Adaptation of borrowed words to Russian morphology. Adaptation of foreign words in modern Russian
Lexical movements from one language to another are the subject of research by many scientists. Any language, to a greater or lesser extent, is replenished with new words either at the expense of its own resources or at the expense of borrowings. New words are borrowed constantly throughout the history of mankind. Some remain in the language and after a few centuries are no longer perceived as borrowed, others disappear or have a narrow scope of use.
The era of globalization is characterized by a transition to a new level of relations between nations, and, consequently, their speaking subjects.
Reasons for borrowing
Borrowing words from one language to another is a natural consequence of language contacts in the field of science, culture, economics, politics and sports. Many linguists show increased interest in the reasons for the appearance of borrowings.
The brevity factor as decisive in the choice between a national or a foreign word is indicated by D.S. Lotte Lotte, D.S. Issues of borrowing and ordering foreign terms and terminological elements. M., 1982. - S. 96-97.: "The main reason for foreign borrowings is rooted in the contradictions between the requirements for the accuracy of the term, on the one hand, and the requirements for their practical brevity, on the other."
So, exploring the reasons for borrowing, L.P. Krysin identifies a number of intralinguistic reasons Krysin L.P. Foreign words in modern Russian / L.P. Krysin. - Moscow: Nauka, 1996. - 208 p.: "1. The need for a name new thing, a new phenomenon, etc.; 2. the need to distinguish between meaningfully close, but still different concepts; 3. the need for specialization of concepts; 4. the tendency that an integral object, not divided into separate components, should be designated “whole”, undivided, and not a combination of words; 5. socio-psychological reasons and factors of borrowing: the perception by the whole group of speakers or part of it of a foreign word as more prestigious, “scientific”, “nice-sounding”, as well as the communicative relevance of the designated concept”. However, the current stage of the development of society allows us to speak not only about intra-linguistic, but also extra-linguistic reasons for borrowing: this is the activation of economic, political and cultural ties with other countries, which is reflected in the vocabulary of the language.
Borrowing classification
Borrowings differ in the degree of their development:
1. words mastered by the language. This group includes words that are completely “recycled” and firmly established in everyday life - a coat, a car, football;
2. words-internationalisms, common in many languages of the world and formed mainly from Greek and Latin words - millimeter, telephone, philosophy;
3. words denoting objects, phenomena and processes inherent in other countries or peoples - siesta, lunch, selva;
4. blotches of foreign expressions - stable expressions widely used in colloquial and written speech (for example, C est la vie ("That's life!"), happy end ("happy ending")).
Separately, there are tracing-paper words formed on the basis of grammatical construction foreign word, which served as a platform for a new word - for example, the Russian word "skyscraper" (English skyscraper).
Borrowed vocabulary occupies a special place limited use. It includes words that are heterogeneous in terms of the degree of mastering them in the language and in stylistic coloring, which also makes it possible to single out several groups of borrowed vocabulary of limited use.
1. A significant part of the borrowed book vocabulary is terms. Terms of foreign origin for the most part do not have synonyms, which makes them indispensable in the scientific style.
2. Exoticisms - borrowed words that characterize the specific national characteristics of life different peoples and are used in the description of foreign reality. Against the background of other foreign language vocabulary, exoticisms stand out as words that are not fully lexically mastered by the host language.
3. Barbarisms, i.e. foreign words transferred into the language, the use of which is of an individual nature. Unlike all lexical borrowings, barbarisms are not recorded in dictionaries foreign words.
Adaptation of borrowings in the language
Borrowed from a foreign language, words go through the process of adaptation. Borrowed words are a special structure in terms of phonetic composition, structure, semantic load, so their correct use causes difficulties. There are several types of adaptation: phonetic, grammatical, semantic, graphic.
Phonetic adaptation is the adaptation of a new foreign unit to the phonetic system of the language. Phonetic adaptation, therefore, consists in adapting borrowings to the phonetic norm of the receiving language, in replacing elements of the sound composition of a foreign lexeme alien to the receiving language with the corresponding elements of their own phonetic system.
Phonetic adaptation of lexical borrowings can be carried out by replacing the sounds of a foreign language with sounds as close as possible to them.
In the process of semantic adaptation, there is an expansion, narrowing or displacement of meanings.
Grammatical adaptation is characterized by the assignment to the lexeme of new grammatical features inherent in the recipient language. When moving from one language to another, borrowed lexemes, as a rule, begin to exist according to the laws of the host language: they are built into its grammatical system, take on the characteristics inherent in the recipient language grammatical indicators, begin to change according to inflectional patterns characteristic of the recipient language, that is, they go through the stage of morphological (grammatical) adaptation of borrowings. So, having come into the Russian language, many words acquire the ability to decline in cases, numbers, etc.
Graphic adaptation occurs mainly in the course of borrowing words from oriental languages and languages \u200b\u200bwith a different writing system, which is the Japanese language.
