How Languages Fit Together in Codemixing.

III tl1i� paper I'll' provide a qU geno.:-ratinn� of speakers from a hilingllal community in northern Cyprus. Dii.lgnustics frolll thro.:'l' areas of"graml11ar phnnology, morphology, and s)'nta,� ­ pnwid(: c()I"1"0hlll":lting l'vidence that when a lone noun, of either English or Turklsh origin. appears in eont(:xts in which it is surrounded by the other Jangunge, it P,ltiCi"IlS sy�\ematically in aeLord:lI1ee wilh its counterparts in thaI other languagl.!. On the uther kIlUJ, when a im\\? noun, either Ellglish or Turkish, nppears within a lllultiword fragment Qf English or Turkish, it patterns ovcrwhelmingly with the language of its etymolugy. The strikingly different grammatical patterns highlight the fnct thaI they represent two di lTerent types of behavior: borr{/wing in the former; codeslI'ilcliing in the latter. These findings demonstrate that empirical investigatiun crln dis31nbigu!lIc the community-specific status of language contrlct phcllomcna. Further, contrastive analysis across generations rcwals that although the g cmploy tlK same stl':;llcgies whcll they do. The�c strategies have far more to do with th Key words