Thetellingofmigrantexperiencesisinitselfaprolificendeavour,when
individualscreateasenseofoldandnewwaysofliving,explainingtoothers
factsthathelpthemtomakesenseoftheirpastandtheirpresent.Crucially,
whendoingso,themigrants’linguisticresourcescanallowthemtoproduce,
togetherwithaninterlocutor,somethingthatgoesbeyondtheactoftelling.They
createanewspace,whichisintrinsicallyinteractional,thatis,createdforand
throughlanguageexchanges(LiWei2011,1223).Preciselythisspace,herenot
intendedasasimplecontainerforhumanactionbutasactivelyproduced
throughinteraction,isthefocusofthepresentstudy.Iinvestigatethewaysin
whichItalianswhohavesettledinTasmaniamakeapparentthecreationofspace
throughlanguageandinrelationtotheirdwellingsites.Iconcentrateonthe
intersectionsbetweenspaceandspeechas‘spacesofspeech’(Livingstone2007)
wherebyasubjecttakespositionintheworldofher/hismeaning,whichisin
turnbothsituatedandemergentfromthespeaker’sconsciousness(MerleauPonty1945).Theresearchstartsfromtheassumptionthatthemigrants’
constructed‘centres’,pivotalgeographicalpointsthatserveasdiscursive
channels,arespatialresources(Kelly-Holmes2013)andareappropriatedas
suchininteraction.Themaingoalistoenquireintotheformationofspace
throughthecentresthatItaliansinTasmaniahaveexperiencedanddecideto
use,choosingfromthesetofresourcestheyhaveattheirdisposal.
(DE)CENTRALISINGITALIANSPEAKERS
ItalianmigrationhasbeenoftennoticedthankstothepresenceofItalianclusters
inbigcitiesacrosstheworldsuchasBuenosAires,NewYorkandToronto,
wheregroupshavecreatedethnicisedzones,amongwhichtheLittleItaliesare
themosteasilyrecognisable.However,Italianmigrationhasalsoreachedremote
areasthatarelessvisibleandhavelargelybeenexcludedfromthecollective
narrativesofItaliannessabroad,aswellasfromacademicresearch.Acasein
pointisTasmania,whereItalianshavebeensettledforover150yearsandstill
failtobeincludedinthediscoursesproducedbylargeItalo–Australian
associationsbasedincontinentalAustraliancities.Althoughmuchisknown
aboutthehistoryofItaliansinAustralia,ItaliansinTasmaniaareeffectively
invisible.Theydonotappearinanymajorscholarlyworkonmigrant
communitiesinAustralia,norcantheybefoundinaccountsthatfocus
specificallyonItalo–Australians.Thedatadiscussedinthisarticlewascollected
throughethnographicworkwhichstartedwithatriptoTasmaniainJuly–August
2014andcontinuedwithfollow-upsinthefollowingmonths.Duringthetripit
waspossibletogathersomedataonthemigrants’pastandtotracesomeofthe
self-producedhistoriographythatvariousmembersofthecommunityhave
shared.
MuchresearchisneededtounderstandthehistoryofItaliansinTasmania,
whichisbeyondthescopeofthisarticle,butafewtentativepointscanbemade
basedoninitialobservations:1)Italians,atfirstmainlymusiciansand
entrepreneurs,startedtoarriveinthe1800s,andkeptarrivinguntilthey
reachedapeakafterWWII;2)manyItaliansworkedonhydroelectricdam
projects,intheconcreteindustryandinasinglelargesilkandtextilefactory;3)
twoleadingsymbolicfigurescanbefoundamongItaliansinTasmania:Diego
Bernacchi(1853–1925),businessmanandfatheroftheexplorerLouis
Bernacchi,thefirstAustraliantosetfootinAntarctica;andClaudioAlcorso
(1913–2000),industrialist,pioneerwinemaker,humanitarianandfounderofthe
ItalianclubinHobart(seeOttavi2005;Rimon2005).
TOWARDSPACESOFSPEECH
InthisarticleIfocusonhowthesemigrantscreatespaceininteractionwhen
theyarticulatetheir‘experienceofmovement’(Papastergiadis2000,147;
Escobar2001,35).Thenotionofspacehasbeenlongdebatedamongscholars
anditsdistinctionfromplacehasnotbeenalwaysagreedupon.Theworksof
Tuan(1977)andRelph(1976)havebeenparticularlyinfluentialinmakinga
distinctionbetweenthetwoconcepts,findingthenotionofplacemore
productive.Theyintendedplaceasalocationcreatedbyhumanexperiences,
whiletheythoughtofspaceasthepartoftheEarth’ssurfacethatexists
regardlessofhumanaction.Inthissensespacewasconsideredalesssignificant
conceptinthat,unlikeplace,itwasnotexplicitlyinvestedwithsocialmeaning.
Othertheorizations,however,haveprogressivelyproblematizedthisviewby
exploringspacethroughthelensofsocialprocesses(Cresswell2004,8-10)and
suggestingamorenuanceddistinctionbetweenplaceandspace.Harvey(1973;
1989;2006)hasshownthatspacesarealsobothconstructedandlived,inthe
sensethattheyexistbecauseindividualshaveexperiencedthemandcontributed
totheirconstruction.Manyotherscholarshavealsorejectedrigiddichotomies
betweenplaceandspace(cf.Hubbard,Bartley,Fuller&Kitchin2002).Infact,the
problematicnatureofthedistinctionbetweenthetwoconceptsbecame
apparentmostnotablythroughtheresearchofLefebvre(1991)whoarguesthat
spaceissocialinitsveryessenceasitisformedbytheactionofhumanbeings.
Individualsrepresentspacewithplans,mapsanddesignandatthesametime
movethroughspaceintheirdailyactivitiessuchasbuying,playingandtravelling
thusbeingactivelyinvolvedinitsformation.Moreover,spaceismadepossible
byattributionofmeaningthatisintertwinedwithrelationalpractices(cf.also
Massey2005);individualsmeet,staytogetherandspeakwithotherindividuals
withinandthroughspace.ForLefebvre,indeed,humanaction–aslocalised
practice–iskeytotheconstructionofspace.Spaceiisthereforebothsocially
constructedandmadepossiblethroughtherelationshipbetweenindividuals
andtheirsurroundings(Pickles1985;Strohmayer1998).Itisinhabitedand
meaningfulbecauseofthepresenceoflivingbeings,andisoneoftheprimordial
expressionsofourbeing-in-the-world(Merleau-Ponty1945).
Workingonthenexusofspaceandlanguage,intheirvolumeonGerman
speakersinCanada,LiebscherandDailey-O’Cain(2013)introducetheconceptof
sociolinguisticspace,whichtheydefineasa‘spaceforpeopletodwellincreated
throughinteraction’(ibid,15).Theirstudyexploreshowspacesarecreated
throughtheuseofimmigrantlanguagesandpositioningpractices.Migrants,in
theirretellings,foregroundinstanceswherespaceswerebornwhileitis
simultaneouslytheactoftellingitselfthatbringsaboutspaceintheinteraction
withtheinterviewer.Itiswhathappens,forinstance,whentheirinformantsare
askedaboutusingGermanfarfromEurope(ibid,124-26).Theymaymention
schuhplattlerdancinginEdmontontoevokethespacecreatedamongGermans,
explaininghowvariousactivitiesmadesenseforthematthetimewhenthey
wereperformed.Crucially,however,thetelling–thewaysinwhichchoicesare
narratedandconstructed–generatesmeaninginthehereandnowofthe
interaction.IntheiranalysisLiebscherandDailey-O’Cainshowthatmigrants
positionthemselvesinside,outside,attheedgesoforinthemiddleofspaces.
TheyattributemeaningandconcurrentlycreateitusingwhatGee(2005)calls
‘signs’and‘portals’,thatis,respectively‘whatthesocialspaceisabout’andwhat
people‘usetoenterthespace’(cf.Liebscher&Dailey-O'Cain2013,19)ii.
LiebscherandDailey-O’Cainalsoprovideanoverviewofhowtheconceptof
spacehasbeenusedtostudylanguageinsociety.Theydescribetheapproach
adoptedbyLiWei’s(2011)studyofmultilingualbehaviour,inhistreatmentof
translanguaging.ChinesemigrantsintheUKcreatemomentsofparticular
semioticrelevancewhereresearcherscanseea‘livedspace,createdthrough
everyday,multiplesocialpractices,includingmultilingualpractices’(ibid,1223).
TheyalsomentiontheresearchofByrdClark(2009),Kramsch(2009),
Blommaert(2005)andMendoza-DentonandOsborne(2010)tohighlight
possiblelinkswithresearchonmigrationandmultilingualism,suchasthe
importanceof‘theattributivequalitiesofspace’(Blommaert2005,223)forthe
useoflinguisticvarietiesassociatedwithspaceitself.Likewise,spaceispivotal
innarrativesofmigrationasoutlinedbyBaynham(2003),aswellasanumberof
otherresearchers,mostnotablyStevensonandCarl(2010)andLefkowitz
(2004),whohavedescribedanumberofpossiblelinksbetweenspaceand
identityconstruction.Forinstance,spacewasfoundtobeconstitutiveof
narrativeactioninthesensethatnarrativesthemselvescanbethoughtofas
spaceswhereactionoccurs.