Chapter 1 Conclusions
Having considered various definitions of the term "borrowing" and correlating them with the classification of borrowings, an attempt was also made to define and consider different kinds adaptation of borrowed words, which helped to draw the following conclusions:
1. Borrowing is an element of a foreign language (word, morpheme, syntactic construction etc.), transferred from one language to another as a result of language contacts, as well as the process of transition of elements of one language into another.
2. Borrowings adapt to the system of the borrowing language and are often so assimilated by it that the foreign origin of such words is not felt by native speakers of this language.
3. There are four types of adaptation of borrowed words: graphic, semantic, phonetic and grammatical.
Of particular interest in the study of transcription is the area of borrowings and their designation in dictionaries. different years editions. These words are remarkable in that over time, under the influence of the system of phonetic rules of the borrowing language, their phonetic appearance changes, and when comparing dictionary transcriptions, differences can be noticed, even if the same phonetic alphabet is used when writing them. In other words, phonetic assimilation is accompanied by pronunciation variability.
The object of our study was English borrowings in French and French borrowings in English. We have studied about fifty words, among which camping, golfe, supporter, medias, pub, hamburger, week end, shopping, dé jà vu, aid- de- camp, apropos, badinage, beau, beret, bouquet, cup d‘ etat, cul- de- sac, risqué and others.
The theoretical basis of the study was the works of Bloomfield L., Haugen E, Egorova K.L., Gak, V.G., David Crystal, Reformatsky A.A., Ermolovich, D.I., Sazonova E.
Linguistic encyclopedic Dictionary defines borrowings as elements of a foreign language (word, morpheme, syntactic construction, etc.) transferred from one language to another as a result of language contacts, as well as the process of transition of elements from one language to another. . The criterion for selecting our material was the presence in the dictionaries of labels that characterize the given word as a borrowing.
Basically, words are taken from other languages, less often phraseological and syntactic units, since words are more valent and easier to remember. Borrowings are adapted to the system of the borrowing language and are often assimilated by it to such an extent that native speakers of a given language no longer feel the foreign origin of such words. In some cases, the process of borrowing can only be traced through etymological dictionaries.
Borrowed words can be conditionally divided into two groups: fully learned and partially learned. Accordingly, in the second group, traces of foreign origin are preserved in the form of sound, spelling, grammatical or semantic features that are not characteristic of the system of the borrowing language.
Usually the process of borrowing does not present any difficulties in the field of phonetics or phonology. If the word of the source language consists of elements that satisfy the phonetic system of the borrowing language, then no change in given level it does not endure. Basically, this situation develops between related languages, not to mention dialects. If in both languages the word will have similar characteristics, it can be borrowed in the initial form, for example, Nominative case singular for nouns or infinitive for a verb, and then used in the borrowing language using already its morphological rules. However, in almost all cases of borrowing, when moving from one language to another, the word needs at least a slight change in the phonetic shell.
First, it is necessary to take into account to what extent the form of the borrowed word, which deviates from the norms of pronunciation, has changed under the influence of the new phonetic system, or, conversely, to what extent it has retained the previous phonetic shell. For example, the French expression dé jà vu has several pronunciations in English: , , . In the second case, the labialized vowel is replaced front row[y] into the more familiar English vowel /u/, expressed as a diphthong. The third case illustrates the process of inserting a semivowel [j] between a consonant and a vowel, thus vu reads like view. Some French borrowings remained with the same phonetic shell, perhaps due to the convenience of pronunciation: pendant, chalet, bouquet.
Similar processes can be observed in French. Yes, according to the dictionary Larousse Dictionnaire de Linguistique et des Sciences de Langue, word week- end, borrowed from early XIX century, has two pronunciations: . In this case, there is a process of adaptation of the word to the phonetic system of the borrowing language, as evidenced by the appearance of a nasal sound and the transfer of stress to the last syllable. From about the end of the 19th century to this day, both options are considered equal and are mentioned in dictionaries (the Grand Larousse de la Langue Française and Le Petit Robert were studied), but it is possible that over time one option will replace the other.
Secondly, in addition to the degree of assimilation of the phonetic shell of a word, one must take into account the fact that, in fact, the borrowing phoneme does not have full equivalents in the borrowing language, so we can say that during the process of borrowing there are several ways to designate one phoneme. For example, the process of borrowing the English final –ing. There are several pronunciations: [-in], [-ing], [-iɲ] and [-iƞ]. Most dictionary creators lean towards last option(camping, shoppling [ʃopiƞ]), others, in principle, do not transcribe this borrowed morpheme.
In English, there are combinations of sounds that do not exist for the French. Yes, in a word roast- beef the French abandoned the diphthong [əʊ], long and the consonant group -.
