Code-switching as a translatorial practice within the 
Italian national minority in Slovenia
Jerneja Umer Kljun
University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
A B ST RAC T
The paper explores the occurrence of  code-switching  as a form of translatoriality 
among members of the Italian national minority in Slovenia. As a continuation of a 
wider sociolinguistic study, which brought a comprehensive analysis of 1,389 instanc-
es of code switching between Italian and Slovene among bilingual speakers, the paper 
examines the intersection between code switching and self-translatoriality by study-
ing 85 instances of bilingual reiteration in spontaneous and semi-spontaneous speech. 
By observing these instances from the perspective of translatoriality, the paper pre-
sents a case study on the translatorial actions that occur in such bilingual utterances, 
i.e. summarizing, duplicating, expanding and complementary language practices, as 
well as their underlying motivation and purpose, while also highlighting the practice 
of intercomprehension among bilingual speakers within the culturally and linguisti-
cally diverse community of the Slovene coast. The data show that self-translatoriality 
occurs both in in-group and out-group bilingual communication, although more fre-
quently in the context of public events aimed at the broader multilingual community. 
While duplicating language practices occur in all settings, speakers often only repeat 
the nearest element, which leads to a fragmentation of the message. Translatorial ac-
tion types are also frequently combined, producing fluid bilingual utterances that pre-
suppose a plurilingual competence among all participants.
Keywords: linguistic minority, code-switching, translatoriality, self-translatoriality, 
intercomprehension
Kodno preklapljanje kot primer prevajalskosti med pripadniki 
italijanske narodne skupnosti v Sloveniji
I Z V L EČ E K
Prispevek obravnava kodno preklapljanje kot obliko prevajalskosti med pripadniki 
italijanske narodne skupnosti v Sloveniji. Izhajajoč iz obsežnejše sociolingvistične 
97Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
obravnave 1389 zgledov kodnega preklapljanja med italijanščino in slovenščino pri 
dvojezičnih govorcih, prispevek proučuje presečišče med kodnim preklapljanjem 
in samotolmačenjem. Analiza 85 zgledov dvojezičnega ponavljanja v spontanem in 
delno pripravljenem govoru z vidika prevajalskosti prinaša pregled prevodnih dejanj, 
tj. povzemanje, podvajanje, razširjanje in dopolnjevanje sporočila, do katerih priha-
ja v obravnavanih dvojezičnih izjavah, ter razkriva temeljne razloge zanje. Prispevek 
obenem osvetljuje pomen medjezikovnega razumevanja med dvojezičnimi govorci 
v večjezični skupnosti v slovenski Istri. Čeprav do samotolmačenja prihaja tako pri 
dvojezičnem sporazumevanju znotraj manjšinske skupnosti kot tudi s pripadniki 
večinske skupnosti, je veliko pogostejše v okviru javnih dogodkov, namenjenih širši 
večjezični skupnosti. Podvajanje sporočila se sicer pojavlja v vseh položajih, vendar 
govorci pogosto ponavljajo le najbližje elemente, zaradi česar prihaja do fragmentac-
ije sporočila. Prevodna dejanja se v dvojezičnem govoru pogosto tudi prepletajo, kar 
se izraža v tekočih dvojezičnih izjavah, iz katerih je razvidno, da se govorci zanašajo 
zlasti na večjezično zmožnost vseh udeležencev.
Ključne besede: jezikovna manjšina, kodno preklapljanje, prevajalskost, samopreva-
jalskost, medjezikovno razumevanje
1. Introduction
In the historically mixed, multicultural, multiethnic, and multilingual area of Slovene 
Istria,1 particularly in the bilingual municipalities of Ankaran, Koper, Izola, and Piran, 
there are two official languages, Slovene and Italian, the use of which is codified due to 
the presence of the autochthonous Italian national minority (see Kompara Lukančič, 
Lenassi, and Paolucci 2023, 12–20).2 In addition to the two official languages and the 
colloquial coastal variety of Slovene, two dialects are spoken – the Slovene Istrian 
dialect and the Istro-Venetian dialect (see Todorović 2018, 33–35), along with other 
languages and linguistic varieties “imported” by immigrant communities.
Regarding the linguistic situation of the Italian national minority, Baloh in her studies 
(Baloh 1995; Baloh 2003) notes that most of its members speak both official languages 
1 For a complete history of this long-contested territory, where the Romance and Slavic 
cultures and languages coexist, see Darovec (2023a), Darovec (2023b), Corni (2015), 
Hrobat Virloget, Gousseff, and Corni (2015), Hrobat Virloget (2021), and Pupo (2015).
2 The Italian national community is a constitutionally recognized national minority in 
Slovenia. In accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia, the autochthonous 
Italian national community is guaranteed special collective rights in various areas (e.g. 
language, culture, and education) to preserve its identity, provide equality and promote 
social inclusion, regardless of the number of its members (Benedetti et al. 2015).
98 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
– alternating the codes as required in various domains and settings – as well as the 
Istro-Venetian dialect, which has become “a bond of solidarity among members of 
the Italian national community and a central part in the socialization process of the 
Italians living in Slovenia” (Todorović 2021, 229, my translation from Slovene). The 
linguistic repertoire of the community is characterized by proficient bilingualism (Ba-
loh 1995, 143) as well as dilalia,3 since the communicative settings in which standard 
Italian and the Istro-Venetian dialect are used often overlap (cf. Umer Kljun 2024; 
Todorović 2021).
This situation of intense contact gives rise to an inevitable series of contact phenom-
ena – code-switching between Italian and Slovene being one of the most prominent 
consequences of language contact in the speech of the members of the Italian minori-
ty and the broader multicultural community of Slovene Istria (Filipi 1995; Buić 2011; 
Buić 2012; Buić 2014; Buić 2020; Umer Kljun 2015; Umer Kljun 2023).
To borrow from Koskinen (2020, 2–3), if the multilingual, multiethnic environment 
of the Slovene Istria is seen as a translation space (Cronin 2006, cited in Koskinen 
2020), “i.e. a space where translation needs to happen for mutual comprehensibility 
and where multilingual repertoires meet and mix”, the Italian minority exists in a 
“climate of constant movement between different languages” (Koskinen 2020), a situ-
ation that Koskinen defines as translatoriality.
Based on previous research on language contact between Italian and Slovene with-
in the Italian national minority in Slovenia, this article aims to observe and discuss 
the occurrence of code-switching as a translatorial action in the speech of bilinguals 
within the Italian national minority in Slovenia. While others have explored the over-
lap between code-switching and translation (see Harjunpää and Mäkilähde 2016, 
on multilingual reiteration in everyday conversations between Brazilian Portuguese 
and Finnish speakers and in early modern drama; Alvarez de la Fuente, Fernandez 
Fuertes, and Arratia Garcia 2019, on natural interpreting among bilingual children; 
Chirsheva and Houston 2020, on interlingual duplicating and childhood bilingual-
ism), the relation between the two terms has not yet been sufficiently explored. In 
this respect, I believe that the broad concept of translatoriality provides a sufficiently 
adaptable methodological framework for analysing code-switching as a self-transla-
torial practice.
3 According to Berruto (1999, 6) the term dilalia denotes a situation in which the 
hierarchical boundaries between higher and lower codes, especially when it comes to the 
relationship between language and dialect, are completely blurred.
99Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
2. Translatoriality and code-switching
2.1 Translatoriality
Deriving from Holz-Mänttäri’s concept of translatorial action (Holz-Mänttäri 1984, 
cited in Koskinen 2020) – the primary function of which is to enable functionally 
adequate communication across cultural barriers (Schäffner 2011) and which de-
notes a professional translator’s “activity that transgresses the boundaries of equiva-
lence-based search for optimal correspondence between two texts” (Koskinen 2020, 
2) – Koskela, Koskinen, and Pilke (2017) extended the scope of the term to include 
contexts of paraprofessional and non-professional translation, in which the role of the 
translator or interpreter is taken up by bilingual speakers who are not formally trained 
in translation.
Translatoriality, which “presupposes that something is repeated, reworded, revoiced, 
or recommunicated” (Koskinen and Kinnunen 2022, 9), is seen as a characteristic fea-
ture of multilingual communication, in which there are two message carriers (i.e. two 
communicative elements) that share a relevant similarity (Koskela, Koskinen, and Pil-
ke 2017, 2). Translatoriality has therefore been proposed as a clarifying term, coined 
to identify and study a wide range of practices “within a wider spectrum of operat-
ing across and within several linguistic codes” (Koskinen and Kinnunen 2022, 11). 
As Koskela, Koskinen, and Pilke (2017) observe, translatoriality often manifests in 
self-translation among bilinguals who switch between codes, providing partial sum-
marizing translations and fragmentary reiteration of their own utterances (Koskinen 
and Kinnunen 2022, 12).
Since the concept of translatoriality has already proven its usefulness in describing 
bilingual contexts in which para-professional interpreting seems to be the norm (see 
Koskela, Koskinen, and Pilke 2017 on translatoriality in bilingual formal meetings; 
Koskinen and Kinnunen 2022 on translatoriality in FL and learning; Havumetsä 2020 
on translatorial actions by journalists), it is also certain to provide further insight into 
bilinguals’ code-switching patterns, as those observed within the Italian national mi-
nority in Slovenia. Especially considering that, according to Kolehmainen, Koskinen, 
and Riionheimo (2015, cited in Koskinen and Kinnunen 2022, 12), in contexts where 
all participants share the same linguistic resources, the notion of translatoriality is 
not restricted to aiding comprehension, but can also be linked to identity display, 
emphasis, and even humour – some of the features that have also been identified in 
code-switching.
100 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
2.2 Code-switching
Following Thomason’s definition, code-switching (CS) is understood here as the “use 
of material from two (or more) languages by a single speaker in the same conversa-
tion” (Thomason 2001, 132). The juxtaposition of elements from two or more codes 
“by the same speaker in the course of a single microtext or communicative event”(Dal 
Negro and Guerini 2007, 42) has been extensively studied (Auer 2005; Auer and 
Muhamedova 2015; Dal Negro 2005; Dal Negro and Guerini 2007; Dal Negro and 
Molinelli 2002; Di Sciullo, Muysken, and Singh 1986; Edwards and Gardner-Chloros 
2007; Gardner-Chloros 2010; Gumperz 1973; Gumperz 1977; Gumperz 1982; Isurin, 
Winford, and De Bot 2009; Myers-Scotton 1993; Myers-Scotton 1997; Myers-Scot-
ton 2002; Pfaff 1979; Poplack 1980; Poplack 2004; Poplack, Wheeler, and Westwood 
1989; Poropat Jeletić 2019; Poropat Jeletić, Moscarda Mirković, and Bortoletto 2021; 
Sankoff and Poplack 1981) and remains one of the most prominent and discussed 
contact phenomena. A brief overview of the literature on CS shows it takes many 
forms and patterns that do not necessarily depend only on linguistic factors, but can 
be explained if we take into account extra-linguistic factors, such as “the political 
balance between the languages involved, the duration of the contact and the origin 
of bilingualism; the functional configuration of the linguistic repertoire, patterns of 
language use, functions, socio-symbolic meanings and the relative prestige and status 
of the two languages; attitudes towards CS and bilingualism in general; the type of in-
teractional setting, social network and conversational context; the degree of bilingual 
proficiency, gender and, last but not least, age” (Alfonzetti 2005, 96).
The transitions from one code to another, which used to be (wrongly) considered as 
random, disorganized, and even chaotic (Berruto 2003, 217) indicators of a speak-
er’s lower linguistic competence, usually fulfil specific functions in the conversational 
context and are characterized by a certain degree of intentionality (Dal Negro and 
Guerini 2007, 42). A comprehensive approach to CS revealed it to be a particularly 
useful language skill (Coulmas 2005, 113), as bilingual or plurilingual speakers who 
code-switch adapt to each other more easily and have a wider range of discourse strat-
egies at their disposal than monolingual speakers (cf. Grosjean 1985). The bilingual 
speakers’ repertoire is therefore characterized by a diverse range of linguistic resourc-
es that they can alternate, adapt, combine, and merge, especially (but not exclusively) 
in informal communication with other members of the same linguistic community.
In his seminal work on bilingual discourse strategies, Gumperz (1982) identified reit-
eration as one of the six fundamental functions of CS (along with quotation, address-
ee specification, interjection, message qualification and personalization/objectiviza-
tion). According to Gumperz (1982, 78), reiteration is a strategy by which “a message 
101Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
in one code is repeated in the other code, either literally or in somewhat modified 
form” to facilitate comprehension or emphasize what has been said, e.g. “The three 
old ones spoke nothing but Spanish. Nothing but Spanish. No hablan ingles (they did 
not speak English)” (Gumperz 1982, 78). From the perspective of this article, this is 
the point at which the study of code-switching most evidently converges with the 
concept of translatoriality, as proposed by Koskinen and Kinnunen (2022, 11), since 
the repetition of overlapping content in different codes or message-carriers highlights 
“the role of self-translatoriality in many contexts beyond professional translating and 
interpreting” (Koskinen and Kinnunen 2022, 11).
3. Aim, data and method
The aim of this article is, therefore, to observe and discuss occurrences of reiterative 
code-switching as turn-internal translatorial practices in spontaneous spoken discourse 
by bilinguals within the Italian national minority in Slovenia.
The article is a continuation of a broader sociolinguistic case-study on code-switching 
between Italian and Slovene, which proved to be a very prominent contact phenom-
enon in the spoken language of bilingual speakers within the autochthonous Italian 
national minority in Slovenia (Umer Kljun 2015; Umer Kljun 2023). The overarch-
ing goal of the research was to provide a comprehensive view of the phenomenon. 
To do so, three main objectives were set: to determine the typology of code-switch-
ing between Italian and Slovene among bilingual speakers within the Italian nation-
al minority on both structural and functional levels; to observe how conversation-
al settings, as well as the age and ethnicity of the speakers influence the occurrence 
of code-switching; and to explore the community’s attitudes towards the individual 
codes of their linguistic repertoire and towards code-switching. The fieldwork, carried 
out in collaboration with members of the community, consisted of collecting record-
ings of authentic spoken language in informal (in-group private discourse), formal 
(public discourse, events hosted by the Italian minority), and semi-formal settings 
(interview interaction with bilingual speakers). To observe extra-linguistic factors 
that might motivate language choice and code-switching, 18 bilingual speakers were 
interviewed about their perceived competence, language use and attitudes towards 
the various codes of their linguistic repertoire, bilingualism, and code-switching. 