Morerecentresearchhasfurtherelaboratedonsomeoftheseinsights,delving
intotheintersectionsbetweenidentity,languageandspace.LiWeiandZhuHua
(2013)showtherelevancetoChinesestudentsintheUKofa‘newlycreated
socialspace’(ibid,532)whereresearcherscantraceandanalyseidentity
constructionsthatoccurconcomitantlywithlanguagepractices.Thisisa‘transspacewherenewlanguagepractices,meaning-makingmultimodalpractices,
subjectivitiesandsocialstructuresaredynamicallygenerated’(Garcia&LiWei
2014,43).Inthecreationofthisspace,Chinesestudentscanexpresstheir
creativity,theirmultipleaffiliationsandtheirtransnationalidentities.Similarly,
fourth-gradepupilsofaSpanish–EnglishbilingualclassintheUScanusethe
spacetowork,learnandplaytogetheracrosslanguages(García2011).Inthis
spaceonecanappreciatethedynamicnatureofmultilingualpracticesofvarious
kindsandthecapacityofthespeakersto‘mobilizetheirlinguisticresources’(Li
Wei&ZhuHua2013,519).
Inparallel,otherscholarshavepaidmorespecificattentiontothesituated
natureofspatialworkbeyonditsroleinidentityconstruction.Pennycook
(2010),forinstance,hasstressedtheimportanceofconsideringthelocalsites
wherelanguageisusedinrelationtospecificactivitiesandobjects.Individuals
interactbyzigzaggingandrummagingamongtheirlanguageresources,always
relatingtothe‘situationalspecificity’(Wise2009,35)theyhappentobein.In
thissense,spaceisthematerialsitewherelanguagepracticescomeabout,as
wellasbeingconstructed‘throughsuchpractices’(Pennycook&Otsuji2014,
179).InarestaurantinTokyothetrajectoriesofthemovementsofpeople
duringabusyworkingdayareatthebaseofacomplexbutfluidenactmentof
languagewherethesociallyconstruedboundariesbetweenJapanese,English
andFrenchallowroomfornewhybridlanguagepractices.
Alongtheselinesofenquiry,inthisstudyIemploythenotionofspacesof
speech.ThiswasfirstintroducedbyLivingstone(2007)tobridgethespatialand
socialdimensionsforthecreationandcirculationofmeaning,butfinds
theoreticalunderpinninginphenomenologicalthought.Inparticular,MerleauPonty(1945,225)viewedspeechasaprisedepositionofthespeakingsubjectin
theworldofher/hismeaning,wheresuchaworldisinfactalinguisticspacein
itselfthatthesubjectcanmodulatethroughlinguistictools(Merleau-Ponty
1964,241).Inthisperspective,spaceisintendedasalivedentitythatis
constitutedbytheexperiencesofthesubjectwithher/hissurroundingsand
her/hismeaning-makingasaconscioussubject.Inthissensespacecanbe
consideredlinguisticatitscore,inthatitismadepossiblebythecontinuity
betweenthesubjectinmotionandlinguistictoolsthatenabletheprisede
position.WhileMerleau-Pontyexplainsonlythattheselinguistictoolsarea
systemofelementsthatcooperateforexpression(Merleau-Ponty1960,85)and
failstodescribethemingreatdetail,hisdescriptionoflinguisticspaceindicates
thattheseelementsareundoubtedlyconnectedtothesituatednatureofspeech.
Atthesametimeheunderscoresthatspeechinspaceissomethingthat
inevitably‘bringstothesurfaceallthedeep-rootedrelationsofthelived
experienceswhereittakesshape’(Merleau-Ponty1964,166).Speechisboth
actedinasituationalrealmandemergesfromthespeaker’sconsciousness.
HereIspecificallyenquireintothetoolssuggestedbyMerleau-Pontyby
exploringspacesofspeech–interactionalspaceswherethespeakingsubject
indeedtakespositioninphenomenologicalterms.Itwillbecomeclearthatthe
keyactorofthisstudydoessobymobilisingcentresasspatialresourcesin
interaction,throughwhichnotonlyissocialmeaningcreated,butalso‘location
andlocution’(Livingstone2007,75)shapeeachother.
Thefocusofthisstudyispreciselyontheintersectionbetweenspacesofspeech
andtheexperienceofmovementalongtheedgesofItalianmigration,farfrom
largeurbansettings,whereonecanfindareasthataresidelinedinmost
cartographiesofdiasporas.Kelly-HolmesandPietikäinen(2013,222)describe
thesesitesascharacterisedbygeographic,economic,andhistorical
peripherality,wherethepresenceofsomenotionalcentresfunctionsasa
referencepointforthecreationofmeaningelsewhere.Intheirvolumethey
illustratethewaysinwhichtensionsbetweencentreandperipheryare
reconfiguredbycontemporarymultilingualpractices.Bypayingspecialattention
to'crucialsites'(Philips2000)suchasairports,indigenousheritagesites,
commercialandtouristspaces,whicharefoundtobeindicativeofthecomplex
interactionsbetweenindividualpracticesandsystemicnorms,theyhighlightthe
fluidnatureofcentre/peripheryrelationships.Thesecentresarenotfixed
conceptsbutrathertheresultofprocessesofperipheralisationand
centralisation,alongwhichwecantraceshiftingandambiguouspositions(Ang
&Stratton1996)wherethediscursivepowerofsomespecificcentresisnot
static.Kelly-HolmesandPietikäinenargueforaconceptofcentre–anddistance
fromit–associallyconstructedalsointhesenseofbeingsomethingthat
individualsandgroupscando,thusacknowledgingitsperformativepotential(cf.
alsoGiddens1984).Followingthisdirection,thisstudyexamineshowvarious
centresemergeinaninteractionalsetting,wheretheyareconstructedand
‘positionedagainstoneanother’(Dong&Blommaert2009,45).Thesecentres
are‘broughtin’(Bauman1986)butalsocreatedascentresinthemakingof
spaceininteraction(deCerteau1984).HowdoItalianscreatesuchspacein
Tasmania?Howdodifferentcentresrelatetothenetworkofresourcesthatare
relevanttothesemigrants?Howarecentresdeployedinthecontingentactof
(re)creatingspace?
CREATINGTHECONDITIONSFORSPACETOEMERGE
Thekeyactor(Fetterman2010,40-55)onwhomthisstudyfocusesisaperson
whohaslongbeeninvolvedwiththeactivitiesoftheAustralianItalian
AssociationofTasmaniaandtheadjacentItalianclub,locatedinanorthern
suburbofHobart.GiovanniiiiisfromasmalltownintheprovinceofTreviso,in
north-easternItaly.Hedidnotcompletesecondaryschool,buthestudiedsome
LatinandrudimentsofRomanandancientGreekliteratureaswellashistory.He
migratedtoTasmaniainthe1960sandwasalmostimmediatelyimmersedin
socialandculturalactivities,whichhecontinuedtobepartofuntilhis
retirement.HespeaksEnglish,ItalianandVenetian.Giovanniwasinterviewed
mostlyinhishomeduringmealstowhichtheresearcherwasinvited.The
researcherisanacademicbasedintheUKbutisoriginallyfromalargecityin
theVenetoregionofItaly.HehaslivedforseveralyearsinSydneyandhas
numerousconnectionswithItaliansinAustraliaacrossdifferentgenerations.He
speaksItalian,EnglishandVenetian,andusedallofthemduringtheinterviews.
WhentheinterviewerapproachedGiovanni,heendeavouredtocreateanopen,
reciprocalanddialogicprocess,wheretheformationofspaceemergedwithin
andthankstotheinteractionbetweenhimandthekeyactor(Liebscher&
Dailey-O'Cain2013,31-35).Usinganethnographicapproach,thisresearchalso
alignswithMondada(1998)inunderscoringtheoscillationsinvisibilityofthe
interviewerinherentinanylinguisticinterview,inkeepingwithaconstructivist
approach(Bucholtz&Hall2005),whichexposesandevennurturestheactive
contributionoftheresearcherintheformationofaccounts.Withthisinmind,
questionswereposedinordertoelicitlengthyanswers(Liebscher&DaileyO'Cain2013,8-12)revolvingaroundtheactor’smigrantexperiencesas‘triggers
forculturalself-reflectivity’(Cronin2006,62),withaspecificfocusonthe
significanceofthefactthathemigratedtoTasmania.Someofthequestionsused
werethefollowing:WhydidyoumigratetoTasmania?Whatkindofactivitiesdo
youdowithotherItalians?WhatdoestheAustralianItalianAssociationdo?And
theClub?
TheinterviewswereinItalian,inVenetianandinEnglish,withvaryingdegrees
oflanguagemixing.Theirlengthvariedfrom30minutestoapproximatelytwo
hours.Theinterviewsweretranscribedandthetranscriptionwastheninspected
insearchoffragmentswherespecificlocationssuchasacity,atown,anareaora
churchwerementioned.Herethedataisdiscussedusingillustrative
conversationalsegments.