It is also important to mention the influence supersegment units during the process of phonetic adaptation. Not all languages have the same characteristics, which makes the process of assimilation difficult. This can lead to a shift in stress and a change in the duration of sounds. For example, if English puts up with French stress on the last syllable, keeping it badinage (bədina˙Ʒ), apropos (apropō˙) (Oxford), then in all English borrowings in French, the stress is transferred (in dictionary transcriptions, this, of course, is not indicated because in French the stress always falls on the last syllable).
The process of borrowing is clearly reflected in the transcriptions offered by dictionaries. When comparing transcriptions of dictionaries of different years of publication and of different orientations (for schoolchildren, technical, linguo-culturological), one can judge the degree of assimilation of a new word. If in older dictionaries of English language two variants of the pronunciation of the borrowed word are given, where one of them is very close to the norms of the French phonetic system (Oxford (1978): cul-de-sac), then only one transcription is proposed in the new dictionaries, which is far from similar in pronunciation to the French word (Longman (2000): cul-de-sac).
French support policy national language is such that the norm of pronunciation of a borrowed word is almost immediately established according to the rules of the French phonetic system and strictly observed. For example, the English word leader was borrowed at the beginning of the 19th century, but in all dictionaries it retained one single pronunciation option -. Once the established pronunciation norm no longer changes, therefore many editorial offices prefer not to indicate transcription in the dictionary entry, but to give reading rules in appendices.
Adaptation of a new word occurs naturally, but explaining this process is sometimes quite difficult. The process of borrowing and assimilation is reflected in dictionaries more explicitly in English and, for the reasons indicated, less prominently in French. The rapid process of establishing the norm for the pronunciation of a French word does not have time to be reflected in French editions, when, as in English, a borrowed word takes longer to learn, so English dictionaries have time to fix changes in pronunciation by dictionary transcription.
- Bloomfield L. "Language" Chapter XXV "Borrowings"
- Lobanova O. "Borrowings in modern French" http://olga-lobanova.livejournal.com/1249.html
- Haugen E. "The Borrowing Process"
- Yartseva V.N. "Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary" M .: Soviet Encyclopedia 1990
- David Crystal “A Dictionnary of Language and Phonetics” 4th edition, Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997
- “Larousse “Dictionnaire de Linguistique et des Sciences du Langage” Paris 1994
We use the term formal adaptation to denote certain types of adaptation (or mastering) of a borrowed word, namely those that are not related to the lexical semantics of the word, i.e., to the content plan, but affect only outside words - the plan of expression.
From this point of view, formal adaptation includes:
Phonetic adaptation (changing the sound image of a borrowed word);
Graphic adaptation (changing the literal appearance of the borrowed word), followed by spelling adaptation in the future 8 .
Formal adaptation of foreign vocabulary, in general, proceeding in early XXI centuries in line with tradition, it still has some new features, features.
First of all, we note that the main direction of adaptation processes in the Russian literary language is the orientation towards the sound of the etymon of the borrowed word in the source language, i.e. the method of so-called practical transcription, which corresponds to tradition. However, the operation of the principles of practical transcription is currently expanding, and in some parts of the subsystem, which
ruyu are foreign words, you can observe something like a departure from the norm. We include these derogations:
1) the possible absence of stunning of a voiced consonant at the end of a word, especially in the speech of young people: pub, groups “particularly devoted fans of some singer”, image, badge, message ‘message’, fast food, etc.
The voiced pronunciation of the final consonant in a foreign word brings the sound of the word closer to the etymon - a borrowing from the English language, which is not characterized by stunning consonants at the end of the word. This feature is also noted by other researchers (see, for example:). At the same time, R.F. Kasatkina writes about that. that "on Russian soil, the pronunciation of final voiced consonants did not take root." However, the researcher notes the possible absence of stunning consonant in composites on the border of the stem in the words bluesman, jazzman, deadline, submarine, etc. .
2) The appearance in the Russian language of words with previously unseen outcomes -shn, -zhn (promotion, fashion, action, reception, fusion, etc.).
Neither in the "Reverse Dictionary of the Modern Russian Language" [OSSRYA], nor in the "Grammar Dictionary of the Russian Language" by A. A. Zaliznyak [GORYA] did we find a single noun ending in the combination -shn or -zhn. By tradition, English lexemes in -tion were formed in Russian and other Slavic languages (and are still formed) by substituting -tion > -tion, for example: modernization 3) Pronunciation with a side stress of new foreign words ascending in the source language to composites or polymorphemic words (boyfriend, gesheftmacher, online, offshore, non-stop, image, etc.).
Subsequently, collateral donation may be lost. See, for example: billboard - billboard, interface - interface, software - software, touchpad - touchpad (computer, "manipulator that replaces a computer mouse in a laptop"), hi-tech - hi-tech, hi-fi - hi-fi, hat -trick - hat-trick, flash mob - flash mob, freelancer - freelancer, etc. However, what long word, the longer the collateral stress lingers on it.