These interactions form part of the corpus. All recordings were then transcribed, an-
notated, and analysed using the EXMARaLDA software suite (Schmidt and Wörner 
2022). The ad hoc corpus of spoken language comprises 62 recordings and approxi-
mately nine hours of transcribed speech. In the context of the study, a total of 1,389 
instances of intersentential, i.e. switching at sentence boundaries, and intrasentential 
102 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
code-switching, i.e. switching within a single sentence, clause, phrase and even within 
a word (Gardner-Chloros 2010; Winford 2003), were further analysed in accordance 
with the research objectives (see also Umer Kljun 2024).
For the purpose of this article, 85 instances of reiterative code-switching, i.e. cases 
in which there is an obvious overlapping of meaning between the spoken text seg-
ments expressed in different codes by a single speaker, have been extracted from the 
above-mentioned corpus. The CS cases, in which a reiterative function has been ob-
served, occur within a conversational turn, i.e. within a speaker’s speech sequence 
that ends when the speaker stops or is interrupted by another speaker (Verdonik and 
Zwitter Vitez 2011; Koskela, Koskinen, and Pilke 2017). Only 11 such cases were iden-
tified in the sub-corpus of spoken language in informal settings, which consists main-
ly of transcriptions of recordings of private in-group conversations in Istro-Venetian, 
Italian or a mixed Italian-Slovene sociolect. There were 26 instances of turn-internal 
reiterative CS in transcriptions of interviews, conducted in Italian, and 48 cases from 
transcriptions of recordings gathered at public cultural events, aimed at a broader 
local audience, in which the working languages were Italian, Slovene and in two in-
stances even Croatian. While such events might require the presence of a professional 
interpreter in other multilingual contexts, the events observed here presuppose a cer-
tain degree of plurilingual competence among the audience, as “knowledge of all the 
languages involved is required to understand the whole message” (Reh 2004, 14), and 
the role of the interpreter is only occasionally taken up by the moderators or speakers 
themselves.
To observe these bilingual utterances through the lens of translatoriality, the following 
research questions were proposed:
(A) What types of translatorial actions occur in this specific bilingual 
context?
(B) What is their underlying motivation and function?
To determine the type of translatorial action involved, the cases were classified in ac-
cordance with the model proposed by Reh (2004, 10–12) for the analysis of multilingual 
writing in a linguistic landscape and adapted for the study of bilingual spoken discourse 
by Koskela, Koskinen, and Pilke (2017, 471): namely, as a duplicating language prac-
tice, when the content or message expressed in the first code is fully reproduced in the 
second code; a summarizing language practice, when part of the content is condensed, 
omitted or otherwise fragmented; an expanding language practice, when there is some 
overlapping in meaning, while new information is added in the second code; and a 
103Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
complementary language practice, where there is seemingly no explicit overlapping of 
content expressed in the two codes. These instances of self-translatoriality were then 
observed in their context to understand their underlying motivation and function, and 
six categories have been identified: aiding comprehension, correction, emphasis, humour, 
addressee specification (cf. Gumperz 1982) and identity signalling.
4. Reiterative code-switching as self-interpreting
4.1 Types of actions in turn-internal translatoriality
While many of the observed cases fall neatly into one of the established categories, 
others are not as easily definable, especially when considering the wider context of the 
single turns. Cases that fall between two categories (e.g. summarizing and expanding, 
duplicating and complementary language practices, or expanding and complementa-
ry language practices) were counted in both and some examples are presented at the 
end of this section. In the bilingual utterances extracted from the corpus, the content 
produced in Slovene always appears in bold to showcase the transitions from one code 
to another. The utterances are equipped with gloss translations in square brackets and 
the observed translatorial actions are underlined or otherwise emphasized.4
Figure 1. Types of translatorial action in different bilingual settings.
4  See the additional transcription symbols in the Appendix.
104 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
4.1.1 Duplicating
Duplicating, i.e. reproducing or repeating content in another code, is the only trans-
latorial action that occurs in all of the observed settings. While code-switching – in 
general – is most prominent in informal settings, there are not many cases of dupli-
cating in the sub-corpus. Examples 1a-c include some cases of duplication in informal 
conversations among peers, in which self-translatoriality serves to clarify the message 
(1a-b) or to illustrate an appropriate expression after some perceived miscommuni-
cation (1c).
Example 1a
Šunka sir ́va bene ̀ prosciutto e formaggio. Di quello là c’ è solo: šunka 
sir.
[Ham, cheese, okay, ham and cheese. Of that one there is only ham, 
cheese.]
Example 1b 
non so ̀ se lei la sa ̀ se non la sa ̀ • • questo iera ́ • • ə • • / noi paghemo l’ 
agiun ́/ la / l’ asicurazion agiuntiva. ((1,3s)) Dodatno zavarovanje.
[I don’t know if you know it or not, it was this/ we pay supplementary 
insurance. Supplementary insurance.]
Example 1c 
Speaker 1: Vabbe che ́ come te dis ̇i ̀ mi bi rade?
 [Okay that, how do you say we would like?]
Speaker 2: Non stame domandar ̀ adeso mi ̀ non so!
 [Don’t ask me now, I don’t know!]
Speaker 1: Non so. • • Perché mi volevo dir ̀ mi bi rade ́ …
 [I don’t know. Because I wanted to say we would like …]
Speaker 2: No:. Noi volesimo ordinar. Ordinar. Mi bi želeli ̀ naročiti ́no ́ 
non … Attenta ((ime)) che ṡe il birillo ́ in strada! ((smeh))
 [No. We would like to order. Order. We would like to order, no, not … 
Careful ((name)) there is a traffic cone on the road! ((laughter))]
Speaker 1: Dovevo dì “mi bi rade naročile” ́e inveze go dito “mi bi rade 
dobile.” ((smeh))
105Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
[I should have said we would like to order and instead I said we would 
like to get.” ((laughter))]
Speaker 2: Dobile. Che ṡe un sinonimo no ́ • però diṡemo che podessi 
esser anche mal interpretado.
 [Get. Which is a synonym no, but let’s say it could be also misinterpret-
ed.] 
As presented in Examples 2a-d below, in semi-formal settings, i.e. interviews, con-
ducted in Italian, duplicating consists mostly of single words insertions, usually ac-
companied by commentary (e.g. per farti capire “to make you understand, for you 
to understand”) or pauses. Knowing that the interviewer is a native speaker of Slo-
vene, the interviewees tend to repeat single concepts in Slovene, to make sure they are 
understood.
Example 2a
La ((ustanova))  ́ è un’ associazione. • • Per farti capire ́društvo.
[The ((institution)) is an association. To make you understand, an association.]
Example 2b
E: io in questo momento sono in pausa parto • • • in porodniška.
[And at this moment I am on maternity leave … on maternity leave.]
Example 2c
Sempre di questo: br: i/ m: ingegneria civile ́ gradbeništvo ́sarebbe ́ e dopo ha 
fatto anche la facoltà.
[Still about this civil engineering civil engineering that would be and then he 
went to university.]
Example 2d
È belissimo ́ perché ̀ ə: già il: / ə: il bando ́ il razpis ́ no ́ lo mete fuori in istroveneto.
[It’s beautiful because the call the call, no, is published in Istrovenetian.]
In formal settings, especially in the case of three cultural events, co-hosted by Italian 
and Slovene associations, and aimed at a wider local audience, duplicating is most 
clearly discernible in opening greetings and closings. 