MULTIPLECENTRESANDTHEARTICULATIONOFSPACESOFSPEECH
Theassociationandtheclubaretheresultofthelonghistoryofsocialand
culturalactivitiesofItalianswhomigratedtotheHobartarea.Theystartedinthe
1950sandarestillactivetodate.Theyarenowmostlyaimedatseniorcitizensof
Italianbackground,whogathertoplaycards,shareameal,participatein
communityeventsorsimplyhaveachat(seeDeFina2007foranotherexample).
Moreover,arestaurant,asoccerteamandvarioussocialandculturalactivities,
includingsometeachingofItalian,revolvearoundboththeassociationandthe
club.ThefirstfragmentisfromaninterviewwithGiovanniwherethe
interviewerisaskingaboutthecurrentandpastactivitiesorganisedbyItalians.iv
Extract1
Giovanni
1
E::hcosì(.)equest’annoio So,thisyearI’mgoingtohave
2
ovviamentedevofare
toorganisesomethingforthe
3
qualcosaperchéèil
centenaryofmyfellow
4
centenariodellamortedel
countrymanSaintPiusthe
5
miopaesanoSanPio
tenth,whohasachurch
6
Decimochehaunachiesaa dedicatedtohiminTaroona.
7
Taroonadedicataalui(.)
SaintPiusthetenth,from
8
SanPiode::cimodaRie::se
Riese,wheremymumcomes
9
dovevienemiamamma(.)
from.Ihavemanycousins
10
Hotanticuginilà°eh°èun
there,heisatruefellow
11
paesanoveroeproprio.
countrymanofmine.
12
BehilVenetohadatotanti
Well,Venetohasgivenmany
13
Papi.
Popes.
Giovanni
14
Eancheilbelluneselà
AndtheonefromBelluno,
15
comesichiamavaquello
whatwashisname?Benedict
16
là?°Benedettoprimo?°
thefirst?Whatwasthename
17
Comesichiamavaquello
oftheonefromBelluno?
18
deBełun?
Interviewer
19
Ehnonmirico::rdo.
Idon’trecall.
Giovanni
20
VittorioVenetopoi=
VittorioVeneto,thencardinal
Interviewer
21
cardinaldeVenessiapoi
22
Pa::paehhh.
Interviewer
23
PoiLucianiPapaLuciani
24
quelloèstatosupoco=ma thatwasn’tinplaceforlong
25
ancheluieraveneto.
buthewasfromVenetotoo.
Giovanni
26
Sì,xeravenetiiera=tanti
Yes,theywerefromVeneto
27
venetitantiveneti=gliera
theywere,manyfromthe
28
tuttietreancaSanPioX
Veneto,theywerethethreeof
29
cardinaldeVenessia(.)o
them,SaintPiusthetenth,
30
patriarcaancorada
cardinalofVenice,or
31
Aquileiasegategnuo(.)ad
Patriarch,stillfromAquileia
32
ognimodosìbehvedremo
hekeptit.Anyways,yes,we
33
Venessiaquan’antravolta.
willseeVeniceonceagain.
34
Ehcertame::ntedeve
Ofcourse.Youmustsee
35
vedereVenezia.
Venice.
Giovanni
36
Nonhopiùnessunodella
Ihavenobodyleftofmyagein
37
miaetàalmiopaesettopiù mysmalltown,nobody,
38
nessu::no=assolutamente
39
nessu::no.
Interviewer
40
Behdaunlato(.)deve
Well,ononeside,youshould
41
ancheringraziareche°in
begratefulthatinaway…
42
uncertosenso°(.)
Giovanni
43
SonoancoraQUA.
I’mstillhere.
Interviewer
44
Ehmstavoperdire(.)leiè
Eh,Iwasgoingtosay,you’re
Interviewer
ofVenice,thenPope,eh.
ThenLuciani,PopeLuciani,
absolutelynobody.
45
ancoraqua.[laugh]
stillhere[laugh]
Giovanni
46
Tesi‘ncoraqua.
Youarestillhere.
InthefirstfewlinesGiovanniconveysthatheshouldorganiseaneventto
celebratethe100thanniversaryofthedeathofSaintPiusX.Throughthemarked
useofthepronoun‘io’(I),grammaticallyunnecessaryinanull-subjectlanguage
likeItalian,andbyreferringtohisorganisingthecelebrationasobvious,heis
immediatelymakingrelevanthisroleinthecommunityastheoneinchargeof
suchevents.Thecelebrationisduetothepresenceofasmallchurchdedicatedto
thesaintinatownintheHobartarea:thesaint‘has’achurchinTaroona,he
holdsaplaceamongthem.Thecentre,thediscursivetoolthatmakesthetelling
ofthiseventrelevant,isthelocalTasmanianspacewherethesaintalreadyfinds
hisplace.InGee’s(2005)termsthechurchisageneratorofmeaningforthe
community,asignforthecreationofspacerelatedtobeingItalianinAustralia.It
isbyvirtueofsuchpre-existingrelevancethatGiovannibringsintheevent,and
thecelebrationisnarratedasaportaltoonceagainaccessthisItalianspacein
Tasmania.
However,thiscreationofspacethroughtheSaintPiusXanniversaryis
articulatedbyGiovanniasapersonalmatter.Thereisanothercentrethatholds
importanceforhim;thatisthesmalltownofRiesewherehismotherwasborn
(lines8-11).AlthoughGiovanniisnotfromthetownitselfbutfromanother
nearby,heclaimsownershipoftheplaceandestablishesaprivateconnection
withthesaint,whomhetwicecallspaesano,whichisthewayItaliansabroad
refertootherItalianswhocomefromthesametown,considereda
characterisationofintimacy(Baldassar&Pesman2005).Theinterviewer,whois
alsofromtheVenetoregionwhereRieseislocated,extendstheconnectionby
mentioningthattherehavebeenafewpopesfromVeneto,andthistriggersthe
useofVenetianbyGiovanni,firstwithdeBełun,andthenwithVenessia.
Whatfollowsisalinguisticallyremarkableturn.Inlines26-27,Giovannirepeats
threetimessynchronically(Tannen2007,48-101)thesentence‘theywerefrom
Veneto’inVenetian.Eachofthethreerepetitions,however,isphonetically
differentandrepresentsadialectalvariationofVenetian:thefirstrealisationof
‘theywere’isxera[ˈzeːra],thesecondiera[ˈjeːra],andthethirdgliera[ˈʎʎeːra].
ThislinguisticperformancereducesthedistancebetweenGiovanni,whoisfrom
asmallcountrytown,andtheinterviewer,borninalargecity,byintroducing
phoneticvariationinthediscourseandthusconveyinglackofattachmentto
locally-markedlinguisticpractices.Giovanniistalkingtoanotherpersonfrom
Venetoandappearstochoosehisdiscursivestrategy–theexhibitionof
phonologicalvariation–inordertonurturethiscommonalitybyeliminating
distance.ItalsoestablishesaconnectionbetweenGiovanniandVenetoasa
whole,includingVeniceitself,whichhementionsseveraltimes.TheVeneto
regionsuddenlybecomesanalternativecentretoRiese;itisacentresharedby
theinterviewerandtheinformant,characterisedbypowerandhistorical
importance(lines30-31).Hisself-positioning,knowledgeofhistoricalfacts,and
competenceinVenetianallowhimtoshiftcentresininteraction,ashecreates
spacewiththeinterviewer.Inline46,despitetheinterviewernotinteractingin
Venetian,Giovannidecidestousethelanguageagainbyrepeatingwhatthe
interviewerhasjustsaidinItalian.TheuseofVenetian,hereinaclosing
repetition(Curl,Local&Walker2006;Harjunpää&Mäkilähde2016),is
thereforekeyforGiovanniandthespacesheiscreatingwiththeinterviewerin
thatthetwosharethepresentinteraction,thelanguageitselfandtheirplaceof
origin.Thisvoluntarychoiceofthecodecreatesmeaningforthisspecific
interactionand,atthesametime,indexesotherspacesthatarerelevanttothis
migrationexperience.
Inthefollowingfragmentweseeanexampleofcreationofspacethatboth
relatestoandtranscendsthelocalityfromwhereGiovannispeaks.
Extract2
Giovanni
1
Enaturalmentealportohai
Andofcourseyou’vealready
2
giàvisto::ilcomplesso
seenthebronzeattheport
3
bronzeodedicatoal(.)al
dedicatedto,tothesonof
4
figliodiitaliani.
Italians.
5
Sì=sìl’hovisto=Bernacchi
Yes,yes,I’veseenit,Bernacchi
6
eh.
eh.
Giovanni
7
Allorailcoso::loscultoreche
Sotheman,thesculptorwho
8
hafattoquellavorobronzeolì madethatbronzeworkthere
9
=infattièmortounpaiodi
actuallydiedacoupleofweeks
10
settimanefa=siamoandati
ago,wewenttohisfuneral.He
11
anchealfuneralesuocheera
wasapersonalfriend.When
12
ancheunamicopersona::le(.) hewasyounghewona
13
ilqualedagiovaneaveva
scholarshipandwentto
14
vintounaborsadistu::dio(.)