Perhaps, in some cases, a certain accent model operates, as, for example, in words with the final component -maker, which in Russian has the meaning " actor’, less often “acting object’. Such words are pronounced with two stresses:
coffee maker, beauty maker, image maker, video maker, demo maker, market maker, play maker, soft maker, speech maker, tattoo maker, film maker, hit maker, hit maker, show maker, trouble maker invent 'find, discover, invent, invent, create' [NBARS]), ieentmeyker 'one who is the organizer of a smth. cultural event '(from event 'event, incident' [NBARS]), price maker. Note that in Russian derivatives formed with the help of -maker, this accent model is preserved - airmaker comp, ‘virus developer’ [AL], rumor maker (about who spreads rumors) [NSIS].
The tendency to pronounce a foreign word close to the “original” also explains the pronunciation in the overwhelming majority of cases of a solid consonant before a front vowel, sometimes supported by the spelling - flash (ka), fashion / fashion, hat-trick football. ‘three goals in a row’, skinhead, teenager, baby, etc. It should be noted that whole groups of single-structured words are formed coming from the same donor language, which are pronounced uniformly (without variation) with a hard consonant in the same structural component. For example, these are words with the -maker component (see examples above), with the final sound combination -ment (management, establishment, imagement, impeachment, harassment - cf. \enty). with the -man component (businessman, showman, yachtsman, superman, walkman, frontman, bluesman, jazzman - cf. early borrowings gentleman]en, congressman, sportsman \ m "\ ep. records] en \ Their pronunciation on Russian soil is already "predetermined" by the pronunciation with which other borrowed words of a similar structure are pronounced, which came from the same source language at about the same time.
As for the method that competes with practical transcription - transliteration, i.e., orientation to the literal composition of the borrowed word in the source language, then transliteration as a method of transmission appearance foreign word in the literary language is used in its pure form irregularly (TV series
In the substandard, on the contrary, transliteration is as regular as practical transcription in the literary language. However, the function of transliteration in the substandard is often different than in the literary language. namely the game. The letter-by-letter transmission of foreign language in jargon gives rise to expressive-sounding units (mousa comp, ‘mouse’, paga comp, ‘page’ - cf. English, mouse, page). The game function of transliteration is especially noticeable if the jargon “obtained” in this way is a variant of a literary word (cf. message - mesaga, manager - manager, computer - computer, punk - punk, etc.). The expressive function in the substandard is also performed by other ways of formal adaptation of borrowed words, which are completely uncharacteristic of the literary language: intentional homonymy, or phonetic mimicry - emela, soap Both in the literary language and in the substandard, new foreign words are subject to variation.
Variation of foreign languages on present stage has its own characteristics. If in previous centuries, in particular in the 19th century, one of the common reasons for the appearance of variance was the borrowing of a word from different source languages, then at the present stage, other factors come to the fore, and given reason manifests itself less and less 9 , since the source language is predominantly one.
In the formal variation of the word, internal reasons turn out to be significant.
So, many among the varying foreign words have an unequal phonemic composition in their different versions because different methods are used in the transfer of the same foreign language prototype - transcription and transliteration (cf .: supervisor - supervisor from English, supervisor). The competition of these methods explains the predominance among the phonemic variants of vocal ones that do not coincide in any vowel sound (yuppie - yuppie from English, yuppie; browser - browser from English, browser; fan - fan from English, fan), and consonantal, differing in the presence / the absence of a separate consonant sound (underground - underground from English, underground; performance - pefomance from English, performance; beautymaker - beautymaker from English, beautymaker; ageism - ageism from English, ageism, etc.).
The variance of a word is also led by such an internal factor as the variance that exists for objective reasons in the transfer of someone else's
phonetic unit. For example, different ways of translating the English phoneme give speakers options for wokman - wokmen (
As before, the appearance of formal variants of foreign words is influenced by:
The principle of analogy (see the non-normative accent version of the bartender - by analogy with the words showman, superman, yachtsman, etc.);
The tendency to move the stress in polysyllabic words to the middle of the word (marketing - cf. marketing)",
Ease of pronunciation. So, almost all words in -shn have phonemic variants with an insertion of a vowel - public relay, promotion, reception (less often - reception), session, action, etc. See also skittle - skittle [ROS].
Starting from the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. the emergence of formal variants of new varieties is noted. So, among the accent variants of foreign neologisms, one can distinguish varying units that differ in the presence / absence of a side stress (billboard - billboard). An absolutely new group of vocal variants of a word, differing in the presence/absence of a vowel sound, are variants of words with -shn.
Among the orthoepic variants, varying units that were not previously found in Russian speech also stood out. Zgo variants that differ in the pronunciation of the combination j: in words of English origin with a combination that is in position before the sonant in the middle of the word (image maker, management), “the pronunciation of four affricates is permissible: [j], [d'zh "], [h], [h '] ". In the position of the end of the word, variation is also possible: after vowels, the combination j is pronounced as |chsh | or [h] (cottage, hajj 'Muslim pilgrimage'); after [j] or [and] (badge, image, cartridge) - like [hh], [h], [h '], [h'sh '] (the last combination is typical for monosyllabic words) [ibid] or [j] 10 (possibly in the speech of young people).
