{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05556399428866543, 'fraction_numerical': 0.015037822401798464, 'mean_word_length': 4.828257790368272, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 4, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
САШКО-LECT: THE TRANSLANGUAGED GRAMMAR OF A HYPER MULTILINGUAL GLOBAL NOMAD PART 2 – CONTACT MECHANISMS

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 second in a series of three – is dedicated to language-contact mechanisms operating in Сашко-lect: code-switching and borrowing.


Introduction
The present study is dedicated to examining Сашко-lect or the idiolect of Сашкоa hyper-multilingual global nomad whose language repertoire draws on forty languages, ten of which he speaks with native or native-like proficiency. The previous article -the first in the series of three -familiarized the reader with the methodological issues of my research: the frameworks that are adopted in 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 original empirical research of Сашкоlect. To be exact, I explained the details of the theory of contact mechanisms, i.e. code-switching and borrowing, the theory of a particular type of contact languages characterizing long-term and profound multilingualism, i.e. mixed-languages, and the theory of a multilingual's idiolect, i.e. translanguaging. I explained that the bottom-top method guiding my description and analysis of Сашко-lect, ascends from the level that is atomic, analytical, fragmentary, grammatical and namedlanguage oriented, to the level that is global, synthetic, unitary, extra-grammatical, and speaker oriented. I also explained that my research draws on the qualitatively limited corpus containing mainly reflexive discourses.
In this paper -the second in the series -following my bottom-up research designed in the previous article, I will focus on two principal language-contact mechanisms operating in Сашко-lect. In Section 2, I will describe and analyze code-switching, and in section 3, I will study borrowing. Lastly, in Section 4, I will formulate interim conclusions and announce issues covered in the third paperthe final part of the study.

Code-switching in Сашко-lect
Code-switching is ubiquitous in Сашко-lect. As its canonical instances, I consider those combinations of languages that are spontaneous and non-entrenched. Indeed, many examples of code-switching are hapax legomena -they are documented once in the corpus and only in a particular language combination. The three structural types of code switching -i.e. insertional, alternational, and congruent (cf. Muysken 2000: 4-8;Stam 2017) -are well attested, the insertional variety being, however, by far the most common.
As I will explain further below, any language can feature as an embedded code in insertional code-switching in Сашко-lect. In contrast, the selection of a particular language as the matrix code is slightly more restricted. Only languages spoken with native or native-like proficiency are used as the matrix code commonly. Seven of them -English, French, Icelandic, Mandinka, Polish, Spanish, and Swedish -adopt that function especially frequently. These are the languages native to countries in which Сашко has resided: South Africa, France, Iceland, Gambia, Poland, Spain, and Sweden. Not surprisingly, various texts in which each of these languages functions as the matrix were produced at the time of residence in or travelling through the respective country. However, in several texts, the correlation between the language donating the matrix and the country in which the text was composed is not observed. German is used as a matrix code rather sporadically -and only in texts written during Сашко's stay in Germany. The use of Lingala and Russian as matrices is much less common. This may be related to the fact that Сашко has never resided in countries or regions where these two languages are the main means of communication. Languages that are not native or have not been mastered to native-like proficiency only function as matrices in the analyzed corpus in exceptional cases.
The matrix code -irrespective of the actual language being selected -donates the main bulk of elements to a sentence and provides all types of structural elements, as is typical of insertional code-switching in general (see Muysken 2000: 64-67;Myers-Scotton 2002: 59-60;Matras 2009: 130-134). That is, any lexical class (i.e. not only nouns, verbs, adjectives, numerals, and adverbs, but also adpositions, connectives, complementizers, particles, interjections, and pronouns) and any morpheme (i.e. both content and system morphemes, including outsider late system morphemes) can feature in the matrix (1.a-b; see also examples 2-8 illustrating other features of the insertional code in Сашко-lect).
( Conforming to most models of insertional code-switching (cf. Myers-Scotton, Jake 1995: 983;Muysken 2000: 67;Myers-Scotton 2002: 59), the matrix code determines the surface order of components, whether the morphemes' order in a word and phrase, or the constituents' order in a clause and sentence. For instance, this because in (2.a) instead of reflecting the English morpheme order because of this, maps the order of the adpositional phrase z tego powodu (lit. from this cause) in Polish -the language donating the matrix. In (2.b), the sentence adheres to V2 word order which is donated by the Icelandic matrix even though the subject (я 'I') and negator (нет 'no(t)') are provided by the embedded code -Russian.