Veronaandworkedin
15
èandatoaVero::naeha
foundriesinVerona,wherehe
16
lavoratonellefonderiea
learnttousetheItalian
Interviewer
Interviewer
17
Veronadovehaimparatoa
techniquetomeltallthe
18
usarelatecnicaitalianaper
statueshecouldfindaround
19
fonderetuttelestatueche
here,therearemany,even
20
avevaintornoqui=sono
downtown,fountainsetcetera
21
molte(.)ancheincittà
andalso,also,youknowinthe
22
fontaneecceteraeanche
mainland.Andhewasreally
23
ancheYOUKNOWINTHE
verygood,verygoodindeed,a
24
MAINLANDederaveramente
manofthelandalso,yes,and
25
bravissimo=proprio
helivedinasmalltown
26
bravissimo=unuomo>della
nearbywhichwascalled
27
terraanchesì<eabita::vain
Campania[inEnglish],
28
unpaesetto°vicino°chesi
Campania[inItalian],called
29
chiama<CAMPANIA>Campania thisbyagreatlandowner
30
(.)cosìchiama::todaun
31
grandepossessorelìperchéla fertileandhecalledit
32
terraerafertile=l’ha
33
chiamatoCampaniaCAMPANIA Campania[inEnglish],they
34
=diconoloroCAMPANIA.
sayCampania[inEnglish].
35
YEAHYEAH.
Yeahyeah.
therebecausethegroundwas
Campania[inItalian],
GiovannikeepshisattentionontheculturalproductionofItaliansinTasmania
andremindstheinterlocutorofthepresenceofanotherportalinHobart,the
bronzesculptureattheport.ThisartefactissomehowtwiceItalian-Tasmanian,
asitrepresentsasecond-generationhistoricalfigureand,inaddition,wasmade
byafirstgenerationmigrant.AccordingtoGiovanni,notonlyisthisbronze
significantbecauseittestifiestangiblytothesuccessofItaliansontheisland,but
italsoshowstheabilityofItalianstotakeownershipoftheirownreference
figuresandposttributestotheminvisiblearenas.Theappropriationofspace
throughthisaestheticact(Phipps&Kay2014)isheremadeevenmore
significantbythetransnationalmovementsofthesculptor(cf.Lemke2011,214)
andtheliteralrecastingoflocalobjectsthankstoskillsacquiredacrossnational
boundaries.Whilethe‘situatedsignificance’(Levinson1983,329)ofthe
sculptureremainsintheforeground,othercentresareappropriatedbyGiovanni
togeneratespacethatismeaningfulforthisaccount.ItisagainacityinVeneto
thatholdsrelevance–Veronainthisinstance–togetherwithitscraftsmanship,
whichistransportableaswellasembeddedinitsdistantlocation.Thesculptural
techniqueslearntthroughmovementsareusedtomodelpreviouslyexisting
bronzeitemsbothinTasmaniaandinotherAustraliansites.Themainland,
mentionedthroughcode-switching(lines23-24),isusedasatooltoexpandthe
scopeofactionofthesculptor,whowasnotonlyapersonalfriendofGiovanni
butalsoatranslocalpersoninthesenseofsomeonewhohascontributedtothe
mouldingofvisibleitemslocallyandelsewhere(Hall1996;Wilson2008).Heis
definedasamanoftheland,probablymeaning‘attachedtoaland’althoughit
remainsunclearwhichlandGiovannirefersto.Whatisclearisthathelivedina
townnearby(lines27-28)thatischaracterisedaschieflyItalian-Australian.The
tinyhamletwasnamedCampaniabyanItalianbecauseofitsfertility,which
remindedhimoftheCampaniaregionofItaly,famousforitscrops.Thetownis
repeatedlyqualifiedinitsbilingualduplicity,phonologicallyAustralianfornonItaliansanddualItalian-and-English-soundingforthoseliketheinterviewerwho
knowitstoponymicalorigin.Thephonologicalshifthere(lines29-34)adds
detailtothere-significationofspacesthroughmovementsandthroughlanguage,
attheendbeingbothappropriatedandotheredintheiradaptedversion(Apter
2006).Giovanni’shistoricaltransnationalmemorycombinedwithlinguistic
competenceallowslayersofinterpretationthathelphimtoestablishmeaningin
space.Inthissensethisfragmentshowsfromadifferentanglehowspacesof
speechcanbeshapedbycentresininteraction,whichareherebothbroughtin
andcontextuallytransformed.
Inthefollowingfragmentherecountsthebirthofethnically-markedspacesin
HobartandgoesontoexplainthesignificanceoftheItalianpresencein
Tasmania.
Extract3
Giovanni
1
Cisonostateanchedueo
Therehavebeentwoor
2
treletterealdirettoredel
threeletterstotheeditorof
3
giornaleTheMercury
thenewspaperTheMercury
4
dicendochequestiitalianisi sayingthattheseItalians
5
accumulanoinsieme,nonsi
sticktogether,don’tmixor
6
mettonoinsiemeo
becomepartofthe
7
diventanopartedella
Australiancommunity.
8
comunitàaustraliana(.)
They’veevenaskedforthe
9
hannochiestopersinopoi
opinionoftheChiefJustice
10
anchel’opinioneOFTHE
herewhosaidthatitwould
11
CHIEFJUSTICEHEREcheanche bebetterifthesemigrants
12
hadettosìsarebbemeglio
spreadintheAustralian
13
chequestiemigrantisi
14
confondesseroinmezzoalla theirownsuburb.Buthere
15
comunitàaustraliana=non
therewasasortofLittle
16
creasserounquartiereloro
Italy,there,atailor,a
17
[laugh]equic’erainvece
cobbler,abarber,theyall
18
unaspeciediLittleItalylà
belongedtoItalians.
19
sartouncalzolaioil
20
barbieretuttiquantidi
21
italiani.
Interviewer
22
YEAH.
Yeah.
Giovanni
23
Ilcaffèeilristorante.Tutto
Thecafé,therestaurant.
24
quantoitaliano(.)eil
EverythingwasItalian.The
25
DE=DELICATESSENilnegozio
delicatessen,the
26
digenerialimentari(.)e
delicatessen…sothereyou
27
alloraletteresulgiornale
goletterstothenewspaper
28
chequestiitalianinonsi
sayingthattheseItalians
29
mescolanoconlacomunità
don’tmixwiththe
30
(.)quellaeraveramente=è community.Thatwas,is
31
LittleItalylanostraLittle
32
Italy(.)chenonèpoidurata whichdidn’tlastverylong,
33
moltononèvero?
didit?
34
Macom’èstatoquando
Sohowwasitwhenthey
35
hannocominciatoavendere startedsellingItalian
36
lecoseitaliane?Lepiaceva? things?Didyoulikeit?
Interviewer
communityandnotcreate
LittleItaly,ourLittleItaly,
Giovanni
37
Ahmanatura::lesonostati
Ah,naturally,thosewere
38
eventienormiquellilà
enormousevents,because
39
perchénaturalmente=vai
naturallyyouenterthe
40
dentroalDELICATESSEN
Italiandelicatessen,apart
41
italianoapartelenuove
fromthenewvegetables,
42
verdurecheloronon
whichtheyhadneverseen,
43
avevanomaivistononè
right?Andneverknown,
44
vero?emaiconosciu::to(.)
thendifferentprosciuttos
45
epoicominciaaarrivarei
startedtoarrive,different
46
prosciuttidiversiformaggi
cheeses,oliveoil,thefirst
47
diversil’oliod’olivailprimo oliveoil,Iusedtobuyitat
48
oliod’olivaiolocompravo
thechemistinsmallbottles
49
inbottigliettecosìin
likethis,youcouldfindit
50
farmacia(.)sitrovavasolo
onlyatthechemist,you
51
infarmaciaunabottiglietta
couldn’tbuyabottlelike
52
così(.)fuorineinegozinon
this,oliveoil,intheshops
53
sicompraval’oliod’oliva
around,eh?Thenbalsamic
54
°eh°poil’acetobalsamicoè
vinegarcamefromModena,
55
venutodaModena=nonè
right?Thewaytolookat
56
vero?Ècambiatotuttoil
thingschanged,littleby
57
mo::dodivedereunpo’alla little,Italians,abunchof
58
voltahanno(.)gliitaliani
semi-illiteratepeople,
59
questaunamassadigente
basically,havechangedthe
60
semianalfabeta
wayofliving,ofdressing
61
praticamente(.)hanno
also,clothes,shoes,you
62
cambiatoilmododivivere
know,differentpeople,also
63
=anchedivestirepoivestiti waytorelatetoeachother,
64
scarpe=sa(.)gentediversa tobefair,eh,so,that’sit,it’s
65
ancheilmododirelazioni
incredibletheinfluence
66
personalisinceramente(.)
we’vehad…sometimes
67
ehcosìèincredibile
whenIgetasked“Whatdid
68
l’influenzacheabbiamo
youItaliansdo?”“Us?”I
69
avuto(.)allevoltequando
alwayssaytothosewhoare
70
michiedono“Macosa
educatedattheuniversityof
71
facevatevoiitaliani?”Noi?E thethirdageoralsodown
72
glidicosempreaquelliche
thereattheUniversityof
73
sonoeducatiall’università
Tasmania,Ialwaysusedto
74
dellaterzaetàoanchegiù
sayatthebeginning:“You
75
all’universitàdella
knowwhatJuliusCesaronce
76
Tasmaniadicevosempre
said?Hesaid“Venivinivici”,
77
all’inizio:losaicosa
Isaid,Icame,Isaw,I
78
scrivevaGiulioCesare?HE
conquered”.Andwewrite:
79
SAID“venividivici”goito(.)