New consonantal variants, distinguished by the presence/absence of a consonant at the end of a word, are variants of anglicisms that ascend in the source language to the plural form. In one variant of the borrowed word, the consonant -c conveys the grammatical plural formant -s. "disappears"; while changing the phonetic composition of the word does not affect its meaning,
see: flyer - flyer 'flyer', public relations - public relations, future - futures, darts - darts 'throwing darts', snack - snacks 'snack', groupies - groupies 'the most fanatical fans of some sl. singer, artist.
Relatively new are graphic variants - varying units, differing in the presence / absence of letters of a different alphabet (Latin). Some words of foreign origin are periodically used in modern texts in both Cyrillic and Latin (this feature was formed at the end of the 20th century). See: iPad - iPad, après - apres-ski (about rest after skiing), after-party - after-party (after-party pastime), beauty - beauty, duty free - duty free, love story - love story , bow - look 'appearance, external image of a person; a photograph capturing this' [HC-XXI], fashion / fashion - fashion, hi-tech - hi-tech, haute couture - haute couture, pret-a-porter - pret-a-porte, smokey eyes - smokey eyes ( about fashionable make-up), etc.
In the electronic form of speech - "live written speech" - at the beginning of the XXI century. the spelling of consonantal abbreviations such as SMS, MMS, which is unconventional for Russian graphics, was fixed; there is an activity of writing these abbreviations in lowercase letters, although they are graphically transmitted only with the help of consonants: sms, mms, gprs (from GPRS). g-x in place of the foreign language [h]. In the modern Russian language of the newest time, the aspirated [h] in Anglicisms is transmitted in only one way - the Russian consonants [x]. Some dictionaries still fix the pairs hamburger - hamburger, handball - handball, however, "live" such a variant does not occur.
It is possible that variants with [x] accompanied the first stage of the occurrence of the word, and were subsequently lost. Increasingly, variation is observed in foreign words, where an unstressed vowel is transmitted by the letter “o”. According to our data, in new Anglo-Americanisms (computer, consulting, controlling, login, modem, monitor, organizer, popcorn, provider, spotlight, etc.), unstressed is pronounced with reduction, i.e., in accordance with the phonetics of the Russian language, while in In the “old” borrowings, the orthoepic norm still offers a variant of pronunciation of the unstressed without reduction (s[o] no, b[o] cal, r[o] yal, p[o] eziya, etc.). We noted variants of unstressed pronunciation - without reduction and with reduction - only for the word okay, and at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. such variance has not yet been observed: okay was pronounced with an unreduced [o] (see:). The words in which the unreduced [o] is pronounced are macho, lecho, cargo, advice note, audio, video, pareo, collection, studio (a component of various names: group
“A-studio”, “Sofronov-studio”), etc. - do not have pronunciation options: from this we can conclude that the absolute end of the word in indeclinable nouns still retains the norm of pronunciation of unreduced unstressed [o].
Elimination (more precisely, limitation) of variance can also occur due to the “intervention” of specialists. Based current rules in the field of spelling, orthoepy, grammar, recommendations are given on the choice of one or another option, and the preference for such a choice is explained. However, in recent times, the fixation in the usage of one or another variant of a foreign neologism sometimes runs counter to such recommendations, which happened, for example, with the word mass media. Often, even if this or that spelling of a new word is recommended by the dictionary, it continues to “live its own life” and is written contrary to the recommendations. So, the "Russian Spelling Dictionary" recommends writing together the word mass media [ROS]. However, the most frequent option, according to our data, is the hyphenated spelling of the word mass media (see about this: For example, the mass media option is used in the title of the monograph by V.G. Kostomarov " Language taste era. From observations on the speech practice of the mass media. See also: Industrial concerns - owners of influential mass media (EKG). According to the recommendation of the specified dictionary, one should write together with other words the foreign language component of media (media business, media holding), however, not only in the media, but also in scientific (linguistic) literature, one can find hyphen
writing similar formations, see: media messages, media scene ‘ information space' etc.
A similar situation is observed with the spelling of the words blogger, shopping. The Russian Spelling Dictionary (ROS) recommends writing these words without a double consonant (since both words are segmented and are motivated by the words blog, shop in the language), however, the normative variants do not take root well - blogger, shopping options compete with them on an equal footing. It can be assumed that in the near future the word Twitter will undergo such variation. of this word "complicates" the morphemic structure of the word Twitter (tweet- + -er), in which, according to the orthographic norms of the Russian language, the double consonant on the morpheme seam is excluded. Therefore, we can expect that the ROS will recommend the variant Twitter (and, possibly, lowercase letter).