(2) a. Polish matrix This EN because EN się nie da this because REFL not give 'Because of this, it is not possible' b. Icelandic matrix -Russian embedded Það veit я RU нет RU that know I not 'I don't know it' As observed in scholarly literature on code-switching (see Muysken 2000: 67;Matras 2009: 130-135), the matrix code typically anchors the predication, providing the main finite verb to the sentence, e.g. está 'is' in (1.b); da 'give' in (2.a); and veit 'know' in (2.b). It also determines the scope and properties of the arguments involved, and projects semantic roles to the constituents. In (3.a), the Mandinka matrix requires the overt presence of an object if the verb karaŋ is to be understood transitively (i.e. a karaŋ 'study (it)' versus karaŋ 'be studied'). However, the matrix code need not be correlated with the first word(s) or with the code that initiates predication. Indeed, sentence-initial interjections (joder 'fuck' in 3.b), adverbials, discourse markers, modal particles, connectives, and even pronouns (see 2.a above) may be provided by the embedded code (see further below in this section).
( While only some languages commonly function as matrixes, any language irrespective of proficiency can -generally with a similar frequency -donate its elements to the embedded code. Apart from native-(like) languages, this regularly involves Xhosa, Kikongo, Swahili, Turkish, Arabic, Hebrew, Czech, Portuguese, Malay, Indonesian, and Maasai, as well as Latin. The use of a particular language as an embedded code is not correlated with the linguistic profile of the country or region in which a text was written. The most common cases of insertional code-switching involve the incorporation of a single element or a single constituent. Typically, it is a noun (appelsínur 'oranges' in 4.a), a noun phrase (nowym samochodem 'with/in a new car' in 6.e), or a prepositional phrase (this because 'because of this' in 2.a). Verbal roots or bases (þurk-'dry' in 4.b), adjectives (saetur 'sweet' in 4.c) and adverbs (mañana 'tomorrow' 1.a) referring to manner, time, and place also feature prominently. Other lexical classes such as discourse markers, modal particles, interjections (joder 3.b), connectives (i 'and' in 8.b. below), and complementizers (que 'that' in 4.d) are widely attested as well. Similarly, pronouns appear frequently as elements of the embedded code -e.g. this in 2.a; я 'I' in 2.b, to 'it' in 3.a (see also tú 'you' and oni 'they' in 8.a below) -contrary to what is excepted according to most models of insertional code-switching (Matras 2009: 133-134). To conclude this review of lexical classes the embedded code rarely contains inflected verbs and auxiliaries.  With regard to the type of morphemes used, the embedded code abounds in content morphemes, see again appelsínur 'oranges' (4.a), þurk-'dry' (4.b), saetur 'sweet' (4.c), mañana 'tomorrow' (1.a), as well as nowym samochodem 'with/in a new car' (6.e). Early system morphemes also feature abundantly in the embedded code. This includes determiners (þessi 'this' in 5.a), articles (los 'the' in 5.b; see also la SP śmierć 'the death' used in a Polish matrix), satellite prepositions of phrasal verbs (e.g. fram ICbrać and za PL -taka 'take away' used respectively in a Polish and Icelandic matrix), plural markers (naleśniki-s SP 'pancakes' and kwiat-orna SW 'flowers' used in a Polish matrix), and derivational affixes (-ismo in 5.c, additionally accompanied by the plural ending -s). In contrast, even though present, bridge system morphemes (for instance the possessive marker s'n in 5.d) and outsider late system morphemes, such as verbal inflections (the Latin infinitive marker -are in 5.e and the Polish accusative feminine ending -ę in 5.f) and case affixes (the Icelandic 2 nd sg. ending -t in 5.g) feature rather infrequently as embedded codes' elements. This behaviour is fully congruent with the properties of the embedded code identified cross-linguistically (Muysken 2000: 