Speaker
Description
The last four decades saw a theoretical shift from a monolingual view of bilingualism to a multilingual one (Grosjean, 1985; Cook, 2002); however, most structure-focused investigations of multilingual speech behaviours are still rooted in monolingual view. The present study aims to explore the pragmatic and structural features of cross-linguistic influences (CLI)—code-switching and transfer—in natural multilingual discourse and consider how well the most prominent structural and sociolinguistic approaches to CS align with naturalistic data. The material was gathered via participant observation of a spontaneous informal dialogue (135 minutes) between four linguistics students aged 21-24 with overlapping yet distinct language constellations. All participants are multilingual and proficient in at least three languages, with their L1 being Russian and their oldest and dominant LX being English. The primary language of communication was Russian, yet participants exhibited 75 instances of CLI, primarily in the form of one-word inclusions from English. Conversation analysis of the dialogue allowed us to isolate several contexts which induce CLI. Some, like maintaining group cohesion (primarily through humour) and quoting, have already been described elsewhere (e.g. Gumperz, 1982). Our participants also employed CLI for metalinguistic discussions, such as clarifications and cross-linguistic comparisons, which can be attributed to their close relationship with languages. The participants' overall linguistic behaviour demonstrates a situation where they can use their idiolect without feeling the need to monitor their speech for adherence to any single “named” language (cf. Li Wei, 2015). Our results also showcase the viability of studying multilinguals who learned their L2 in L1 environment: their linguistic behaviour exhibits robust CLI and can provide a clearer insight into the personal psycho-social factors that instigate CLI, as they have no environmental necessity to employ more than one language in their daily life. Furthermore, the unmarked nature of most CLIs provides evidence towards the growing movement of re-evaluating of the nature and structure of multilingual language competence (cf. Cook, 2016).