“Dearmum,wecame,we
80
sonvenutohovistoho
saw,wecame,wesaw,we
81
conquista::to(.)enoi
concreted.Concrete
82
scriviamo(.)caramamma
everywhere”.
83
siamovenuti,abbiamovisto
84
WECAMEWESAWWE
85
CONCRETED(.)CONCRETE
86
EVERYWHERE.
Interviewer
87
Eheh.[laugh]
Eh,eh.[laugh]
Giovanni
88
ITELLgliaustraliani
ItelltheAustralians,
89
EVERYWHEREYOUSEE
everywhereyousee
90
CONCRETENOWANDREMEMBER
concretenow,and
91
ISAIDTHATYOUFATHERYOU
remember,Isaid,thatyou
92
GRANDFATHERcamminavano
father,yougrandfather
93
perlacittàequando
whentheywerewalking
94
arrivanoacasaricevevano
aroundthecity,theywould
95
lebastona::tedallamoglie
getbashedbytheirwives
96
cheavevanotuttelescarpe
becausetheirshoeswereall
97
pienedifango(.)adesso
muddy.Nowyouwalk
98
camminiperlacittàedici
aroundthecityandgohome
99
vaiacasaconlescarpe
andyourshoesareclean,
100
pulite(.)primadinoi
beforewecameyouwent
101
andaviacasasempreconle homeandyourshoeswere
102
scarpesporche[laugh]
dirty.[laugh]Numberone,I
103
numerounogoitoepoi
said,andthenwealsowent
104
siamoandatisuacostruire
andbuiltthepowerplants
105
lecentralielettrichesuah
upintheforests,eh,and
106
nelleforeste(.)eadesso
nowwhenyougohomeyou
107
quandovaiacasanon
don’tlightupacandle,you
108
accendiunacande::la(.)
flickandlightcomeson.We
109
YOUFLICK(.)ANDTHELIGHT
broughtyoulight.Ialways
110
COMESON(.)LALUCETE
saythistothem,whichis
111
L’ABBIAMOPORTATANOI
alsopartlytrue.
112
(.)ioglidicosemprecosìa
113
lorocheinparteèanche
114
unaverità::.
GiovannirecallsthatthecreationofaclusterofItalianshopswasopposedby
localresidents,somuchsothatindignantlettersweresenttothemedia.
AuthoritiesexpressedadverseopinionsaboutItalianspacesinHobart,which
GiovanniinvokesastheepitomeoftheresistancetothenewlyformedItalian
area.Inline11heemploysthecodeswitcheddeicticheretorefertothelocalised
responsetothedisputeandthentheItalianqui‘here’andlà‘there’inreference
toItalianshopsinlines17-18,thusprojectinghisbelongingtotheTasmanian
spacewhencehespeaks;thesepointsarereferredtoasphysicallynear,located
inaspacethatisadjacenttotheoneheiscurrentlyinhabiting(cf.Haviland
2005).HereiteratesthehostilityoftheHobartcitizensinthesecondturnas
well.HeopposesthewaytheletterstoTheMercurydescribedItaliansas‘those
Italians’withhisinternalplacementwithintheItalianspace(‘ourLittleItaly’).
HebuildshisallegiancetotheItaliancommunity,whichhasbeenotheredby
Anglo-Australians,andatthesametimepositionshimselfinthemiddleofthe
dispute.ItisalsointerestingthatattheendoftheturnwhenmentioningLittle
Italyheusesfirstthepasttenseandthenthepresenttense(line30).Althoughby
hisownadmissiontheLittleItalyofHobartnolongerexistsandisplacedinthe
past,itisrecreatednowforandthroughthisinteraction.Itismeaningfulatthe
verymomentwhenheistellingit.
Theinterviewerenquiresmoreintothepersonalexperienceofthemanin
relationtotheformationofLittleItalyinHobart,whichtriggersananimated
turnwhereGiovanniraisestheissueoftheculturaldistancebetweenItalians
andAustralians.Heexemplifiessuchdistancebytellingaboutthechangeinthe
useofoliveoil.BeforeItaliansstartedtheirfoodbusinesses,oliveoilwas
availableonlyasaformofmedicationinpharmacies.Byimportingit
systematicallyandestablishingitwithinanItalianAustralianspace,Italiansreappropriateditasagroceryitem.ThankstothenewlyacquiredItalianspace,
signscouldbeaddedandappropriatedasethnically-markedproductsthus
acquiringakeytransnationalimageaslegitimateItalianitems.More
importantly,theseproductsarenarratedascarriersofchangeinthewider‘upscaled’(Blommaert2007)Tasmanianspace.Theyfunctionasanentrypoint
whereGiovannicanmovefromtheItalianspaceplacedatthemarginofthe
widerAustraliansociety,toacentralposition.Startingfromline56,thecentre
becomestheTasmaniansocietyaroundItalians,whichisseenasboththe
receiverofchangeandthedevicebywhichtheItalianpresencegains
prominence.GiovannirecountsthispositionofItalians,comparingittothe
arrivalofCaesarinGaulandcitinginLatinthephraseveni,vidi,viciand
translatingitintoacodeswitchedItalianEnglishphrase.Hepositionshimselfas
ateacher,enactingtheeducationalspacethatheusedtoinhabit,byemploying
bothdiscourse-pragmaticmarkers(nonèvero?)andahighdegreeof
codeswitchinginlines89-93and110-112.TheItalianinfluenceonTasmaniais
characterisedasanepicachievementwheresemi-literatemigrantswhowrite
letterstotheirmothersinItalycanachieveaformoftriumphthankstoboth
culturalpresenceandhardlabour.Itisevidentthatthecentresherehave
nothingtodowiththelocalItalianoriginthatwasmaderelevantintheprevious
fragments.Rather,pan-ItalianspacesinTasmaniaareconstructedasvictorious.
Itisthroughtheuseofspacereferencesthatthiscreationofmeaningis
subjectivelypossible,andisappropriatedand‘re-ordered’(Valentine,Sporton&
BangNielsen2008,385)inthehereandnow.IndoingthisGiovanninimbly
breakslanguagebordersandmobilisesthenetworkofspatialresourcesathis
disposal.
Soonafter,GiovannidecidestotelltheinterviewerabouttheAustralianItalian
Associationandthechangesthathaveoccurredinrecenttimes.Clearlyalsoin
thisfragmentspatialworkintersectswithlanguagethroughthedeploymentof
centresthatarevariouslycharacterisedaslocalandtransnational.
Extract4
Giovanni
1
L’unicacosachemi
OnethingI’msorryaboutis
2
dispiaceècheabbiano
thatthey’vedestroyedthe
3
distruttolabiblioteca(.)
library,adonationfromthe
4
unadonazionedel
ministryofforeignaffairs,
5
ministerodegliaffariesteri sevenhundredandfifty
6
(.)<settecentocinquanta>
volumes,allwellcatalogued.
7
volumituttibencatalogati
Theyhaveelectedanew
8
(.)hannoelettoilcomitato
committeeandthat’sthat,it
9
nuovoeTHAT’STHATè
disappeared,itdisappeared
10
scomparsa=èscomparsa
11
completamente.
12
Evabehèandatacosì=
13
peròhannoancoraqualche Buttheystillhavesome
14
volumeunoscaffa::le.
volumes,ashelf.
Giovanni
15
Pocaroba°pocaroba°(.)
Notmuch,notmuch.No,itwas
16
Noeraunabella
anicelittlelibrary.It’sa
17
bibliotechi::na(.)èuna
shamebecausemyfriends,the
18
vergognaperchéimiei
Greeks,theyhavealltheir
19
amicigrecihannotuttele
classes,theyhaveacultural
20
classi=hannouncentro
centre,nobodyfromtheclub
21
culturalenessunodelclub
hasevertouchedit,it’s
22
l’hamaitocca::toè
independent,theyhaveanice
23
indipendente(.)hannouna library,theyhavetheirclasses
24
bellabibliotecahannole
there.Eh,so,thiscommittee,
25
classilà(.)ehhhperciò(.)
especiallytheclub,is
26
questocomitato
particularlyconcernedwith
27
specialmentedelclubsi
money.So,yes,it’sdifficultto
28
interessadeisoldi(5.0)
createanyinterestinculture
29
così(.)èdifficile
orthingslikethat.
30
introdurreunsensodi
31
interessenellaculturao
32
robadelgenere.
33
Eh.
Interviewer
Interviewer
completely.
Allright,that’showthingsgo.
Eh.
Giovanni
34
Avevamounsaccodi
Weusedtohaveheapsof
35
conferenze(.)c’eragente
conferences.Therewere
36
dall’università::,
peoplefromtheuniversity,
37
professo::riilprofessor
professors,professorFiskar,a
38
Fiskarsvizzeroincaricato
Swiss,inchargeoftheGerman
39
deldipartimentodi
department,whoplayed
40
tedescochehafatto
MisterGeppettowhenwe
41
Geppettoquando
presentedPinocchio.Hewas
42
presentavamoPinocchio
happytocome,really
43
(.)eracontentodiveni::re
enthusiastic.Thingschange,
44
entusiastaproprio(.)Le
eh.