61-64, 95;Myers-Scotton 1993a: 120;1993b;2002: 59;Myers-Scotton, Jake 1995: 983;2000;2009;Matras 2009 The elements of an embedded code may be fully integrated into the frame of the matrix by matrix-language morphological shields (cf. Muysken 2000: 4, 31, 64), usually inflectional suffixes, e.g. za-…-ował used to mark 3sg.ms. perfective past (6.a), -o used to mark 1sg. present (6.b), and -o used as a definite nominalizer (6.c; see also the verbal suffix -owa and the infinitive ending -ć that help to integrate the Icelandic verbal base þurk-'dry' into the Polish matrix in 4.b). Embedded elements may also exhibit functional markings typical of their own code, thus constituting embedded-code islands (cf. Myers-Scotton 2002: 54, 139-140), e.g. konu -the Icelandic accusative (or oblique) form of the singular kona 'woman' (6.d) (see also appelsínur 'oranges' that exhibits the nominative plural ending -ur in 4.a, and saetur 'sweet' that exhibits the nominative singular -ur in 4.c). In such cases, the role of an embedded element (e.g. direct object or subject) is typically projected by the matrix code while morphological marking itself (e.g. nominative or accusative case) is provided by the embedded code. Lastly, an embedded element may appear bare (cf. Myers-Scotton 2002: 67, 113), even when languages rich in inflections such as Polish and Icelandic are involved (see ten chłopak 'this boy' in 6.f and tarka 'grater' in 6.g). Elements of the embedded code are found in all positions in the clause, whether clause-internally (e.g. 1.a-b, 3.a, 4.d, 5.d-e, 5.g, 6.a) or at the clause's peripheriesinitially (e.g. 2.a, 3.b, 4.b-c, 5.a-b, 6.b-c) and finally (e.g. 4.a, 6.e-g). The inserted element may appear in a nested structure y-x-y (cf. Muysken 2000: 63), being intercalated between two related elements of the matrix. For example, in (7), the conditional perfect of the Icelandic matrix (mynda hafa gert 'would have done') makes use of the Spanish verb haber as its second component. Similarly, za-hjálpować 'help' is composed of the elements of the Polish matrix (the perfective prefix za-and the verbalizer -owa 'help' accompanied by the infinitive ending -ć) that together circumscribe an element of the Icelandic embedded code (the verbal root hjálp-'help') (see also naj-fallech IC -szy chłopak 'the most beautiful lad' where the Icelandic adjectival root falleg-'beautiful', with the Polish spelling ch instead of the Icelandic g, is nested in a Polish superlative construction naj-…-szy 'the most…').
The embedded code employed in a sentence may draw on more than one language. The use of two languages in the embedded code is relatively common, e.g. tú 'you' and oni 'they' in (8.a) and fram 'from' and i spowrotem 'and back' in (8.b). A few instances of three and sporadically four languages -usually in lists as illustrated by Sverige 'Sweden', Ísland 'Iceland', The Gambia, and España 'Spain' in (8.c) -are also found. Embedded codes that would incorporate elements of five or more languages are unattested. Alternational code-switching is also characteristic of Сашко-lect, albeit, as explained above, it features less commonly than the insertional type. It is employed in two main cases: to correct an expression (9.a) or to provide supplementary information in relation to an expression used previously (e.g. clarifying it or specifying it) (9.b)two functions typically associated with this type of code-switching in literature (Matras 2009: 105-106). Switches may take place at two distinct levels: a phrase level (especially in corrections, paraphrases, or reiterations) (9.a) and at an utterance level (especially when a construction of one code is commented on in another code) (9.b). Virtually all languages can appear in switches. However, languages in which Сашко is proficient -whether native(-like) or not, and whether modern, classical (Standard Modern Arabic), or ancient (e.g. Latin, Biblical Hebrew, Old Icelandic)feature especially prominently.