Example 3a 
Grazie ́ • • hvala lepa ́al • • direttore del ((ustanova)) ̀ • • direktorju • • • ə 
((ustanove))
[Thanks … many thanks to … the head of the ((institution)) … the head of the 
((institution))]
106 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
Example 3b 
Stimati ̀ • • ospiti ́ spettabile pubblico ́ • • • permettete di porgervi il saluto a 
nome della ((ustanova)) di capodistria. • • • Cenjeni gosti ́ spoštovana publika 
́ lep pozdrav ́ • •in dobrodošli ́ na sedežu ((ustanove)) Koper.
[Dear guests, esteemed audience … allow me to greet you on behalf of the ((in-
stitution)) of Capodistria. Distinguished guest, esteemed audience, greetings 
and welcome to the ((institution)) headquarters in Koper.]
Example 3c
Najprej lep pozdrav vsem ́ • • un cordiale saluto a tutti quanti.
[First, a warm greeting to all. A warm greeting to all.]
Example 3d
Vi ringrazio. Hvala lepa. ((aplavz))
[Thank you. Thank you very much.]
After these brief bilingual introductions, addressing both Italian and Slovene speakers 
and audience members, each speaker is free to continue in their preferred code and 
there is little to no further explicit translatorial activity on their part. In doing so, 
the participants rely on receptive multilingualism or intercomprehension, which entails 
reciprocal understanding between speakers of two different mother tongues, where 
each participant uses their own language while understanding the language of oth-
ers. Although intercomprehension is traditionally seen as a process that takes place 
between languages within a language family (Schlamberger Brezar 2020, 104), in the 
context of the broader Slovene-Italian linguistic community in Istria this bilingual 
practice signals a respectful attitude towards the language and culture of the other, as 
it allows all participants “to be on a fairly equal footing” (Perko 2020, 156). According 
to Zeevaert (2007, 105, emphasis added), receptive multilingualism can be defined as: 
(…) a reasonable option of communication between languages that are 
unrelated or only remotely related – under the condition that all speak-
ers involved are familiar with both languages, and provided that the 
speakers have only a passive competence at their disposal (either because 
only a passive competence was acquired, because one or more of the 
speakers are less advanced learners or because of a lack of language prac-
tice) or that the interlocutors prefer to use their own mother tongue 
in spite of an available active competence (either because they feel able 
to express themselves better in their first language or to mark their lin-
guistic identity in a multilingual environment). 
107Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
In the context of the wider bilingual community of the Slovene coast described here, 
such practices can be seen as a conscious effort by members of the two national groups 
to overcome past conflicts and even as a means of preventing linguistic discrimination 
and assimilation of the linguistic minority (see Umer Kljun 2024).
4.1.2 Summarizing – fragmentary multilingualism
Example 4 below illustrates the fragmentary nature of summarizing as a turn-internal 
translatorial action in a lengthier excerpt of spoken language in a formal setting. The 
purpose of the event, hosted by a local Italian cultural association, was to present the 
Italian national minority to university students of Italian and Slovene. As some of the 
students did not speak Italian, one of the presenters, who is of mixed Italian-Slovene 
ethnic background and fluent in both languages, engaged in self-translatoriality by 
either interpreting only the nearest elements (effectively duplicating single phrases or 
key words) or omitting commentary and information, thus condensing the presenta-
tion of several cultural associations to a simple enumeration of their activities, and 
producing a highly fragmented text.
Example 4
Presenter 1: Cominciamo dalla musica ́ začnemo z glasbo ́ abbiamo i piccoli ́ i 
minicantanti ̀ • • •ǝ: mlade glasbenike ́ che m::: • • più che venire in co-
munità ́ • • è la comunità ad andare da loro ́ quindi • • si fanno a scuola. • 
• Le loro / Le loro prove si fanno a scuola ́• • poi abbiamo il coro ́ • • zbor 
́ • • poi abbiamo: ǝ: il gruppo di mandolini  ́/
 [Let’s start with music let’s start with music, we have the little ones, the 
little singers, the little musicians, who … it’s not that they come to us 
it’s the community that goes to them, so they take place at school. Their 
lessons take place at school. Then we have the choir the choir and then 
we have the mandolin group /]
Presenter 2: La filodramatica.
 [The theatre group.]
Presenter 1: Cominciamo dalla musica perché se no ̀ comincio a dire ((neraz.)) 
• e dimentico tre quarti. • • • I mandolini ́ • • e poi abbiamo in casa Tartini 
 ́un corso di ̀ • tečaj  ̀pianoforte ́ • • klavir ́ violino ́ e • • chitarra. • • • Poi / 
 [Let’s start with music or I’ll start to say ((unintelligible)) and will forget 
half of it. The mandolins and then we have in the Tartini house a course 
of a course piano piano, violin and guitar.]
108 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
Presenter 3: E mandolino.
 [And mandolin.]
Presenter 2: E: ma ha già deto.
 [She already said that.]
Presenter 3: Ah sì perché l’ ha già dettò scusami.
     [Ah, yes, because you already said that, sorry.]
Presenter 1: Ho detto mandolino? • • • ((smeh)) Poi c’ è il gruppo dei pittori ́ • 
• • ǝ slikarji ́ il grupo dei ceramisti ́ • • ((pokaže izdelke)) di keramika ́ 
• lì ́ e:h? • • • E:: il gru/ un gruppo etnografico ́ la famea dei salineri ́ • ǝ: 
se pravi solinarska družina ́ che è quel gruppo che dovrebbe ̀ / • • che 
mantiene ̀ le tradizioni ̀ • ǝ della vita e del lavoro l/ legato alle saline di 
pirano ́
 [Did I say mandolin? ((laughter)) Then there’s a group of painters, paint-
ers, a group of ceramists, ((points to the artwork)) of ceramics, there. 
And the ethnographic group, the salt makers family, that is to say, the 
salt makers family, which is the group that should/ that preserves the 
traditions of the life and work at the salt pans of Piran.]
Listener 1: E si esibisce ́ no ́ anche?
 [And they perform as well?]
Presenter 1: E si esibisce ́ • • ǝm:: il gruppo della filodrammatica ́ dramska 
skupina ́ che anche ogni anno:: ́ • • • fa una propria produzione ́ • • in 
dialeto ́ • • vero? O in dialeto ́ o in lingua ̀ ma • per la maggior parte gli 
ultimi anni almeno ́ da quando • sono io qua ́ e: in dialetto ́ • • • se pravi 
dramska skupina v dialektu in v italijanščini ̀ • • e poi insomma quelli 
che dimentico ̀ no? ((neraz.)) Il gruppo fotografico ́ ((1.5s)) e: il gruppo 
al tempo di tartini. Perché quest’anno ́ ǝ: • • ma già dagli ultimi: ̀• • paio 
d/ anni ́ abbiamo deciso di dedicarci ̀ un • • po’ di più al settecento vene-
ziano ́ e alla vita di tartini e cerchiamo di ̀ • • ripercorrere la sua vita ́ e • 
• fare anche dei percorsi ́ guidati ́ attraverso • • gli ambienti che: gli ospiti 
possono visitare. • • • Torej zadnja leta se ukvarjamo ̀ / se ukvarjamo 
• •imamo novo skupino: ́ ki se ukvarja z • • oblačili ́ in Tartinijevim 
življenjem ̀ in delom. • •
 [And they perform. The theatre group, the theatre group, that makes a 
production every year, in dialect, right? Either in dialect or in Italian, 
but at least in the last few years mostly, since I’ve been here, in dialect, 
109Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
that is to say, a theatre group in dialect or Italian. And then in short 
all those who I forget, no? The photography group and the group In 
Tartini’s time. Because this year, but in the last few years as well, we 
decided to focus more on the Venetian 18th century and to Tartini’s life 
and we try to retrace his life and also make guided tours through the 
environments that guests can visit. So, in the past years we have been 
focusing / we have a new group dealing with the clothing and Tartini’s 
life and works.]