45
cosecambianoe::h.
In1-11Giovannireferstoasmalllibrarythathewasabletoputtogetherwhen
intheAustralianItalianAssociation.Thelibraryisacontentioustopicamong
thosewhorevolvearoundtheassociationandtheclubasitwasdismantled
whentheassociationwasrenovatedandmostofthebookswerelost.Duringthe
variousinterviewsGiovannimentionedthislibraryatotaloffivetimes,
recollectinghowitwasbuiltanditssadend.Forhimthelibrarywasan
importantassetforthecommunity,culturallychargedandvalidatedbythe
involvementofItalianinstitutions(lines4-5).Giovannifindsitisdifficultto
createaninterestincultureamongmigrants,andhementionsprofitasacurrent
drivingforceamongItaliansinvolvedintheassociation.Agreatdealofpersonal
investmentisexpressedinthisfragment,evidentwhenhesaysbibliotechina,
diminutivefor‘library’,avevamo‘wehad’,èunavergogna‘it’sashame’.Giovanni
hasdedicatedhislifetothepromotionofItaliancultureinTasmaniaandinthis
accountheshareshisfrustrationaboutwhathappenedwhenhewasnolonger
abletotakecareoftheassociation.Interestingly,herethealignmentwiththe
activitiesofothermigrantcommunitiesisbroughtinasarelevantreference
point(Cohen2013,109-119);thelocalculturalandeducationalpracticesof
GreeksinTasmaniaareindicatedasthebenchmarkforhowthesematters
shouldbeadministered.AccordingtoGiovanni,theGreekculturalcentrehas
showntherightwaytogo;theGreekcentreneverallowedinterferenceonthe
partoftheGreekclub,becausetheclubisdedicatedtoactivitiesthatarenot
concernedwithculture.Giovannishiftscentrehereveryclearlyandcallsinto
questionlocalpracticesof‘amici’(friends)assignificanttothemanagementof
culturalassetsamongItalians.Similarly,theinvolvementofanacademicfrom
theUniversityofTasmaniaintheperformancesorganisedbytheassociation
reinforcesboththeculturalandthelocalrelevanceofthesepastactivities,in
relationtowhichGiovannipositionshimselfaschiefpromoter(lines33-43).
Interestingly,suchreinforcementcomesfromsomeonespecificallyidentifiedas
non-Italianandnon-Italianspeaking.Thespatialworkisonceagainmultilayered
andlinguisticallymeaningfulasaresultofreferencepointsusedtofinddirection
whilecultivatingspace(LaCecla2000,102).Moreover,theseinstancesarein
linewithmuchrecentresearchthathasquestionedtheusefulnessofsetting
rigidboundariestodefinecommunities(Pennycook2010;Blommaert&Backus
2013).Itisspace,instead,thatappearstobesociallyrelevanthereandsoarethe
waysinwhichculturalactivitiescreatecommunality.
Inthefollowingfragmentwecanseeanotherexampleofhowmovementand
languagearestrictlyconnected.
Extract5
Giovanni
1
Miricordoche::andavoin
IrememberIwasgoingto
2
Italianavolta=e=c’eraqui
Italyonceandheretherewas
3
untrentinochem’hadetto(.)
amanfromTrentinowho
4
“Ciòsenti(.)quandoritorni
askedme:“Solistenwhenyou
5
qua(.)teveaCastelfranco?”
comebackhere…areyou
6
“Sì”,goito“aCastelfranco”(.)
goingtoCastelfranco?”.“Yes”I
7
“Tevealmarcàetemeporti
said“toCastelfranco”.“Yougo
8
°qua°isemideradici°gheto
tothemarketandbringme
9
capi’°deradicio”(.)mighe
hereradicchioseeds,you
10
portoquaisemideradicchioe understand,radicchioones”.
11
luilihapiantatiacasasuapoi AndIbringhimhereradicchio
12
hafattounpo’disoldi=e=si seedsandthenhesowedthem
13
èfattounacasettalìgiù
athisplace.Thenhemade
14
vicinoalmareehaPRIMROSE
somemoneyandgotahouse
15
SA::NDSehapiantato=aveva
downtherebythesea,eh,in
16
unbell’ortomoltopiùgrande
PrimroseSandsandhesowed,
17
lìepiantavastiradicchi
hehadanicegarden,much
18
trevixani=infattiognitanto
largerthere,andsowedthis
19
menedavauno.
Trevisoradicchio,hegaveme
20
somefromtimetotime.
Thisextractfurtherelaboratesonthespatialworkininteractionwherelinguistic
abilitiesandchoiceofcodesbecomeparticularlysalient.Giovannirecallsan
episodewhereanacquaintanceaskedhimtobringsomeradicchioseedsfrom
Italy.Radicchioisaleafvegetablecultivatedandusedinthenortheastofthe
countryandassuchpointstospecificspaceswithwhichbothinterlocutorsare
familiarsomuchsothattheinterviewerreactstothistopicwithaconstant
smile.Inthissenseintroducingthiselementcreatessharedempathicgroundin
thisrecount(Hayashi1996,11-13)wherebothGiovanniandtheinterviewer
acknowledgetheimportanceofthisitem.Plantingradicchioisatypicalexample
ofconstructingethnicspaceabroad,asdescribedbyLiebscherandDailey-O’Cain
(2013,176-217).Thecommunallifearoundasharedsignismaderelevantinthe
ItalianTasmaniancontextthroughthere-enactmentofbehavioursthatarefixed
intimeaspre-migrationhabits.Atthesametime,thisspaceisre-signifiedbythe
retellingofavisittoItalyandbyconnectingitwithdifferentpartsoftheisland
(lines15-19).MoreinterestinglythereportedexchangebetweenGiovanniand
hisacquaintanceshowsthecreationofadifferentformofcommunication,that
is,thelinguisticbridgebetweenTrentinoandVenetianspeakers.Manyvarieties
ofTrentinoshareadegreeoftypologicalsimilaritywithVenetianthattranslates
intopartialmutualintelligibility(Zamboni1979;Pellegrini1992).Giovanni
enactsthismutualintelligibilitybyusingVenetianasifthesharingofradicchio
andthesharingoflinguistictoolswerecontiguousforhim.Thetwospeakers
coulddispensewithItalianwhiletalkingtoeachother,therebycreatingabond
thatallowsoneofthemtoaskforafavour.Thefavourwouldresultinnew
radicchioleavesgrowninTasmania,inturnsharedasaresultofamicablebonds
activelycreatedthroughspacesofspeech.However,GiovannialsousesItalianin
thisexchange,signallingtheambiguousnatureofthechoiceofVenetian.The
centresshiftdynamicallybetweentransversalVeneto-Trentino-Italianplanes
andlocalcontextsofinteraction,wherebyusingavarietyoflinguisticresources
includingabundantdeictics(lines2,5,8,10,13,16)andspecificlocations(line
14),GiovannisituateshiscommonlifewiththeotherItalians.Inotherwords,the
combinationoflinguistictoolshelpGiovannito‘construeandconstructthevery
contextwithinwhichthatinteractionistakingplace’(Sidnell&Enfield2012,
309).
Inthefollowingfragmentadifferentcombinationoflinguistictools‘cooperate
forexpression’(Merleau-Ponty1960,85)sothatGiovannicantakeposition.
Extract6
Giovanni
1
Ecosìquestaèlacomunità
AndsothisistheItalian
2
italiana(.)èancoraattiva(.)
community,itisstillactive
3
oltreaquello=ohdevo
andbesides,oh,Imust
4
<menzionare>chec’èuna
mentionthatthereisan
5
processioneitaliananavolta
Italianprocessiononcea
6
all’anno.
year.
Interviewer
7
Eh.
Right.
Giovanni
8
L’unica°processione°della
Theonlyprocessionin
9
Tasmaniaperleviedellacittà
Tasmaniathroughthe
10
cheèancoralaprocessionedi
streetsofthecity.Itisthe
11
SanCarloBorromeoalcuiera
SaintCarloBorromeo
12
dedicatalanostrachie::saa
processiontowhomour
13
NorthHo::bart=vicinoalclub
churchinNorthHobartwas
14
=attraversostradache
dedicated,nexttotheclub,
15
naturalmenteèstatachiusada throughtheroadwhich
16
moltiannieadessoèuna
naturallyhasbeenclosed
17
speciediah::(.)nonso::ah::
formanyyearsandnowisa
18
(5.0)unaspeciediquasi
kindof,mm,Idon’tknow,
19
museo=raccoltadidatiperla
mm,museum,datastorage
20
diocesidiHo::bart
fortheHobartdioceses.
Interviewer
22
Manoncisipuòentrarelì?
Sonoonecangetin?
Giovanni
23
Sì°WELL°cioècisonodelle
Yes,well,Imeanthereare
24
suore=dellevoltesuonarete
nuns,youcouldringIguess,
25
goitoperchéèl’orache
asIsaid,becauseit’stime
26
anch’iovadaasuonare=a
alsoformetoringandseeif
27
vedereseilmio::fonte
mybaptismalfountisstill
28
battesimalesiaancoralà=che there.Theothersmovestuff,
29
queglialtrilomuovono=la
priestsdonothaverespect
30
robalo::rocheipretinon
forthesethings.LasttimeI
31
hannorispettodiqueste(.)
wenttherethefountwas
32
cosel’ultimavoltachesono
stilltherebutmanyother
33
andatolàeraancoralìilfonte
things,eventhestationof
34
però::molti=persinodivie
thecross,haddisappeared.