(9) a. Lingala > Icelandic alternation {Kufa eza likambo} LG {eða frekar blessun} IC death it.is problem or rather blessing 'Death is a problem -or rather a blessing' b. Spanish > Polish alternation {Un día lo haré} SP : {pojadę na Kamczatkę, zamieszkam w iglo, one day it I.will.do I.will.go to Kamchatka I.will.live in igloo zajmę się łowieniem ryb i zapomnę o cywilizacji} PL I.will.keep REFL fishing fish and I.will.forget about civilization 'One day I will do it: I will go to Kamchatka, I will live in an igloo, I will be fishing, and I will forget about civilization' Several features exhibited by alternational code-switching in Сашко-lect match the properties identified for this type of code-switching in scholarly literature (Muysken 2000: 97-107, 120). The number of elements used in any given language alternation, and thus its quantitative magnitude, can be considerable (see 9.b above where fourteen words are employed). Similarly, alternations can be qualitatively rich, thus making use of elements that belong to different lexical classes and morpheme types. in 9.b). Second, alternations contain not only content morphemes, but also system morphemes, whether early, bridge, or outsider late. This greater diversity of lexical classes and morphemes is especially pervasive in clause-level switches. Switches between the codes tend to take place in clause-peripheral positions, typically at the clause's boundary. Apart from the clauses separated asyndetically (9.a-b, 10.a-b), this involves the following syntactic structures: left dislocation, coordinated clauses (11.a), cleft sentences, and various types of subordinate and relative clauses (11.b). This complies with the position of switches identified in literature on alternational code-switching (Muysken 2000: 99-104 The items that are switched are usually neither governed nor selected by the elements of the other code. Furthermore, rather than being integrated, they can be marked by flagging, e.g. a dummy word (nje in 12; see also bueno in 10.b) or a pause and "comma" intonation (9.b, 10.a-b) (cf. Congruent code-switching is the least common out of all types of code-switching in the analyzed corpus. This may stem from the fact that its most evident examples emerge in cases involving closely related languages in which linear and structural correspondence is unmistakable, in particular: Icelandic and Swedish, Spanish and French, Polish and Russian, Lingala and Swahili, Xhosa and Fanakalo, Hebrew and Arabic. As was the case of alternational code-switching, all types of categories can appear in congruent switches (cf. Muysken 2000: 129-131). This includes pronouns, finite verbs (auxiliaries and copulas), complementizers, conjunctions, and articles. Moreover, system morphemes, whether early or late, and whether bridge or outsider, are fully tolerated in congruent code-switching. The elements are often morphologically integrated by means of the marking typical of one language or a hybrid marking containing elements of the two languages (e.g.  To conclude the discussion of code-switching, the following should be noted: no type of code-switching presented above constitutes a rigid category disconnected from the other types. In various texts, code-switching types vary approximating one of the three code-switching prototypes to a greater or lesser degree. Switches found in Сашко's discourses may simultaneously draw on insertional, alternational, and convergent code-switching varieties, thus yielding a gradual scale and transmuting from one type to another (compare with Muysken 2000: 9). Many of them are found in a transition phase between insertion and alternation; between insertion and congruent lexicalization; and between alternation and congruent lexicalization (cf. Muysken 2000: 9-10).

Borrowing in Сашко-lect
Сашко-lect attests to multiple cases and several types of borrowing. An element is understood as borrowed if it forms a permanent characteristic of the recipient code. Its presence is furthermore not limited to a single recipient code. Rather, the element appears in recipient codes that draw on (potentially) all named languages that can be used as such by Сашко. Lastly, due to its entrenchment and frequency, the borrowed element does not produce stylistic marking, thus failing to be disruptive in the recipient code(s) in which it occurs.
Matter borrowing is particularly well attested, and a number of elements have permanently spread to many recipient codes. As far as the lexical class of loanwords is concerned, nouns constitute the largest set of borrowed lexemes, which is congruent with tendencies observed in borrowing taking place in many other languages (see Myer-Scotton 2002;2006: 226-229;Field 2002: 36-38;Winford 2003: 53;Matras 2007: 61;2009: 155, 157). Some borrowed nouns constitute culture-specific concepts being thus language-specific. This explains, in turn, their stabilization in Сашко's vocabulary. Exemplary cases are: skýr IC 'an Icelandic type of yogurt', bigos PL 'cabbage-based food typical of Poland', pierogi PL 'Polish dumplings', gołąbki PL 'stuffed cabbage leaves eaten in Poland', paella SP 'rise-based Spanish meal', longaniza SP 'sausage from Aragón in Spain', chorizo SP 'a spicy Spanish sausage', tuba MA 'a white expatriate person living in Western Africa', fufu LG 'a type of maize meal/porridge eaten in Africa', umphokoqo XH 'Xhosa crumble porridge', and umngqusho XH 'a typical Xhosa dish made from maize and beans'. Other nominal loanwords are names of countries, towns, or provinces formulated in the language of the people by which they are inhabited. ; and (f) places, e.g. chicken GAM.EN 'kitchen', háskóli IC 'university', ofisi XH 'office'. If a donor language has diminutives, such forms are often preferred, rather than ordinary forms. For instance, the diminutive form koteczek 'cat' and perrito 'dog' were borrowed from Polish and Spanish respectively -not the "neutral" forms kot and perro.