These single-word switches that are intended by the speaker as a form of translation 
into Slovene are frequently preceded by pauses (un corso di ̀ • tečaj  ̀pianoforte ́ • • 
klavir ́ “a course of … course piano … piano”) and filler sounds (Poi c’ è il gruppo 
dei pittori ́ • • • ǝ slikarji ́ “Then there’s a group of painters … uhm, painters”), while 
longer target-language segments are introduced by “so” (torej) or “that is to say” (se 
pravi). Although it was the speaker’s intention to render their own words in Slovene 
to facilitate comprehension among those who do not speak Italian, it is quite clear 
that speaker presupposes at least a passive command of Italian on the part of the 
listeners.
4.1.3 Expanding
Expanding is observed in those cases of self-translatoriality when there is some over-
lapping in meaning while new information is added. In an interview, an expansion 
can be as simple as adding a modifier to an inserted noun phrase (5a) to further clarify 
or better illustrate the situation the speaker is describing (that is, why she relies on her 
husband when dealing with issues in Slovene). In formal settings, as those described 
in Example 3 above, speakers tend to expand when reiterating a greeting in the sec-
ond code, which can be interpreted either as an indication of their own affiliation to 
a particular institution/community/group (5b) or the affiliation of the person who is 
about to take turn speaking (5c).
Example 5a
E: adesso sto ricu ̀/ perché anche mio marito adesso sta: ̀/ ha fatto un corso: ́• 
tečaj ́ slovenščine ́ • • allora gli dico sempre ̀ “((ime)) ma che sklon è questo ̀ 
come fa questo ́”
[And now I am re/ because even my husband now / completed a course a course 
of Slovene ... so I always tell him “((name)) which case is this, how do you say 
this?”]
110 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
Example 5b
Lep pozdrav ́ vsem prisotnim ̀cordiale ́ • • (quindi) saluto a nome: ̀ • • della 
((ustanova)) di ̀• • • di Capodistria.
[Greetings to all the people present warm greetings on behalf of the ((institu-
tion)) of Capodistria]
Example 5c
Ecco ora io non mi dilungerei ́ • • cederei subito la parola ̀ • • agli esperti ́ • • torej 
• ǝ: predajam besedo ̀ • tokrat • • • v vlogi strokovnjaka ̀ kot umetnostne-
ga zgodovinarja ̀ • •ki bo predstavil zbornik ́ • • profesor ́ • ((ime)). Izvolite.
[So now I wouldn‘t want to take-up any more time, I‘d like to immediately give 
the floor to the experts. So I‘m giving the floor to – this time in the role of an 
expert as an art historian who will present the book of proceedings – professor 
((name)). Please.]
Whichever the case, part of the message is only expressed in one of the codes. Sim-
ilarly, expanding can also be observed in the context of the formal event, described 
in Example 4 above. When interpreting their own speech for the benefit of a Slo-
vene-speaking audience, the speaker expands on what has been said by commenting 
on it, expressing an opinion (6a), or adding information that they consider important, 
but which was not previously included (6b).
Example 6a
• • Se/ finanziamenti permettendo. Vedno smo odvisni tudi mi ̀ na žalost ̀ 
predvsem od denarja.
[If/ funding permitting. We are always dependent, unfortunately, primarily on 
money too.]
Example 6b
E: c’ è l’ asilo ́ • • la scuola per l’ infanzia ́vrtec ́ ((ustanova)) ́ e anche la scuola: ́ / 
• il ginnasio ((ustanova)). Gimnazija. • Tudi ̀ • z italijanskim učnim jezikom.
[And there is a kindergarten, the preschool preschool ((institution)) and also 
the school / the secondary school ((institution)). The secondary school. Also 
with Italian as the language of instruction.]
4.1.4 Complementary language practice and combining TA types
Unlike Koskela, Koskinen, and Pilke (2017), who refer to complementary language 
practices, i.e. cases in which there is no overlap between the contents produced in the 
111Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
two codes, as non-translatorial, data from the corpus of bilingual spoken discourse 
of members of the Italian national minority in Slovenia suggests an implicit transla-
toriality. Although not explicitly duplicated or otherwise interpreted, the following 
cases from informal in-group conversations show how the contents produced in the 
two codes are connected, either through intensification (7a) or attenuation (7b). The 
alternating segments in different codes quite literally complement one another (cf. 
message qualification (Gumperz 1982), i.e. CS, in which a segment produced in the 
second code defines or completes the previous utterance), thus producing a fluid bi-
lingual speech.
Example 7a
Non lo soporto organicamente. Mi gre na bruh ́ propio perché ṡe un / il cialtro-
ne ́ • che è diventato famoso.
[I can’t stand him physically. He makes me sick, just because he is a slob who 
became famous.]
Statement  > intensification  > elaboration 
Example 7b
Ah ṡe:: ̀ zbirčen ̀ṡe:: ((1,3s)) delicato ciò! ((smeh))
[Ah, he is choosy, he is  delicate ((laughter))]
statement   > attenuation
Several translatorial actions can also be combined: Example 8 below illustrates sum-
marizing (“the association is based on voluntary work”) combined with expanding 
(“and none of us are employed here”).
Example 8
Il lavoro della comunità degli italiani • • • è un lavoro di volontariato noi siamo 
tutti volontari ((1,2s)) La parte /• • torno a ripetere. La parte culturale ́ è una 
parte di volontari ́ • • ǝ: se pravi kulturni del društva ̀ / društvo deluje na os-
novi prostovoljnega dela ́ in nihče od nas tukaj ni zaposlen ́
[The work of the Italian community is voluntary work we are all volunteers. The 
part/ I will repeat myself. The cultural section is a section of volunteers. That is 
to say, the cultural section of the association / the association is based on vol-
untary work and none of us are employed here]
In Example 9a, the speaker starts off in Slovene, elaborates on the first utterance in 
Italian (italics), duplicates the content of the Italian utterance in Slovene (underlined), 
and finally adds further information in Italian, which remains uninterpreted (italics).
112 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
Example 9a
Tam se pa prijavimo ́ kot katero dr/ koli drugo kulturno društvo. ((1,5s)) Con la 
differenza ́ che noi ci occupiamo ́ di • cultura • italiana. ((1,4s)) Z razliko ́ da 
s:e mi ukvarjamo ́ • • pretežno ́ z italijansko kul/ kulturo ́ anche se siamo molto 
aperti anche alla maggioranza.
[There we apply as any other cultural association. With the difference that we 
deal with Italian culture. With the difference that we deal mostly with Italian 
culture even though we are quite open to the majority.]
Examples 9b-c below illustrate duplicating combined with expanding and comple-
mentary language practices.
Example 9b
((kašelj)) ǝ:: In questa casa ́ • • funzionano:: ̀ / hanno / trovano spazio: ́ le sezioni 
́ • che operano ́ presso la nostra comunità • • • Torej v tej hiši ̀ domujejo dru/ 
m:: • • sekcije našega društva ́ naše skupnosti ́ • • e sono tante ́ e ne dimentico 
sempre qualcuna ́ per questo chiamo sempre due aiutanti ́ no?