35
cruciseranoscomparse
Theyhadsevenoreight
36
avevanosetteottostatuedi
statuesofSaintsandMary,
37
santiemadonne=lì
kepttherethattheyno
38
accumulatechenonusavano
longerusedsoallourstuff,
39
piùperciòtuttalanostraroba
thebenches,havevanished
40
ibanchisonosvanititutti
allofthemandofcourseall
Interviewer
41
quantienaturalmentele
thevaluablestherelikethe
42
ricchezzecheeranolìdentro
goldenostensorydonated
43
poicomel’ostensoriod’oro
by[internationalcompany
44
donatotral’altroda
name],bytheway,thatone,
45
[internationalcompanyname] andotherthingsdonatedas
46
èstatodonatoquellolàealtre wellaregone.Theybelong
47
cosedonatedanoisono
tothem.Thechurchwas
48
andate°via°=appartienea
builtonlandthatthe
49
loro=lachiesaèstata
cathedralowns.Anywayif
50
costruitasuterrenoche
youtoohavetodowith
51
appartieneallacattedrale=
priests,neverbuildanything
52
peròanchesehaiachefare
ontheirlandbecauseyou
53
coipretinoncostruiremai
don’thaverights.
54
sullaloroterraperchétu
55
dirittinoncen’hai.
56
Eheh[laugh].
Eheh[laugh].
InthisfinalfragmentweseethattheItaliancommunityisdescribedasstillalive
inTasmaniaontwodifferentlevels.OnonelevelItaliansstillorganisearangeof
activitiesincludingpassingthroughthelandduringreligiousprocessionsand
visitingItalianTasmanianlocalitiessuchasaCatholicchurchfoundedby
Italians.Onanotherleveltheirpresenceismarkedbytheexistenceof
repositoriesthataremeanttotestifynotonlytotheparticipationofthe
communityinitsreligiouslife(Fortier2000)butalsototheattentionof
internationalcompaniesthatconnectItalyandotherplaces(lines43-46).His
subscribingtothecategoryofItaliansabroadandplacinghiscontributionina
transnationalperspectiveenableshimtoelevatehisTasmanianItalianspace
and,atthesametime,toarticulatesuchspaceas‘culturallymeaningful’(Duranti
1994,49)becauseofthisvalidationfromelsewhere.Yetthespacecreated
throughdonationstothechurchisseenasprecarious,whereadivisionbetween
theclergyandlaypeoplecausesobjectstodisappear.Notallspacescreatedby
ItaliansinHobartaresuccessfullyappropriated,andtheplacementofvaluable
objectswithinsitesthatmarkculturalpresenceisnotdescribedasasafe
strategytoclaimrights(lines49-55).Theareaofthechurchisrecountedas
Italianbutassociatedwithout-groupmembers–nunsandpriests–whoare
Italianbutdonot(orwhonolonger)sharespacewiththecommunity.
CONCLUDINGREMARKS
Whenrecountingepisodesoftheirexperienceofmovementindividualsinvoke
instanceswherespaceswerebroughttolifeand,inparallel,itisthemoment-tomomentunfoldingoftalkthatbringsaboutspace.Thisarticlehasinvestigated
thetensionsbetweenthecreationofspaceininteractionandtheuseofa
numberofcentres,appropriatedasmeaningfulpointsinrelationtowhich
migrants‘takeposition’(Merleau-Ponty1945,225).TasmanianItaliansoffera
goodentrypointintotheseprocessesinlightnotonlyoftheirremotelocation,
whichmakescentre-peripherydynamicsparticularlyrelevant(Wang,Spotti,
Juffermans,Cornips,Kroon&Blommaert2014),butalsooftheirbeing
completelyignoredinthetransnational‘masternarratives’(Bamberg&
Georgakopoulou2008,385)ofItaliandiasporas.
ThedataanalysedhereshowsthatGiovanni,whendecipheringhispastand
presentexperiences(Villareal2014,269),deploysanumberofmeaningful
centrestomakesenseofhismigration.Thesecentresareoftenrelatedtothe
verylocaldwellingsitesfromwherehehappenstospeak.Theyarevariously
characterisedasItalian,AustralianorTasmanianandmadesignificantalonga
fluctuatingpatternofmembershipcategorisation;forexamplethecaseofthe
processionofSaintCarloBorromeothroughthestreetsofHobartorthe
referencetohowothergroupsmanagedtheirculturalactivitiesinTasmania.But
thecentresthismigrantcanexploitininteractionarealsothoselocated
elsewhere:asmalltowninVeneto,alargeareainthenorthofItalyaswellasthe
Australianmainland.Thekeyactorhereisabletonavigatearoundthesesites
bothlocallyandtransnationally,constructingthemwhilehere-tellshis
experiences.Hedoessobyusinganamplerangeoflinguisticresources,among
whichcodechoice,codeswitchingandintentionalexposureofphonological
variationareparticularlyevident.Itisthroughtheskilfulmanagementofthese
resourcesthatheisabletocreatespace.Giovannitellsepisodesofsuccess,
failure,validationandpersonalattachments,andindoingsohislanguageallows
himtotransportandrebuildvalue.Indoingso,centresareemployedas
momentarilyfixedorientingpoints(Liebscher&Dailey-O'Cain2013,266-269)
thatresonatewithotherpointstocreatespacesofspeechpreciselybecausethey
arebothdiscursivelymediatedandspatiallydistributed(Pennycook2016).
Thesecentresarethereforenotsimplyreferencepointsusedasdeictictools,but
fociendowedwithdifferentpowersthatareusedthroughandforthespacesof
speechtheyhelptoshape.Continuingthisexaminationofthishighly
personalisedconfigurationofspaceandlanguagepracticesmightopenarear
windowontothelinguisticsofItalianmigration,onethatcouldhelpto
understandthenexusofmobility,situatedmeaning-makingandhybridlanguage
use.
REFERENCES
Ang, Ien & Stratton, Jon (1996). Asianing Australia: Notes toward a critical
transnationalism in cultural studies. Cultural Studies 10: 16-36.
Apter, Emily (2006). The translation zone: a new comparative literature. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Baldassar, Loretta & Pesman, Ros (2005). From paesani to global Italians: Veneto
migrants in Australia. Crawley: UWA Press.
Bamberg, Michael G. W. & Georgakopoulou, Alexandra (2008). Small stories as a
new perspective in narrative and identity analysis. Text & Talk-An
Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse Communication Studies 28:
377-396.
Bauman, Richard (1986). Story, performance, and event: contextual studies of oral
narrative. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Baynham, Mike (2003). Narratives in space and time: beyond “backdrop” accounts of
narrative orientation. Narrative Inquiry 13: 347-366.
Blommaert, Jan (2005). Discourse: a critical introduction. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Blommaert, Jan (2007). Sociolinguistic scales. Intercultural Pragmatics 4: 1-19.
Blommaert, Jan & Backus, Ad (2013). Superdiverse repertoires and the individual. In
Ingrid de Saint-Georges & Jean-Jacques Weber (eds.), Multilingualism and
Multimodality: Current Challenges for Educational Studies 11-32. Rotterdam:
SensePublishers.
Bucholtz, Mary & Hall, Kira (2005). Identity and interaction: a sociocultural
linguistic approach. Discourse Studies 7: 585-614.
Byrd Clark, Julie (2009). Multilingualism, citizenship, and identity: voices of youth
and symbolic investments in an urban, globalized world. London; New York:
Continuum.
Cohen, Anthony P. (2013). Symbolic construction of community. London: Routledge.
Cresswell, Tim (2004). Place: a short introduction. Malden: Blackwell.
Cronin, Michael (2006). Translation and identity. London; New York: Routledge.
Curl, Traci S., Local, John & Walker, Gareth (2006). Repetition and the prosody–
pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics 38: 1721-1751.
de Certeau, Michel (1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
De Fina, Anna (2007) Code-switching and the construction of ethnic identity in a
community of practice. Language in Society 36: 371-392.
Dong, Jie & Blommaert, Jan (2009). Space, scale and accents: constructing migrant
identity in Beijing. In James Collins, Stefaan Slembrouck & Mike Baynham
(eds.), Globalization and language in contact: Scale, migration and
communicative practices 42-61. London; New York: Continuum.
Duranti, Alessandro (1994). From grammar to politics: linguistic anthropology in a
Western Samoan village. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Escobar, Arturo (2001). Culture sits in places: reflections on globalism and subaltern
strategies of localization. Political Geography 20: 139-174.
Fetterman, David (2010). Ethnography: Step-by-step. London: Sage.
Fortier, Anne-Marie Fortier (2000). Migrant belongings: memory, space, identity.
Oxford; New York: Berg.
García, Ofelia (2011). Educating New York's bilingual children: constructing a future
from the past. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism
14: 133-153.
