New Lexis in the Interaction of Languages and Cultures: The Case of "Selfie" in the Lithuanian Language

New Lexis in the Interaction of Languages and Cultures: The Case of Selfie in the Lithuanian LanguageThis article deals with the adaptation of the English neologism selfie in the Lithuanian language. It sheds light on how selfie first appeared in Australian English back in 2002 and on the socialisation and lexicalisation of this word in the English and Lithuanian languages. The aim here is to analyse the characteristics of the usage of the neologism selfie and its adapted form selfis in the Lithuanian language as well as its rivalry with other Lithuanian equivalents of the word.Based on the usage data obtained from the Database of Lithuanian Neologisms, the online corpus WebCorp, and the Google search engine, the loanword selfie was found to have first appeared in Lithuanian blogs back in 2013 at the latest. After a brief period of time, in early 2014 or sooner, it began vying with its Lithuanian equivalent, asmenukė. Eventually, with the formational families of selfis and asmenukė expanding, two rival lexical semantic systems have emerged in the Lithuanian language, both consisting of what usually are variations of the name of the object (selfie, selfis and asmenukė, asmenutė, asmeninukė), actor (selfininkas, -ė, selfukininkas, -ė and asmenukininkas, -ė), action (selfintis and asmenukintis), and additional tool (selfi stikas, selfio lazda and asmenuklazdė), as well as the different new versions thereof.After it had made its way into the Lithuanian language, the English neologism selfie (selfis), as the name for a new sociocultural phenomenon with its own semantic and formational family, became anchored there and was adapted to the inflectional system of the host language just as it provided an impetus for producing local equivalents. This case can be considered to be a typical mini-model, one that demonstrates what happens when a loanword for a new and trendy element of reality, which therefore has a considerable potential to spread, enters the Lithuanian language. Without a shadow of doubt, similar processes are also taking place in other languages that have borrowed this word. New comparative neological studies of other languages would help us form a better understanding of the origin, functioning, and prevalence of neologisms, as well as the mechanisms of how local equivalents of borrowings are made and how they compete with them. Nowa leksyka w interakcji języków i kultur: przypadek selfie w języku litewskimNiniejszy artykuł jest poświęcony adaptacji angielskiego neologizmu selfie w języku litewskim. Rzuca światło na to, jak słowo selfie pojawiło się po raz pierwszy w australijskiej odmianie języka angielskiego w 2002 roku oraz na jego socjalizację i leksykalizację w języku angielskim i języku litewskim. Opracowanie ma na celu analizę cech użycia neologizmu selfie i zaadaptowanej formy selfis w języku litewskim oraz jego rywalizacji z innymi litewskimi odpowiednikami.Na podstawie informacji z Bazy Danych Litewskich Neologizmów, internetowego korpusu WebCorp i wyszukiwarki Google, stwierdzono, że zapożyczenie selfie pojawiło się po raz pierwszy na litewskich blogach najpóźniej w 2013 roku. Wkrótce, na początku 2014 roku lub wcześniej, zaczęło rywalizować ze swoim litewskim odpowiednikiem: asmenukė. Ostatecznie, wraz z rozwojem rodzin wyrazów selfis i asmenukė, w języku litewskim pojawiły się dwa rywalizujące ze sobą leksykalne systemy semantyczne, składające się z odmian nazwy obiektu (selfie, selfis i asmenukė, asmenutė, asmeninukė), aktora (selfininkas, -ė, selfukininkas, -ė i asmenukininkas, -ė), czynności (selfintis i asmenukintis) i dodatkowego narzędzia (selfi stikas, selfio lazda i asmenuklazdė) oraz rozmaitych nowych wersji tych nazw.Po przejściu do języka litewskiego, angielski neologizm selfie (selfis), jako nazwa nowego zjawiska społeczno-kulturowego z własną rodziną semantyczną i słowotwórczą, został w nim zakotwiczony i dostosowany do rodzimego systemu fleksyjnego i dał impuls do tworzenia lokalnych odpowiedników. Ten przypadek można w pewnym sensie uznać za modelowy, pokazuje bowiem, co się dzieje, gdy zapożyczenie nazwy na określenie nowego i bardzo modnego elementu rzeczywistości, który ma zatem znaczny potencjał rozprzestrzeniania się, wchodzi do języka litewskiego. Podobne procesy bez wątpienia zachodzą również w innych językach, które zapożyczyły to słowo. Podjęcie nowych badań porównawczych pomogłoby lepiej zrozumieć powstawanie, funkcjonowanie i rozpowszechnianie się neologizmów, a także mechanizmy tworzenia rodzimych odpowiedników i ich konkurowania z zapożyczeniami.