In general, the spelling of most neologisms of foreign origin that have entered the Russian language in recent decades has not yet been established (which will be noted further). The norm as a “mechanism for choosing options” (B.N. Golovin) has not yet “worked” with respect to the spelling of many words. In our opinion, this indicates that the development of a new word is a living process, the result of which is individual for each unit entering the language.
We can talk about different types of borrowing other people's words: a) lexical, b) morphematic, c) derivational.In the first case, the word as a whole is borrowed (theme, form, bureau, dressing table, full house, etc.); of course, in this case, in the borrowing language, it can change both its meaning and its sound.
In the second case, the morpheme structure of the word and the meaning of morphemes (i.e., the smallest meaningful parts of the word - roots, prefixes, suffixes, etc.) are borrowed, but morphemes are only translated using the corresponding morphemes of the borrowing language, their meaning is borrowed, not sound.
Such borrowing is called tracing paper (from the French caique - a copy on a transparent sheet, imitation). So, the Russian word subject is skalked with Latin word objectum: the prefix ob- is translated by the prefix pre-, the root ject is translated by the root -met-, and the end of the Latin word is dropped.
The German word Vorstellung is calque with the Russian word representation: the prefix vor- corresponds to the prefix pre-, the root -stell- is replaced by the Russian root -stav-, the suffix -ung - to the Russian suffix -enie. Whole expressions can also be tracing.
Finally, in the third case, words are borrowed that are used in the borrowing language to build, form a new word - one that was not in the source language. This is how the words agrobiology, biometrics, teletype, telemetry, philology and many others were obtained. There are also less certain types of borrowings of foreign vocabulary.
But the study of borrowings is by no means limited to understanding the ways and means of penetration of "foreign" words into "one's own" language. It is very important to understand what is going on with the word when it is in a language that is “foreign” to it.
So, at first, the word penetrates into the language along with an object or phenomenon borrowed from another people. Then the process of adaptation to the new language begins. First of all, a new phonetic-morphological form is formed, which arises as a result of phonetic and morphological substitution. True, quite often the whole word is borrowed - along with suffixes and prefixes. But then it still begins to "grow" with other morphemes.
In the Russian language, first of all, inflection changes, because Russian is an inflectional language. Quite often, the accent also changes, although not always. So, when borrowing words from the French language, in which the stress falls on the last syllable, in Russian these words quite often change their stress, although the stress of many of them remains unchanged. At the next stage, derivative words from the borrowed word appear, which are already formed according to the laws new to this word of the language.
So, some time after borrowing from Italian the words moon appeared the words lunar, hole, lunatic, sublunar, lunar. Sometimes there is a change in the meaning of borrowed words. This process is due to the fact that the meanings of many foreign words are not always perceived the right way. For example, german word Maler - an artist, in Russian turned into a house painter. Apparently, when this word “came” to Russia, its meaning was not understood in the right way.
A change in the meaning of borrowed words can also be due to the fact that not all the meanings of a word that are characteristic of it in Russian take root in the Russian language. mother tongue. For example, there has been a change in the meaning of such a polysemantic word in English as sport:
sport- 1) entertainment, joke; 2) fan; 3) dandy.
But not all borrowed words undergo complete grammatical reformulation and rethinking.
There are many examples of the use of foreign words with a partial change, dandy, lady - eng. dandy, lady, or no change at all, cf.: sketch - eng. sketch; farmstead, dandy - Polish. forwak, frant; form, formula - lat. form, formula, etc.
CHAPTER I
1.1. Theoretical foundations of the study of borrowing.10
1.1.1. Borrowing as a linguistic phenomenon.10
1.1.2. Problems of terminology used in the work.16
1.1.3. Types of borrowings.20
1.1.4. Ways and sources of borrowing in Russian and Chinese.38
1.2. Psychological aspects of the perception of foreign vocabulary.52
1.2.1. Perception and memory.52
1.2.3. Perception of foreign language vocabulary.64
Chapter 67 Conclusions
CHAPTER II. SYSTEMIC AND STRUCTURAL STUDY OF MASTERING FOREIGN LANGUAGE VOCABULARY IN RUSSIAN AND CHINESE LANGUAGES AT THE PRESENT STAGE
2.1. Material selection and classification methodology.71
2.2. Distribution of borrowed units by thematic groups. .89-100 2.2.1. Comparative analysis of the distribution of material by thematic groups in Russian and Chinese.91
2.3. Formal adaptation of foreign vocabulary in Russian and Chinese.100
2.3.1. Benchmarking phonetic systems in English, Russian and Chinese.104
2.3.2. Phonetic-graphic mastering of foreign words in the system of the Russian language.120
2.3.3. Phonetic-graphic mastering of foreign words in the Chinese language system.123
Chapter 128 Conclusions
CHAPTER III. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF ADAPTATION OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE VOCABULARY IN THE SYSTEMS OF RUSSIAN AND CHINESE LANGUAGES AND PERCEPTION OF ITS NEAR SPEAKERS
3.1. Methodology for organizing and conducting an experiment.131
3.2. Features of the perception of foreign language innovations by native speakers of the Russian language.135
3.3. Peculiarities of perception of foreign language innovations by native speakers of Chinese.153
3.4. Comparative analysis of the mechanisms of perception of borrowed vocabulary by native speakers of Russian and Chinese.169
Chapter 171 Conclusions
Introduction to the thesis (part of the abstract) on the topic "Adaptation of foreign vocabulary in the language system and the perception of native speakers: based on the vocabulary of Russian and Chinese languages of the late XX - early XXI century."