Garcia, Ofelia & Li Wei (2014). Translanguaging: language, bilingualism and
education. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gee, James Paul (2005). Semiotic Social Spaces and Affinity Spaces: From The Age
of Mythology to Today's Schools. In David Barton & Karin Tusting (eds.),
Beyond communities of practice: language, power, and social context 214–
232. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Giddens, Anthony (1984). The constitution of society: outline of the theory of
structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hall, Stuart (1996). Cultural identity and diaspora. In Stuart Hall & Paul Du Gay
(eds.), Questions of cultural identity 51-59. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Harjunpää, Katariina & Mäkilähde, Aleksi (2016). Reiteration: at the intersection of
code-switching and translation. Multilingua 35: 163-201.
Harvey, David (1973). Social justice and the city. Athens: University of Georgia
Press.
Harvey, David (1989). The condition of postmodernity : an enquiry into the origins of
cultural change. Oxford; Cambridge: Blackwell.
Harvey, David (2006). Space as a keyword. In Noel Castree & Derek Gregory (eds.),
David Harvey: a critical reader 270-293. Malden; Oxford: Blackwell.
Haviland, John (2005). Dreams of blood: Zinacantecs in Oregon. In Mike Baynham &
Anna De Fina (eds.), Dislocations/relocations: narratives of displacement 87126. Manchester; Northampton: St. Jerome.
Hayashi, Reiko (1996). Cognition, empathy, and interaction: Floor management of
English and Japanese conversation. Norwood: Ablex Publishing.
Hubbard, Phil, Bartley, Brendan, Fuller, Duncan & Kitchin, Rob (2002). Thinking
geographically: Space, theory and contemporary human geography. London:
Continuum.
Kelly-Holmes, Helen (2013). 'Translation in progress’: centralizing and
peripheralizing tensions in the practices of commercial actors in minority
language sites. In Sari Pietikäinen & Helen Kelly-Holmes (eds.),
Multilingualism and the periphery 118-132. Oxford; New York: Oxford
University Press.
Kelly-Holmes, Helen & Pietikäinen, Sari (2013). The peripheral multilingualism lens:
a fruitdul and challanging way forward? In Sari Pietikäinen & Helen KellyHolmes (eds.), Multilingualism and the periphery 222-227. Oxford; New
York: Oxford University Press.
La Cecla, Franco (2000). Perdersi: l'uomo senza ambiente. Rome: Bari: Laterza.
Lefebvre, Henri (1991). The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lefkowitz, Daniel (2004). Words and stones: the politics of language and identity in
Israel. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lemke, Sieglinde (2011). Liberty: a trasnational icon. In Winfried Fluck, Donald E.
Pease & John Carlos Rowe (eds.), Re-framing the transnational turn in
American studies 193-218. Hanover: Dartmouth College Press.
Levinson, Stephen C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Li Wei (2011). Moment Analysis and translanguaging space: Discursive construction
of identities by multilingual Chinese youth in Britain. Journal of Pragmatics
43: 1222-1235.
Li Wei & Zhu Hua (2013). Translanguaging Identities and Ideologies: Creating
Transnational Space Through Flexible Multilingual Practices Amongst
Chinese University Students in the UK. Applied Linguistics 34: 516-535.
Liebscher, Grit & Dailey-O'Cain, Jennifer (2013). Language, space, and identity in
migration. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Livingstone, David N. (2007). Science, site and speech: scientific knowledge and the
spaces of rhetoric. History of the Human Sciences 20: 71-98.
Massey, Doreen B. (2005). For space. London; Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Mendoza-Denton, Norma & Osborne, Dana (2010). Two languages, two identities. In
Carmen Llamas & Dominic Watt (eds.), Language and Identities 113-122.
Ediburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (1945). Phénoménologie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (1960). Signes. Paris: Gallimard.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (1964). Le visible et l'invisible; suivi de Notes de travail.
Paris: Gallimard.
Mondada, Lorenza (1998). Technologies et interactions dans la fabrication du terrain
du linguiste. Cahiers de l'ILSL 10: 39-68.
Ottavi, Teodino (2005). The Italian community. In Alison Alexander (eds.), The
Companion to Tasmanian history. Hobart: Centre for Tasmanian Historical
Studies.
Papastergiadis, Nikos (2000). The turbulence of migration: globalization,
deterritorialization and hybridity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Pellegrini, Giovan Battista (1992) Studi storico-linguistici bellunesi e alpini. Belluno:
Archivio Storico di Belluno Feltre e Cadore, Fondazione Giovanni Angelini.
Pennycook, Alastair (2010). Language as a local practice. Milton Park; New York:
Routledge.
Pennycook, Alastair (2016). Posthumanist Applied Linguistics. Applied Linguistics,
Advance Access.
Pennycook, Alastair & Otsuji, Emi (2014). Metrolingual multitasking and spatial
repertoires: ‘Pizza mo two minutes coming’. Journal of Sociolinguistics 18:
161-184.
Philips, Susan U. (2000). Constructing a Tongan nation-state through language
ideology in the courtroom. In Paul V. Kroskrity (ed.), Regimes of language:
ideologies, polities, and identities 229-257. Santa Fe: School of American
Research Press.
Phipps, Alison & Kay, Rebecca (2014). Languages in migratory settings: place,
politics and aesthetics. Language and Intercultural Communication 14: 273286.
Pickles, John (1985). Phenomenology, science and geography: spatiality and the
human sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Relph, Edward (1976). Place and placelessness. London: Pion.
Rimon, Wendy (2005). Bernacchi, Diego. In Alison Alexander (eds.), The
Companion to Tasmanian history. Hobart: Centre for Tasmanian Historical
Studies.
Sidnell, Jack & Enfield, Nick J. (2012). Language Diversity and Social Action: A
Third Locus of Linguistic Relativity. Current Anthropology 53: 302-333.
Stevenson, Patrick & Carl, Jenny (2010). Language and Social Change in Central
Europe: Discourses on Policy, Identity and the German Language.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Strohmayer, Ulf (1998). The event of space: Geographic allusions in the
phenomenological tradition. Environment & planning: international journal of
urban and regional research 16: 105-122.
Tannen, Deborah (2007). Talking voices: repetition, dialogue and imagery in
conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tuan, Yi-fu (1977). Space and place: the perspective of experience. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Valentine, Gill, Sporton, Deborah & Bang Nielsen, Katrine (2008). Language use on
the move: sites of encounter, identities and belonging. Transactions of the
Institute of British Geographers 33: 376-387.
Villareal, Corazon D. (2014). Enacting hybridity in the Philippine diaspora. In Rani
Rubdy & Lubna Alsagoff (eds.), The global-local interface and hybridity:
exploring language and identity 282-299. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Wang, Xuan, Spotti, Massimiliano, Juffermans, Kasper, Cornips, Leonie, Kroon,
Sjaak & Blommaert, Jan (2014). Globalization in the margins: toward a reevalution of language and mobility. Applied Linguistics Review 5: 23-44.
Wilson, Rita (2008). Cultural (Re)Locations: narratives by contemporary Italian
Australian women. In Gaetano Rando & Gerry Turcotte (eds.), Literary and
social diasporas: an Italian Australian perspective 147-164. New York: Peter
Lang.
Zamboni, Alberto (1979) Le caratteristiche essenziali dei diletti veneti. In Manlio
Cortelazzo (eds.) Guida ai dialetti veneti 9-44. Padua: CLEUP.
Wise, Amanda (2009). Everyday multiculturalism: Transversal crossing and working
class cosmopolitans. In Selvaraj Velayutham (ed.), Everyday multiculturalism
21–45. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
iAswellasplaceintendedassocialspace.
iiForinstancestudentsinaclassroomcanexperiencetheexistenceofasignsuchasateacher’s
manualthatshapestheinteractionamongthem,butaccessitthroughalternativeportalswhich
canincludetheirowntextbook’sexplanationsortheinteractionwiththeteacher(Gee2005,22122).
iiiThenameisfictitious.
ivThedatahasbeentranscribedaccordingtothefollowingconventions:plain
fontisusedforItalianandLatin;smallcapsareforEnglish;ItalicsareforVenetian;capitalsfor
louderspeech;underlinedtextforstressthroughamplitudeorpitch.Thefollowingsymbolswere
used:(.)shortpause;(5.0)longerpause;[]paralinguisticelements;::phonemiclengthening;°
softtoneorlowervolume;=latch;><fastertalk;<>slowertalk.
*Iwouldliketogratefullyacknowledgethemanycolleaguesandfriendswhocommentedon
earlierversionsofthisarticle.SpecialthanksgotoEstellaCarpi,DeirdreConlon,Annick
Pellegrin,ThorSawin,GiovanniUrraci,MichelleVeljanovska,theeditorofLanguageinSociety
andtheanonymousreviewers.Anyremaininginaccuraciesaremyown.IamgratefultotheArts
andHumanitiesResearchCouncil(UK)forfundingtheproject‘TransnationalizingModern
Languages:Mobility,IdentityandTranslationinModernItalianCultures’whichenabledthis
research.IalsowishtothankmycolleaguesontheprojectandinparticularCharlesBurdett,
LoredanaPolezziandRitaWilsonfortheirsupportalongtheway.Mydeepestgratitudeisof
courseformyinformantforhisindescribablegenerosity.