The borrowing of lexemes belonging to other lexical classes is more restricted. A limited number of adverbs has been borrowed. This includes: (a) adverbs of time, e.g. (straxt) (right) núna IC 'now', luego SP 'later', mañana SP 'tomorrow'; (b) adverbs expressing quantity or intensity, e.g. dużo PL 'a lot, much', mikið IC 'a lot, much', lítið IC 'a little', mucho SP 'a lot', kakhulu XH 'a lot', kancinci XH 'a little'; and (c) manner, especially in an indefinite sense such as svona IC , tak PL , and así SP , the three lexemes signifying 'like this'. Particles are even fewer. Their main bulk is provided by modal particles, especially those expressing possibility (e.g. kannski IC 'maybe' and może PL 'maybe') and certainty (e.g. claro SP 'evidently, for sure'). A few intensive particles are also attested, e.g. nje XH and ke XH , as well as the tag particle used in questions ne XH/AF . Albeit rather sporadically, pronouns can be borrowed too, as illustrated by the personal pronouns wena XH/FA 'you', moi FR 'I', mna XH 'I', mina FA 'I', yous SA.EN 'you [pl.]', the demonstrative pronoun þessi IC 'this', and the interrogative pronoun qué SP 'what'. Conjunctions seem to be the least common lexical class among all borrowings. Only four lexemes have been borrowed: pero SP 'but', kodwa XH 'but', okanye XH 'or', and since EN . This contrasts with the high position occupied by conjunctions in hierarchies of borrowability posited in literature (cf. Matras 2007: 54-55, 61;2009: 157; see however Muysken 1981 andWinford 2003: 53). Lastly, loanwords belonging to the lexical class of numerals are unattested.
Although free morphemes are the most borrowable, the borrowing of bound morphemes is also attested. Most common are derivational affixes, especially diminutive suffixes such as -śu PL , -uś PL , -ito SP , and -ico SP , as well as the nominal suffix -asie AF '-tion' used mostly with abstract nouns and -ski PL used with surnames, nicknames, and names of persons. A few genuine inflectional affixes are also attested, in particular the masculine nominative suffixes -ur IC and -us LA and the class prefixes: u-XH , typically added to proper names of persons, i-XH often added to inanimate nouns, and isi-XH used with names of languages. In the verbal system, 1pl. ending -mus LA is widely attested. The set of borrowed bound morphemes, additionally includes the locative prefix e-XH and the locative circumfix e-_-ni XH , which could be analyzed both as derivational and inflectional morphemes. It should be noted that although the use of the inflectional suffixes may coincide with the donor language (see -mus LA ), this is not the rule. For example, the use of -ur IC and -us LA is much broader in the recipient languages than in the languages from which they are borrowed. Contrary to Icelandic and Latin, these two suffixes may occur in any syntactic position in recipient languages, whether employed as subjects, direct objects, indirect and oblique objects, or complements of prepositions. On the contrary, the use of the locative affixes e-and e-_-ni is more restricted in recipient languages than in the donor language, Xhosa. In recipient languages, these affixes appear only with proper nouns of places. In Xhosa, however, their presence is grammatical with both proper and common nouns.
Сашко-lect also attests to the borrowing of patterns. In such cases, by analogy to the donor language, certain formal and/or semantic structures are replicated in the recipient codes through their own elements (cf. Sakel 2007;Matras 2009: 235). Pattern borrowing is visible in nominal, pronominal, and verbal systems, as well as in word order and lexicon.