[((cough)) In this house function, have, find their space the sections that oper-
ate within our community. So this house is home to sections of our association, 
of our community and there are many and I always forget some this is why I 
always call for two assistants, no?]
Example 9c
Lepa hvala ́ • grazie ́ • a ((ime)) ́ curatrice ̀ di questo volume ́ • • • ecco ora siamo 
giunti ̀ • • • ala fine quasi ̀ • e io • • • vedo tanti autori ́ • • colaboratori ́ • cederei 
la parola se qualcuno ̀ ((1,5s)) ha voglia di fare qualche intervento? • • Če je m/ 
mogoče ̀ kdo med vami ̀ da bi želel še kaj ̀ dodati? ((4,0s)) Sembra di no ́ siamo 
un po’ stanchi ́forse.
[Many thanks, thanks, to ((name)) the editor of this volume … so now we have 
come to the end, and I see many authors, contributors, I would like to give the 
floor if anyone feels like adding something? Is there someone among you who 
would like to add anything? Apparently not, we are a bit tired, maybe.]
These sequences and combinations of different types of TA further highlight the fluid-
ity of such bilingual practice, proving that – even at public events – the bilingual speak-
ers who engage in self-translatoriality assume that everyone involved speaks both lan-
guages, while also signalling a preference for intercomprehension over interpreting.
113Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
4.2 Motivation for self-translatoriality and its purpose
Self-translatoriality, as already indicated in Example 5 above, is not limited to inter-
preting and facilitating comprehension: for instance, in Example 10a, when asked 
about their preference between Italian and Slovene, the speaker responds with con-
viction, repeating the last utterance in Slovene, to add emphasis and humour; further-
more, Examples 10b-d illustrate how speakers engage in self-translatoriality to correct 
an (unintentional) insertion. In many of these cases the transitions between codes are 
marked by pauses, laughter, or commentary.
Example 10a
No:: l’ italiano assolutamente. Non esiste. • • Non c’ è paragone. • • *Ni 
primerjave*.
[No, Italian, absolutely. It doesn’t exist. There is no comparison. There is no 
comparison.]
Example 10b
ad esempio ̀ l’ altro giorno ̀ mia mamma ́ • • è entrata in una biblioteca ́ • • in 
una libreria ̀ scusa ́• • quella lì di fronte ala tržnica ́ di fronte al merca/… Mia 
nona ́ non gavesi dito mai tržnica.
[for example, the other day my mum went to a library … a bookshop, sorry … 
that one in front of the market, in front of the mark/ … My grandma would 
have never said market.]
Example 10c
E lei ha detto ̀ “sì però se tu fai decidere ̀ • • il capitalismo ́ al fine sei una: / una 
cunja ̀” *non so cosa ha deto* ̀ uno straccio.
[And she said “yes but if you let capitalism decide, in the end you are a rag” I 
don’t know what she said a rag.]
Example 10d
Avevo ̀ • • un nonno ̀ che viveva a Lubiana ́ che era čebelar ́ • • apicoltore ́ • • • 
e::m::: e loro ́ so che mi:: insegnavano::: ̀ ((1,9s)) lo sloveno.
[I had a grandfather who lived in Ljubljana and he was a beekeeper … a bee-
keeper … and they, I know they taught me Slovene.]
Example 10e
In veste kako je blo hecno ́ ne? • • Cosa era interessante ̀ no? • • Che allora ̀ • 
• noi naturalmente non possedevamo nessuna fotografia ̀ niente ̀sua di lui  ̀no?
114 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
[And you know how funny it was no? What was interesting, no? That at the 
time we did not possess any photo, nothing, of him, no?] 
As observed before in the case of opening greetings, self-translatoriality can also over-
lap with addressee specification (cf. Gumperz 1982) and serve as a symbolic gesture 
expressing openness and respect towards the other culture. Moreover, it may signal 
the speakers’ identity through language choice (cf. Koskinen and Kinnunen 2022, 12), 
as illustrated in case 10e above, in which the presenter at the meeting with the univer-
sity students starts their turn in Slovene, reformulates their utterance and continues in 
Italian, presumably to highlight their role as a representative of the Italian community.
5. Conclusion
The purpose of this article has been to observe the occurrence of code-switching as a 
form of translatoriality among members of the Italian national minority in Slovenia. 
Following the model proposed by Reh (2004) and expanded upon by Koskela, Koski-
nen, and Pilke (2017), 85 instances of self-translatoriality (or reiterations according to 
Gumperz 1982, 78) from spontaneous and semi-spontaneous speech were observed 
in terms of duplicating, summarizing, expanding and complementary language prac-
tices. The analysis shows that while self-translatoriality occurs both in in-group and 
out-group bilingual communication in different (informal, semi-formal and formal) 
settings, it is far more frequent in the context of public events hosted or co-hosted by 
the Italian national minority that were open to the broader multilingual community, 
i.e. in situations that would usually call for interpreting. Furthermore, the analysis 
indicates that although duplicating language practices occur in all settings, speakers 
often repeat only the nearest element, either single words or phrases, which can some-
times lead to a fragmentation of the message. Moreover, all four TA types are often 
combined, producing fluid bilingual utterances that presuppose a certain degree of 
plurilingual competence among all participants.
In addition to speakers making sure they are understood or engaging in self-transla-
toriality to aid comprehension, these language practices are also motivated by other 
reasons: speakers often correct themselves after a single-word switch or reiterate what 
has been said to add emphasis and humour. The data also show that self-translatori-
ality signals speakers’ identities and – particularly in the case of duplicating greetings 
and opening formulas in formal settings – often overlaps with addressee specifica-
tion. The case study also unveiled the value of translatoriality as a symbolic gesture 
within the multilingual community of Slovene Istria, in which intercomprehension 
is perceived as a desirable practice that acknowledges the importance and value of 
115Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
both official languages as well as a discursive strategy that reveals a respectful attitude 
towards the culture of the Other and promotes plurilingualism and the coexistence of 
multiple local cultural identities.
References
Alfonzetti, Giovanna. 2005. “Intergenerational variation in codeswitching. Some re-
marks.” Rivista di Linguistica 17 (1): 93–112.
Álvarez de la Fuente, Esther, Raquel Fernández Fuertes, and Óscar Arratia García. 
2018. “Bilingual Children as Interpreters in Everyday Life: How Natural Interpret-
ing Reinforces Minority Languages.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural De-
velopment 40 (4): 338–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2018.1518985.
Auer, Peter. 2005. “A postscript: code-switching and social identity.” Journal of Prag-
matics 37 (3): 403–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.10.010. 
Auer, Peter, and Raihan Muhamedova. 2015. “’Embedded language’ and ‘matrix lan-
guage’ in insertional language mixing: Some problematic cases.” Rivista di Linguis-
tica 17 (1): 35–54. 
Baloh, Barbara. 1995. “Položaj slovenščine pri italijanski narodnostni skupnosti v 
slovenski Istri.” Jezik in slovstvo 41 (3): 129–48.
Baloh, Barbara. 2003. “Vzorci govornega vedenja pri pripadnikih italijanske narodne 
skupnosti v slovenski Istri.” MA thesis. Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana.
