Lexis, 3 | 2009, “Borrowing” [Online], Online Since 27 July 2009, Connection on 21 September 2021

Lexis Journal in English Lexicology 3 | 2009 Borrowing L'emprunt Aurélia Paulin and Jennifer Vince (dir.) Electronic version URL: https://journals.openedition.org/lexis/620 DOI: 10.4000/lexis.620 ISSN: 1951-6215 Publisher Université Jean Moulin - Lyon 3 Electronic reference Aurelia Paulin and Jennifer Vince (dir.), Lexis, 3 | 2009, “Borrowing” [Online], Online since 27 July 2009, connection on 21 September 2021. URL: https://journals.openedition.org/lexis/620; DOI: https:// doi.org/10.4000/lexis.620 This text was automatically generated on 29 September 2020. Lexis is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword Denis Jamet Introduction Aurélia Paulin and Jennifer Vince Introduction Aurélia Paulin and Jennifer Vince Papers Lexical Borrowing in Malaysian English: Influences of Malay Siew Imm Tan Borrowed Borrowings: Nahuatl Loan Words in English Jason D. Haugen Linguistic Borrowing in the English Language of Economics Magdalena Bielenia-Grajewska La traduction de l’emprunt : coup de théâtre ou coup de grâce ? Corinne Wecksteen « L’Autre » juif américain : l’emprunt lexical au yiddish dans l’anglais américain des films de Woody Allen, un enjeu pour le doublage Frédérique Brisset Lexis, 3 | 2009 2 Foreword Denis Jamet The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don’t just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary. James D. Nicoll1 1 Lexis, an e-journal boasting an International Scientific Committee (ISSN 1951-6215), publishes papers on the English lexicon written from both synchronic and diachronic perspectives, in the form of two annual thematic issues, as well as book reviews and a number of special issues containing conference proceedings. It is hosted in France by the Groupe de Recherche en Linguistique Anglaise (GRLA), Centre d’Etudes Linguistiques (CEL), Jean Moulin University – Lyon 3. It has already published two issues: one on “Polysemy” and another on “Lexical Submorphemics”. The third and current issue is devoted to “Borrowing”. 2 Borrowing has played a crucial role in the history of the English lexicon – and still does. As an example, some 10,000 words were adopted from French between 1250 and 1400, and roughly 75 per cent of them are still used nowadays. Contrary to popular belief, the borrowing of French words is still very frequent in English, in order to connote culinary refinement for example, as noted by K. Allan & K. Burridge [2006: 185]2: How much classier a meal becomes when a leek tart is changed to flamiche aux poireaux, oxtail to queue de boeuf and tossed salad to salade composée. Soup versus potage de whatever, stew versus casserole, slice versus tranche, aged versus affiné, swimming versus nageant, in aspic versus en gelée, reheated versus réchauffé – all distinguish the mundane from the elegant. […] ‘How to’ books for menu designers in the US advise using foreign languages to ‘continentalize your menu’. 3 Borrowing is therefore not just a question of filling in a linguistic gap, but also serves other functions, as is developed in the articles. Lexis, 3 | 2009 3 4 The practice of borrowing is also known as using “loanwords”. Interestingly, a slight semantic difference can be noted between the two terms: “borrowing” refers to the process, whereas “loan-word” refers to the result, i.e. the linguistic material which has been borrowed from a foreign language. Yet, “borrowing” is also frequently used to refer to the result of such a process, as in “this word is a borrowing from Old Norse”, therefore following a metonymic process (result for the process). Etymologically speaking, the words “borrowing” and “loan” come from the financial field, and have to do with money exchange; a quick search on WebCorp3 confirms this intuition. The metaphorical process has made it possible for words referring to the transfer of money or goods to be used in linguistics to refer to the transfer of words. But the metaphor cannot be spun for long. Indeed, this third issue on lexical borrowing poses a lexical puzzle, because if you think about the borrowing process in real life, differences quickly emerge with the linguistic phenomenon. When you borrow something from someone, you are supposed to give it back, one day or another, and give it back in good condition, i.e. in the same condition as you have borrowed it. To tell the truth, this is not exactly what happens between two languages, which do not seem to be as well- behaved as human beings. As a matter of fact, there is no real “transfer” from one language to another, as the source language keeps the loan-word; and there is no return either, because rarely does a language give the word back, except if we consider that it gives back the word when it cannot enter the lexicon of the language that borrows. And when the