The expansion of the areas of linguistic interpenetration and mutual influence in our days has given particular importance to the study of the processes of borrowing and adaptation of foreign vocabulary. Research approaches to the study of foreign vocabulary and its development are very diverse. The processes of borrowing and adaptation as linguistic phenomena were devoted to the works of many domestic and foreign linguists: V. M. Aristova, O. S. Akhmanova, JI. Bloomfield, W. Weinreich, N. S. Valgina, V. V. Vinogradov, E. F. Volodarskaya, Gao Mingkai and Liu Zhengtan, V. I. Gorelov, V. V. Ivanov, L. P. Krysin, A. A. Potebnya, A. A. Reformatsky, A. L. Semenas, Khan Shaoxian, E. Haugen, N. M. Shansky, Shi Yuwei, L. V. Shcherba. It is well known that the anthropocentric paradigm has come to the fore in modern linguistics, so the boundaries of the analysis of foreign language innovations have expanded in recent years by including the human factor. The problems of studying borrowings in the sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic aspects are devoted to the works of O.V. Vysochina, O.V. Ilina, E.V. Kakoripoy, G.V. Pavlenko. Despite the work done by researchers, the mental aspects of perception, development, storage and extraction of borrowed words in the mind of an individual are not fully disclosed. This dissertation research is devoted to the onisap of the processes of perception and development of foreign vocabulary borrowed by Russian and Chinese at the turn of the 20th - 21st centuries. The choice of these parameters is due, first of all, to extralinguistic reasons. Active development of science and technology, reorganization of economic and political spheres, the change of social and cultural landmarks have become a kind of catalyst for the intensification of the process of borrowing and the mass use of foreign vocabulary.
The relevance of the study of the problems of borrowing foreign vocabulary, and its further adaptation is due to a number of proper linguistic and linguistic reasons. Intralinguistic reasons are associated with the massive use of foreign language innovations and their active participation in many linguistic processes observed in Russian and Chinese at the present stage.
The interest of linguists in the study of this area is based on the insufficient study of some aspects of the linguistic phenomenon of "borrowing" and the processes of adaptation of foreign words accompanying it. The mobility and dynamism of the borrowed vocabulary gives particular importance to the issues of evolution, since their solution is of great importance both for learning the language as a whole and for understanding individual language processes. In the study of neologisms of foreign origin, the value is that part of the borrowed material that has passed into the usage, that is, it is adequately perceived and actively used by the language community. Thus, there is a need for a comprehensive study of the process of mastering foreign language innovations: in the language system, on the one hand, and by native speakers, on the other.
The problem of typological description of foreign language units in the systems of two languages deserves special consideration, since on its basis it is possible to identify interlingual and particular patterns of borrowing and assimilation processes.
The relevance of the chosen topic is also justified by the insufficient study of the latest modern borrowings in terms of their number and thematic affiliation.
In connection with the above provisions, the purpose of the study was determined - a system-structural and anthropocentric study of the process of mastering foreign vocabulary.
This goal led to the following tasks:
1) systematize existing concepts about lexical borrowing;
2) describe the ways and sources of penetration of foreign vocabulary into various areas of the language;
3) to study the psychological aspects of the perception of borrowed units individual groups native speakers of the recipient language;
4) to characterize the main types of adaptation of foreign vocabulary;
5) identify the features of the perception of borrowed units by speakers of different ages;
6) highlight the main adaptation parameters.
The object of the research is lexical borrowings.
The subject of this work is the nature and mechanisms of mastering foreign vocabulary by the system of the recipient language and different age groups of its speakers.
The material of the study was 600 words and phrases borrowed by Russian and Chinese in the late XX - early XXI centuries, selected from modern dictionaries of foreign words, popular youth magazines and electronic resources.
The complex nature of the object under study led to the choice of the following general scientific methods and techniques: receiving a continuous sample of borrowed units from dictionaries, printed publications, electronic resources; a descriptive method based on such research techniques as observation, comparison, classification and generalization; the method of system-structural analysis, which made it possible to establish the nature and mechanisms of formal adaptation of foreign vocabulary; the method of psycholinguistic experiment used to determine the degree of mastery of foreign borrowings in different age groups of native speakers of the recipient language; elements quantitative analysis used to process the results of the experiment and in the study of the frequency of word usage.
When describing foreign neologisms that are not recorded in dictionaries, the technique of lexicographic description was used.