КРЕАТИВНІСТЬ ІДІОМАТИЧНОГО ПРОСТОРУ СОЦІАЛЬНОЇ ІНТЕРАКЦІЇ

The present paper is a study of creativity of idiomatic space in the national varieties of English. The defi nition of the term ‘idiomatic space of social interaction’ has been suggested, formulated as “the property of the idiomatic space of social interaction to, either individually or collectively, form new idiomatic units or to adjust them according to the pragmatic and communicative goals of discourse”, and is further investigated in the News on the Web (NOW) corpus evidenced from canonical and non-canonical forms of the idiom have your cake and eat it (too). In total, 1158 instances of the use of the above idiom were investigated in fi ve national varieties of English (British English, American English, Canadian English, Australian English, and New Zealand English). Based on the data obtained, it was discovered that canonical forms of the idiom under analysis prevail over non-canonical forms (79.8% to 20.2%). Further, this was verifi ed with the help of concordance analysis using AntConc freeware corpus analysis toolkit, which showed minor deviations of the idiom from its base form. However, despite being in the minority, the non-canonical forms of have your cake and eat it (too) lend themselves to a rigorous analysis from the standpoint of the conceptual integration theory. One such instance of conceptual blending – to have their cake and eat it and then expect to still have it to eat later on when they’re hungry. And a bag to put it in – was considered in the present paper. The overall analysis has proved the applicability of the conceptual integration theory to idiomatic creativity in terms of idiomatic inputs and blends. Since no direct blends inv olving the above idiom were identifi ed in the NOW corpus, a wider context of the idiom (at least two or three sentences along with the title of the relevant publication) was considered. This provides certain evidence to hypothesize that the conceptual integration theory is not a universal one when it comes to interpreting idiomatic creativity. With this in mind, further quantitative and qualitative analyses are needed to rigorously determine the place of the conceptual integration theory in examining idiomatic creativity. Key words: study of idioms, idiomatic space, corpus analysis, conceptual integration theory, creativity of idiomatic space.

In Search of Salience: Focus Detection in the Speech of Different Talkers

Many different prosodic cues can help listeners predict upcoming speech. However, no research to date has assessed listeners’ processing of preceding prosody from different speakers. The present experiments examine (1) whether individual speakers (of the same language variety) are likely to vary in their production of preceding prosody; (2) to the extent that there is talker variability, whether listeners are flexible enough to use any prosodic cues signaled by the individual speaker; and (3) whether types of prosodic cues (e.g., F0 versus duration) vary in informativeness. Using a phoneme-detection task, we examined whether listeners can entrain to different combinations of preceding prosodic cues to predict where focus will fall in an utterance. We used unsynthesized sentences recorded by four female native speakers of Australian English who happened to have used different preceding cues to produce sentences with prosodic focus: a combination of pre-focus overall duration cues, F0 and intensity (mean, maximum, range), and longer pre-target interval before the focused word onset (Speaker 1), only mean F0 cues, mean and maximum intensity, and longer pre-target interval (Speaker 2), only pre-target interval duration (Speaker 3), and only pre-focus overall duration and maximum intensity (Speaker 4). Listeners could entrain to almost every speaker’s cues (the exception being Speaker 4’s use of only pre-focus overall duration and maximum intensity), and could use whatever cues were available even when one of the cue sources was rendered uninformative. Our findings demonstrate both speaker variability and listener flexibility in the processing of prosodic focus.