In the nominal system, the most persistent patterns copied are articles (cf. Matras 2009: 252). That is, by imitating languages which contain definite and/or indefinite articles in their grammatical repertoire (e.g. Spanish, Swedish, French, Wymysorys, German, English), sets of articles are created in languages in which articles are not grammaticalized as fully-fledged categories (Polish, Lingala, and as far as the indefinite article is concerned, Icelandic). The replication of definite articles typically proceeds through the use of demonstrative pronouns (e.g. ten 'this' in Polish), while that of the indefinite article exploits the numeral 'one' (e.g. jeden in Polish and einn in Icelandic) or indefinite pronouns (e.g. jakiś 'a certain' and especially in plural jacyś/jakieś 'certain'). Another type of pattern borrowing concerns the proximate-distal distinction in deictic pronouns which by analogy to the French structures celui-ci 'lit. that one-here' and celui-là 'lit. that one-there' have been copied to other codes. The exemplary cases are ten-tutaj, este-aquí, þessi-hérna 'this-here' and ten-tam, este-allá, þessi-þarna 'this-there' in Polish, Spanish, and Icelandic respectively. As a result, the set of deictic distinctions is expanded from two (e.g. þessi 'this' and sá 'that' in Icelandic) or three (e.g. este, ese, aquel in Spanish) to a significantly larger number.
A pronominal pattern that has spread to various recipient codes is the set of possessive pronouns distinct from possessive adjectives, as in French (le mien vs. mon), Spanish (el mío vs. mi) and English (mine vs. my). The structures developed in languages that lack such a morpho-syntactic distinction replicate the French and Spanish pattern, thus using a definite article (already extant or developed by analogy; see above) and a respective possessive, e.g. ten-mój in Polish. Another pronominal pattern often replicated in recipient codes is a possessive pronominal linker mirroring the Afrikaans and Dutch construction s'n/z'n 'his' or d'r 'her' (e.g. Piet z'n fiets 'Piet's bicycle'). In languages that lack this type of construction, a 3 rd person possessive pronoun is used, e.g. su 'his' in el chico su casa 'the boy's house' in Spanish, or jego 'his' in ten idiota jego pomysł 'that idiot's idea' in Polish. 2 Although fully recognizable in the nominal and pronominal systems, pattern borrowing is the most visible in the verbal system. It is responsible for the emergence of a perfect (anterior) series (present perfect, pluperfect, and future perfect), an unreal conditional/subjective, and a progressive aspect in the codes that lack (one of) those categories. For instance, in the recipient code based on Polish -a language with no specialized present perfect -a present perfect gram has been coined imitating the 'have'-type perfects found in Icelandic, Swedish, English, as well as similar constructions present in Spanish and French. Canonical examples are ma pojechane 'she has/is gone' (16.a), mam zrobione 'I have done ' (16.b), and ma mieszkane 'he has lived ' (16.c). This innovative replica is employed in the three senses associated crosslinguistically with the category of present perfect: resultative (16.a), experiential (16.b), and inclusive (16.c). Similarly, past perfect (or pluperfect) and future perfect grams are formed and used accordingly to their cross-linguistic prototypes (see miała pojechane 'she had gone' in 16.d). 3 Another gram replicated in various recipient codes is an unreal counterfactual conditional and/or subjunctive comparable to habría hecho 'I would have done' and hubiera hecho 'if I had done' in Spanish (and similar constructions in French, English, and Icelandic). These constructions constitute permanent features of a Polish recipient code, e.g. byłbym zrobił, 4 byłbym miał zrobił, miałbym był zrobił 'I would have done / (if/that) I had done'. Lastly, a series of progressive grams (present, past and future) has been introduced to recipient codes in the standard varieties of which such constructions are absent. For example, contrary to Standard Polish -a language with no dedicated progressive gram but only a broader imperfective -Сашко's Polish exhibits a progressive series that matches the English and Spanish participial or gerundial constructions, e.g. jestem myślący 'I am thinking' (present progressive in 16.e) and byłem idący 'I was walking' (past progressive). The imitation of pluperfects found in other languages also leads to an increased usage of