which might favor use of one language over the other), minimal or absent language identity or other ideology linking language to other aspects of identity, acceptance of code switching, and sufficient dialect or language diversity to offer a range of options to choose from.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-linguistic Conditions for Causativization as a Linguistic Attractor

Nichols

2018

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An attractor, in complex systems theory, is any state that is more easily or more often entered or acquired than departed or lost; attractor states therefore accumulate more members than non-attractors, other things being equal. In the context of language evolution, linguistic attractors include sounds, forms, and grammatical structures that are prone to be selected when sociolinguistics and language contact make it possible for speakers to choose between competing forms. The reasons why an element is an attractor are linguistic (auditory salience, ease of processing, paradigm structure, etc.), but the factors that make selection possible and propagate selected items through the speech community are non-linguistic. This paper uses the consonants in personal pronouns to show what makes for an attractor and how selection and diffusion work, then presents a survey of several language families and areas showing that the derivational morphology of pairs of verbs like fear and frighten, or Turkish korkmak ‘fear, be afraid’ and korkutmak ‘frighten, scare’, or Finnish istua ‘sit’ and istutta ‘seat (someone)’, or Spanish sentarse ‘sit down’ and sentar ‘seat (someone)’ is susceptible to selection. Specifically, the Turkish and Finnish pattern, where ‘seat’ is derived from ‘sit’ by addition of a suffix—is an attractor and a favored target of selection. This selection occurs chiefly in sociolinguistic contexts of what is defined here as linguistic symbiosis, where languages mingle in speech, which in turn is favored by certain demographic, sociocultural, and environmental factors here termed frontier conditions. Evidence is surveyed from northern Eurasia, the Caucasus, North and Central America, and the Pacific and from both modern and ancient languages to raise the hypothesis that frontier conditions and symbiosis favor causativization.

show abstract

Mixed Languages

Cited by 188 publications

References 37 publications

Voice onset time production in Ecuadorian Spanish, Quichua, and Media Lengua

Voice onset time production in Ecuadorian Spanish, Quichua, and Media Lengua

Сашко-lect: The translanguaged grammar of a hyper multilingual global nomad. Part 1 – Methodological considerations

Non-linguistic Conditions for Causativization as a Linguistic Attractor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About