Benedetti, Ezio, Breda Mulec, Zaira Vidau, Robert Štoka, Maurizio Tremul, Devan 
Jagodic, Adriana Janežič, et al. 2015. Analiza, izvajanje in razvoj zaščite narodnih 
skupnosti v Sloveniji in Italiji. Koper: Italijanska unija.
Berruto, Gaetano. 1999. “Le varietà del repertorio.” In Introduzione all’italiano con-
temporaneo. Vol. I: La variazione e gli usi, edited by Alberto Sobrero, 3–36. Roma 
and Bari: Laterza.
Berruto, Gaetano. 2003. Fondamenti di sociolinguistica. Roma and Bari: Laterza.
Buić, Mirna. 2011. “Jezikovni stik med slovenščino in italijanščino v luči jezikovnih 
ideologij in praks dveh generacij v Izoli.” In Meddisciplinarnost v slovenistiki, edit-
ed by Simona Kranjc, 69–74. Ljubljana: Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete.
Buić, Mirna. 2012. “Proučevanje jezika v urbanem okolju Izole: večjezične govorne 
prakse z vidika jezikovnih ideologij govorcev.” In Antropološki vidiki načinov živl-
jenja v mestih, edited by Jaka Repič and Jože Hudales, 255–76. Znanstvena založba 
Filozofske fakultete.
Buić, Mirna. 2014. “Language Ideologies and Speech Practices in the Istrian Town 
of Izola: Selected Examples.” In The New European Frontiers: Social and Spatial 
(Re)Integration Issues in Multicultural and Border Regions, edited by Milan Bufon, 
116 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
Julian Vincent Minghi, and Anssi Paasi, 154–72. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge 
Scholars Publishing.
Buić, Mirna. 2020. “Kodno preklapljanje v luči jezikovnih ideologij govorcev v sloven-
ski Istri.” Glasnik slovenskega etnološkega društva 60 (1): 78–89.
Chirsheva, Galina, and Marina Houston. 2020. “Interlingual duplicating in the speech 
of bilingual children.” SHS Web of Conferences 88: 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1051/
shsconf/20208801011. 
Corni, Gustavo. 2015. “Commentary.” In At Home but Foreigners: Population Transfers 
in 20th Century Istria, edited by Katja Hrobat Virloget, Catherine Gousseff, and 
Gustavo Corni, 15–23. Koper: Univerza na Primorskem, Znanstveno-raziskovalni 
center, Založba Annales.
Coulmas, Florian. 2005. Sociolinguistics. The Study of Speakers’ Choices. Cambridge: 
Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.
Cronin, Michael. 2006. Translation and Identity. London and New York: Routledge. 
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203015698. 
Dal Negro, Silvia. 2005. “Il codeswitching in contesti minoritari soggetti a regressione 
linguistica.” Rivista linguistica 17 (1): 157–178.
Dal Negro, Silvia, and Francesca Guerini. 2007. Contatto. Dinamiche ed esiti del pluri-
linguismo. Roma: Aracne.
Dal Negro, Silvia, and Piera Molinelli, eds. 2002. Comunicare nella torre di Babele: 
repertori plurilingui in Italia oggi. Roma: Carocci. 
Darovec, Darko. 2023a. Kratka zgodovina Istre. Koper: Zgodovinsko društvo za južno 
Primorsko, Založba Annales; Čentur: Inštitut IRRIS. Accessed June 10, 2024. 
https://zdjp.si/kratka-zgodovina-istre-e-izdaja/.
Darovec, Darko. 2023b. Pregled zgodovine Istre. Koper: Zgodovinsko društvo za 
južno Primorsko, Založba Annales; Čentur: Inštitut IRRIS za raziskave, razvoj 
in strategije družbe, kulture in okolja. Accessed June 10, 2024. https://zdjp.si/
pregled-zgodovine-istre-e-izdaja/.
Di Sciullo, Anne-Marie, Pieter Muysken, and Rajendra Singh. 1986. “Government 
and code-mixing.” Journal of Linguistics 22 (1): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0022226700010537. 
Edwards, Malcolm, and Penelope Gardner-Chloros. 2007. “Compound verbs in code-
switching: Bilinguals making do?” International Journal of Bilingualism 11 (1): 73–
91. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069070110010501. 
Filipi, Goran. 1995. “Psevdoizposojenke (na istrskih primerih).” Annales. Series histo-
ria et sociologia 6: 139–42.
Gardner-Chloros, Penelope. 2010. “Contact and Code-Switching.” In The Handbook 
of Language Contact, edited by Raymond Hickey, 188–207. Malden and Oxford: 
Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444318159.ch9. 
117Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
Grosjean, François. 1985. “The Bilingual as a Competent but Specific Speaker-Hearer.” 
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 6: 467–77. https://doi.org/1
0.1080/01434632.1985.9994221. 
Gumperz, John. 1973. “La comunità linguistica.” In Linguaggio e società, edited by 
Pierpaolo Giglioli, 269–80. Bologna: Il mulino.
Gumperz, John. 1977. “Sociocultural knowledge in conversational inference.” In Lin-
guistics and Anthropology, edited by Muriel Saville-Troike, 191–212. Washington: 
Georgetown University Press.
Gumperz, John. 1982. Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834. 
Harjunpää, Katariina, and Aleksi Mäkilähde. 2016. “Reiteration: at the intersec-
tion of code-switching and translation.” Multilingua 35 (2): 163–201. https://doi.
org/10.1515/multi-2015-0036. 
Havumetsä, Nina. 2020. “Instances of Translatorial Action: A Journalist as a Translat-
ing Reporter of Speech.” Perspectives 28 (3): 440–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907
676X.2019.1623270. 
Holz-Mänttäri, Justa. 1984. Translatorisches Handeln: Theorie und Methode. Helsinki: 
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
Hrobat Virloget, Katja. 2021. V tišini spomina: ‘eksodus’ in Istra. Koper: Založ-
ba Univerze na Primorskem; Trst: Založništvo tržaškega tiska. https://doi.
org/10.26493/978-961-293-062-2.
Hrobat Virloget, Katja, Catherine Gousseff, and Gustavo Corni, eds. 2015. At Home 
but Foreigners: Population Transfers in 20th Century Istria. Koper: University of 
Primorska, Science and Research Centre, Annales University Press.
Isurin, Ludmila, Donald Winford, and Kees de Bot, eds. 2009. Multidisciplinary Ap-
proaches to Code-Switching. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://
doi.org/10.1075/sibil.41. 
Kolehmainen, Leena, Kaisa Koskinen, and Helka Riionheimo. 2015. “Arjen näky-
mätön kääntäminen. Translatorisen toiminnan jatkumot.” Virittäjä 119 (3): 372–
400. https://doi.org/10.1111/1559-8918.2015.01044. 
Kompara Lukančič, Mojca, Nives Lenassi, and Sandro Paolucci. 2023. Bilingualism in 
Slovenian Istria: Studies and Issues in Its Preservation. Maribor: University of Mar-
ibor, University Press. https://doi.org/10.18690/um.2.2023.
Koskela, Merja, Kaisa Koskinen, and Nina Pilke. 2017. “Bilingual Formal Meeting 
as a Context of Translatoriality.” Target 29 (3): 464–85. https://doi.org/10.1075/
target.16017.kos. 
Koskinen, Kaisa. 2020. “Translatorial Linguistic Ethnography in Organizations.” 