Lexical preference in second dialect acquisition in a second language

Aims and objectives/purpose/research questions: How does second dialect acquisition in a second language compare to that in a first language in terms of rates and predictors of second dialect vocabulary use? Design/methodology/approach: A lexical preference task was completed by four groups of participants residing in Australia: first language speakers of Australian (L1D1) and American (L1D2) English, and first language speakers of Russian who acquired Australian (L2D1) and American (L2D2) English first. The participants named objects which are denoted by different words in American and Australian English (e.g. bell pepper vs capsicum). Data and analysis: The response was coded as either American or Australian, and percentage of use of Australian items was calculated for each group. Findings/conclusions: L1D1 used Australian words the most and L1D2 the least. L2D1 and L2D2 fell between the two L1 groups. L1D2 rate of use was predicted by proportion of life spent in Australia. L2D1 were more likely to choose Australian words if they had lived in Australia longer and had positive attitudes toward Australia. L2D2 were less likely to use Australian words the longer they had lived in the USA. Similar, but not identical, factors predict second dialect acquisition in the first and second languages. Originality: The research is innovative in considering second dialect acquisition in second language speakers and creates a bridge between second language and second dialect acquisition research. Significance/implications: The finding that second language speakers may be more flexible in second dialect acquisition than first language speakers has important implications for our understanding of cognitive and social constraints on acquisition.

Securing the borders of English and Whiteness

This article examines how racial and linguistic identities are constructed on the Australian reality TV show Border Security. Based on an analysis of 108 episodes of the show involving 253 border force officers and 128 passengers, we explore how the hegemonic Australian identity of the White native speaker of English is constructed on the show. Officers are represented as a relatively uniform group of heroes devoted to protecting Australia’s national security. Simultaneously, most of them look white and sound like native speakers of Australian English. In contrast to the officers, passengers, as their antagonists, do not have a predominant racial or linguistic profile. They are represented as highly diverse. What unites them is not any racial or linguistic profile but that they represent a security risk. Threat thus comes to be mapped onto diversity. The show’s schema of heroes and antagonists invites the audience to identify with the heroes. By identifying with the White-English heroes, the audience also comes to take on their power of judgment over its diverse linguistic and racial Others. The analysis shows how the White-English identity bundle is constructed as the authoritative and legitimate position of the judging knower. The article’s main contribution is to show how the raciolinguistic construct of the White-English complex is made hegemonic in a diverse society officially committed to multiculturalism.

(IN)DEPENDENCY ON THE HEGEMONIC TO BE HEARD: NEWS-FOCUSED WECHAT OFFICIAL ACCOUNTS IN AUSTRALIA AS A CASE STUDY

This paper contextualizes an alternative perspective to a common academic discourse that ethnic media in the West provide a voice for the marginalized from the original bourgeois public sphere. The paper investigates an emergent industry – news-focused WeChat Official Accounts (hereafter WOAs) in Australia. The WOA is an information broadcasting feature launched on WeChat in August 2013 and then adopted by Australian-Chinese media entrepreneurs to produce and circulate the ethno-specific news stories among the Chinese diaspora in Australia and even beyond. From 2019 to 2020, I interviewed 24 media professionals to understand the internal working of news-focused WOAs in Australia. I argue that the anatomy of these Chinese-language digital media organizations reveals their financial independence from the nation-state in contrast to Australian hegemonic taxpayer-sponsored media. Contrary to many media scholars have argued, news-focused WOAs do not completely represent antithetical voices to Australian English media. The commercial imperative does not translate well into agonistic pluralism. News-focused WOAs are attached to the hegemonic journalism and internalize interethnic racism alongside white supremacist discourse against black people in order to be part of the dominant media structure.