word is kept, what happens then? Not only does the language which borrows keep the word, but very often, it modifies it in one way or another: the borrowed word can undergo phonological modification (French lingerie, /lɛ̃ʒʀi/ vs. GB lingerie, /ˈlændʒə.ri/ and US /ˌlɑːndʒəˈreɪ/), semantic modification (to carry on with the culinary trend, the word chef in English does not have much to do with the original French chef, which has a much wider range of meaning), morphological modification (maître d’, the shortened form from French maître d’hôtel attested as from 1953), and even grammatical modification (consider the traditional change countable / uncountable), etc. There is consequently a long way to go for a word to be accepted in the English lexicon: starting as a foreignism, a word can, through the process of conventionalization, a.k.a. domestification, become a loan-word, i.e. a real neologism of the English language. But it can also die along the way, and never be accepted. 5 Finally, as editor of Lexis, I would like to extend my warmest thanks to Aurélia Paulin and Jennifer Vince who agreed to be in charge of this issue on borrowing, as well as to the members of the International Scientific Committee who refereed the papers submitted. My thanks also go to the authors of the five papers appearing in this issue for their interest in Lexis and for putting up with my numerous emails during the refereeing process. NOTES 1. Usenet group rec.arts.sf-lovers, 1990. Lexis, 3 | 2009 4 2. Allan Keith & Burridge Kate, Forbidden Words. Taboo and the Censoring of Language, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2007. 3. http://www.webcorp.org.uk/ Lexis, 3 | 2009 5 Introduction Aurélia Paulin and Jennifer Vince 1 Languages have been in contact for centuries because of historical, political, economic, social, and cultural reasons and, of course, tourism. As a consequence, there are many linguistic interferences which may lead to the process of linguistic borrowing. 2 The borrowing language is going to attract various foreign elements, and the product will be either graphic (e.g. one letter), phonological (e.g. one phoneme), morphosyntactic (e.g. the structure determined noun + preposition + determiner) or lexical. Lexical borrowing is the main process and can be divided as follows: morphological (the signifier is borrowed), semantic (the signified is borrowed) and morphosemantic (both signifier and signified are borrowed). 3 Borrowings – either non-integrated, in the process of being integrated, or integrated – are assimilated in a graphic, phonic, semantic or flexional way. As far as the contact between languages is concerned, English has a very important role to play, because mainly of Great Britain and the United States. So it is that English is a language that not only provides loan words but also welcomes them from other languages. It has already borrowed from over 350 languages in the past, and it continues to draw on these same resources. It is this role of English, that of recipient language, which provides the framework for the five papers that make up this issue. A Brief Historical Background 4 In the past, the arrival of loan words in English has often been recorded and commented on, while at the same time giving rise to a certain amount of concern and even animosity about the number of words being borrowed, as was certainly the case in the 16th century. In the 18 th century, Samuel Johnson published his Dictionary of the English Language, which was the first real attempt to put in place a methodical treatment of the lexicon, while at the same time introducing a certain amount of stability in the language. This did not mean he refused to include loan words, which he defined and illustrated in the same way as any other element of the lexicon, his aim being to “register the language”. The analysis of linguistic borrowing tended to follow Lexis, 3 | 2009 6 the same lines right up until the 20th century, when Einar Haugen put forward his suggestions for the classification and categorization of linguistic borrowing. His categories remain the main point of reference by which linguistic borrowings of all types are classified today. The Different Types of Analysis 5 The study of linguistic borrowing tends to follow three main lines of investigation: 1. The Dynamics of Linguistic Borrowing • the mechanisms involved in the process of linguistic borrowing • the reasons behind the need for recourse to loan words • the modifications that loan words are subjected to in order to integrate the target language • once integrated, the problems posed by their translation into other languages 2. Linguistic Contacts and Exchanges between Cultures and Communities • the history of linguistic borrowing in a particular language • linguistic borrowing (both direct and indirect) between two particular cultures 3.

Load more