In Managing Multilingual Workplaces: Methodological, Empirical and Pedagogic 
118 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
Perspectives, edited by Sierk Horn, Philippe Lecomte, and Susanne Tietze, 60–78. 
London and New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429431128-6. 
Koskinen, Kaisa, and Tuija Kinnunen. 2022. “Mediation in FL Learning.” Stridon 2 
(1): 5–29. https://doi.org/10.4312/stridon.2.1.5-29. 
Myers-Scotton, Carol. 1993. Social motivations for codeswitching: evidence from Africa. 
Oxford: Clarendon Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198239055.001.0001. 
Myers-Scotton, Carol. 1997. Duelling languages: grammatical structure in codeswitch-
ing. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Myers-Scotton, Carol. 2002. Contact linguistics: bilingual encounters and gram-
matical outcomes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/
acprof:oso/9780198299530.001.0001. 
Perko, Gregor. 2020. “Medjezikovno (ne)razumevanje: zgodovinski vpogled na pri-
meru bivše Jugoslavije.” In Intercomprehensio Slavica, edited by Roland Marti, 
Patrice Pognan, and Mojca Schlamberger Brezar, 155–62. Ljubljana: Znanstvena 
založba Filozofske fakultete.
Pfaff, Carol W. 1979. “Constraints on Language Mixing: Intrasentential Code-Switch-
ing and Borrowing in Spanish/English.” Language 55 (2): 291–318. https://doi.
org/10.2307/412586. 
Poplack, Shana. 1980. “Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en es-
pañol: toward a typology of code-switching.” Linguistics 18 (7–8): 581–618. https://
doi.org/10.1515/ling.1980.18.7-8.581. 
Poplack, Shana. 2004. “Codeswitching.” In Sociolinguistics: An International Hand-
book of the Science of Language and Society, edited by Ulrich Ammon, 589–96. 
Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Poplack, Shana, Susan Wheeler, and Anneli Westwood. 1989. “Distinguishing lan-
guage contact phenomena: evidence from Finnish-English bilingualism.” World 
Englishes 8 (3): 389–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1989.tb00677.x. 
Poropat Jeletić, Nada. 2019. “Dijatopijska rasprostranjenost recepcije kodnoga prekl-
jučivanja u Istri.” Annales. Series historia et sociologia 29 (2): 259–272. 
Poropat Jeletić, Nada, Eliana Moscarda Mirković, and Anna Bortoletto. 2021. “Incidenza 
e implicazioni di alcuni tratti formali pertinenti tipici del discorso bilingue istriano: i 
casi di commutazione di codice.” Annales. Series historia et sociologia 31 (2): 329–40.
Pupo, Raoul. 2015. “Italian Historiography on the Istrian Exodus: Topics and Perspec-
tives.” In At Home but Foreigners: Population Transfers in 20th Century Istria, edit-
ed by Katja Hrobat Virloget, Catherine Gousseff, and Gustavo Corni, 25–47. Ko-
per: Univerza na Primorskem, Znanstveno-raziskovalni center, Založba Annales.
Reh, Mechthild. 2004. “Multilingual Writing: A Reader-Oriented Typology – with Ex-
amples from Lira Municipality (Uganda).” International Journal of the Sociology of 
Language 170: 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2004.2004.170.1. 
119Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121
Sankoff, David, and Shana Poplack. 1981. “A formal grammar for code-switching.” 
Papers in linguistics 14: 3–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351818109370523. 
Schäffner, Christina. 2011. “Theory of translatorial action.” In Handbook of Transla-
tion Studies. Volume 2, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 157–62. 
Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.2.the1. 
Schlamberger Brezar, Mojca. 2020. “Medjezikovno razumevanje na področju bivše 
Jugoslavije – slovenščina in srbohrvaščina.” In Intercomprehensio Slavica, edited by 
Roland Marti, Patrice Pognan, and Mojca Schlamberger Brezar, 103–18. Ljubljana: 
Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete. 
Schmidt, Thomas, and Kai Wörner. 2022. “EXMARaLDA – Creating, Analysing and 
Sharing Spoken Language Corpora for Pragmatic Research.” Pragmatics 19 (4): 
565–82. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.19.4.06sch. 
Thomason, Sarah G. 2001. Language Contact. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/03032-1. 
Todorović, Suzana. 2018. Raznovrstnost narečnih govorov na koprskem: Bertoki, Puče, 
Sveti Anton. Koper: Libris.
Todorović, Suzana. 2021. “Istrobeneščina med pripadniki italijanske narodne man-
jšine v slovenski Istri.” Razprave in gradivo 87: 211–31. https://doi.org/10.36144/
rig87.dec21.211-231. 
Umer Kljun, Jerneja. 2015. “Dojemanje mešane identitete in kodnega preklapljanja 
med pripadniki italijanske narodne skupnosti v slovenski Istri.” Annales. Series his-
toria et sociologia 25 (1): 223–34. 
Umer Kljun, Jerneja. 2023. “Skladnja dvojezičnih besednih zvez v mešanem italijan-
sko-slovenskem govorjenem jeziku.” In Prispevki k preučevanju slovenske skladn-
je, edited by Mojca Smolej and Mojca Schlamberger Brezar, 295–308. Ljubljana: 
Založba Univerze v Ljubljani.
Umer Kljun, Jerneja. 2024. Com’è bello far mešat. Istrska prepletanja in italijansko-slov-
enski jezikovni stik. Ljubljana: Založba Univerze v Ljubljani.
Verdonik, Darinka, and Ana Zwitter Vitez. 2011. Slovenski govorni korpus GOS. Lju-
bljana: Trojina, zavod za uporabno slovenistiko.
Winford, Donald. 2003. An Introduction to Contact Linguistics. Malden: Blackwell 
Publishing.
Zeevaert, Ludger. 2007. “Receptive Multilingualism and Inter-Scandinavian Semi-
communication.” In Receptive Multilingualism: Linguistic analyses, language policies 
and didactic concepts, edited by Jan D. ten Thije and Ludger Zeevaert, 103–35. Am-
sterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.6.08zee.  
 
120 Jerneja Umer Kljun: Code-switching as a translatorial practice
Appendix
Table 1. Additional transcription symbols.
. falling intonation
? rising intonation
! exclamation
 ́ rising tone
 ̀ falling tone
*text* speech laughter
“text” reported speech
: sound elongation
 •  short pause
 • •  pause < 0,5 seconds
 • • •  pause 0,5–1 second
((0,00s)) longer pause with duration
word/
wor/
false start, correction, or word fragment
… ellipsis
((text)) extralinguistic circumstances, e.g. ((laughter)), ((noise)), ((sigh)); omission to pro-
vide anonymity, e.g. Rose works at the Faculty of Arts in Ljubljana > ((name)) works 
at the ((institution)) in Ljubljana
((neraz.)) unintelligible speech
(text) guessing an unintelligible part
ə, əm, m, filler sound indicating hesitation, uncertainty
mhm filler sound indicating agreement
About the author
Jerneja Umer Kljun graduated in translation studies at the University of Ljubljana and 
holds a PhD in sociolinguistics from the Faculty of Humanities at the University of 
Primorska. Her main research area is language contact between Italian and Slovene in 
multilingual areas, although she also researches other topics in the field of translation 
studies and digital humanities. She works as a language instructor and researcher at 
the Department of Translation at the Faculty of Arts (University of Ljubljana).
121Stridon. Journal of Studies in Translation and Interpreting, Volume 4 Issue 1, pp. 97–121