the 'be'-type pluperfect construction in the Polish-based code (e.g. byłem pojechał 'I had gone'), a construction that previously existed in Standard Polish but is currently lost. However, a more direct influence from French (j'étais allé) or English (I was gone), where the "be" auxiliaries are employed, cannot be ruled out. 4 The form zrobiłbym which in Standard Polish is commonly used in all counterfactual senses, whether real ('I would do') or unreal ('I would have done'), is almost exclusively used by Сашко to express real counterfactuality. e. Jestem myślący że się da I.am thinking that REFL it.will.give 'I am thinking it will be possible' Pattern borrowing often results in replica grammaticalization. That is, abstract functions conveyed by a construction in the donor language are reconstructed through more concrete lexical elements of the recipient language (cf. Heine, Kuteva 2003;2005;Matras 2009: 239-240). This creates the impression of advancement along a grammaticalization path (cf. Heine, Kuteva 2003;2005;Andrason, Visser 2016). For instance, demonstrative pronouns are grammaticalized as definite articles (e.g. ten 'this' in Polish); numerals or indefinite pronouns are grammaticalized as indefinite articles (e.g. jeden 'one' and jakiś 'certain' in Polish); and a possessive resultative construction is grammaticalized as a present perfect (e.g. mam (to) zrobione 'I have this done' in Polish).
Complying with several linguistic models of borrowability (Stolz, Stolz 1996;Aikhenvald, Dixon 2001;Ross 2001;Matras 2007;2009), word order is another area profoundly affected by pattern borrowing. The "free" pragmatically driven word order typical of Slavonic languages (e.g. Polish, Russian, Ukrainian) and to an extent, Romance languages (Spanish) is often used in codes based on Germanic languages (e.g. Icelandic, Swedish, German) (17.a). In such cases, the V2 rule is often preserved too (17.b). 6 (17) a. English recipient code I yesterday to meet that idiot went 'Yesterday I went to meet that idiot' b. Icelandic recipient code Í fyrra var ég auðvitað arabísku laera In last.year was I certainly Arabic learn 'Of course, I was studying Arabic last year' The polysemy of a lexeme -or the entire map of its senses -can also be copied from a donor code to recipient codes (regarding polysemy copying consult Heine, Kuteva 2005: 100-103 andMatras 2009: 239). For instance, the verb (to) close is used in the English recipient code in the sense of both 'close' and 'lock' in analogy to the meaning of the verbs zamknąć in Polish, cerrar in Spanish, and fermer in French. The adjectives referring to the colours green and blue may be used synonymously reflecting usage typical in Xhosa, where luhlaza means both 'blue' and 'green'. In such cases, they are usually accompanied by a recipient-code's expression 'like sky' or 'like grass', again matching the usage in Xhosa, i.e. nje ngenca and nje ngeisibakabaka respectively. Lastly, a few lexical calques are found in the analyzed corpus: ísskáp/ kylskåp IC > ice-board EN (instead of fridge) and lód-szafa PL (instead of lodówka); washing machine EN /tvättmaskin SW /þvottavél IC > maszyna do prania PL (instead of pralka).

Interim conclusion and prelude to Part 3
In this paper -the second in the series of three articles dedicated to the idiolect of a hyper-multilingual global nomad, Сашко -I described and analyzed the two language-contact mechanisms common in the discourses produced by multilingual speakers: code-switching and borrowing. The evidence demonstrates that both mechanisms are extensively exploited by Сашко. Three types of code-switching are attested, i.e. insertional, alternational, and congruent. With a few exceptions (e.g. the presence of pronouns in the embedded code in insertional code-switching), the insertional, alternational, and congruent variants exhibit the usual properties associated with each one of them respectively in scholarly literature. Similarly, the two types of borrowing are widely used, i.e. matter and pattern borrowing, with most borrowability tendencies and hierarchies generally respected -despite minor divergences, such as the scarcity of borrowed conjunctions.
In the next paper -the third in the series -following the bottom-up research strategy adopted in this study, I will expand the scope of my discussion from language-contact mechanisms to language-contact types, specifically mixed languages, and ultimately to the translanguaged grammar that typifies Сашко-lect in its entirety.