The scientific novelty of the work lies in the complex application of system-structural and anthropocentric approaches to the description of the process of mastering foreign neologisms; the development process is presented systematically, taking into account socio- and psycholinguistic parameters.
The theoretical significance of the study lies in the fact that it identifies and describes ways to identify the meaning of borrowed words by different age groups of native speakers; the criteria for mastering foreign vocabulary are determined; the thematic orientation of borrowed vocabulary at the present stage of development of the Russian and Chinese languages is determined; features and mechanisms of phonetic-graphical, legsico-semantic assimilation of foreign vocabulary borrowed by the studied languages at the turn of the century are described.
The practical significance of the undertaken research lies in the possibility of using its results in the development of lecture courses, organization of seminars on language typology, language theory, lexicology, lexicography, Russian as a foreign language. The proposed research methodology can be used in works devoted to the problems of lexical borrowing.
The conducted research allows us to make the following provisions for defense:
1. To determine the degree of mastery of foreign borrowings in the system of the recipient language, the following features are considered relevant: phonetic and graphic transmission of a foreign word by means of the recipient language, the use of a foreign word within grammatical categories recipient language, consolidation (stabilization) of meaning; and to determine the degree of assimilation of foreign borrowings, the necessary features are carriers: their recognition, reproducibility, semantic and functional assimilation.
2. Language typology determines the nature, scale, specifics of borrowing, as well as the speed of adaptation processes in the recipient language.
3. The perception of foreign language vocabulary is a heterogeneous and complex process, which is determined by the individual and personal characteristics of the perceiver, as well as the way of borrowing lexical units.
4. Identification of the meanings of unfamiliar/unfamiliar lexical borrowings occurs at the associative level based on the internal form and sound-graphic design. Identification of foreign words already mastered by native speakers of the recipient language - on a situational level.
5. The correct contextual use of a borrowed word is not always a criterion for an adequate understanding by its native speakers.
The research materials have been analyzed in the form of discussions at meetings of the Department of English and Chinese Languages of the Far Eastern Academy of Social Sciences and Humanities, reports at postgraduate seminars (Biysk, V.M. Shukshin Belarusian State University, 2006, 2009) and international conferences: II International scientific and practical conference"General theoretical and typological problems of linguistics" (Biysk, November 30 - December 1, 2006), international scientific and practical conference (Biysk, December 4 - December 5, 2007).
The structure of the work is determined by the goals and objectives of the study. The dissertation consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, a bibliographic list and appendices. Overall volume works - 232 pages (main text - 197 pages).
Dissertation conclusion on the topic "Theory of language", Borisova, Olga Sergeevna
Conclusions to the third chapter
1. The nature of borrowing in languages of different structure is not the same. In Russian, foreign language material initially penetrates into the literary language and then into dialect groups, while in Chinese the opposite phenomenon is more common: before entering the literary language, a foreign word is borrowed in one or another dialect area, where interlingual contacts occur more often, and then, through internal borrowing, it penetrates into the literary language. Thus, the speed of mastering foreign words in two languages is not the same. special device The system of the Chinese language predetermines the presence of an intermediate stage at which the adaptation of a foreign word to the system of the national language Putonghua takes place.
2. The speed of mastering foreign language innovations is not the same in different social groups of the language community and thematic areas. The highest level of recognition, knowledge and use of borrowings was shown by representatives of the group of recipients aged
20-30 years old. At the present stage of development of the youth subsystem of the Russian language, computer vocabulary has been updated, vocabulary related to the domestic sphere and the sphere of culture and show business. Representatives of the older generation adequately perceive and more actively use the borrowings of socio-political discourse. Among Chinese youth wide use received household and computer vocabulary, among older carriers - only household.
3. The process of semantic adaptation of a foreign word involves the transformation of its semantic structure, which occurs as a result of its ignorance or false / inaccurate understanding. The study showed that the main changes that the semantic structure of foreign words in two languages has undergone are: expansion of the semantic structure; narrowing of the semantic structure; displacement of the hierarchy of values; change in semantic volume.
4. Identifiable words are explained differently by native speakers, which is related to their individual characteristics and the nature of the borrowed units. Identification of familiar or unfamiliar vocabulary by native speakers of the Russian language takes place at the associative level or based on outer shape the words. Chinese speakers often rely on the internal form of the word or turn to foreign prototypes. Identification of the meanings of familiar words by native Russian speakers in most cases takes place at a situational level, while Chinese informants are prone to detailed interpretation or categorization. A media parameter such as age matters. Young people mainly describe the concept, while representatives of the older generation tend to express their attitude towards it.
5. Formally correct and semantically accurate use is not always a criterion for an accurate understanding of a borrowed unit. The study revealed cases of automatic memorization of a foreign word and its formal correct use without understanding the meaning. In Chinese, such a phenomenon is excluded by the very nature of the language and the peculiarities of perception.
6. The functional activity of a borrowed word depends to some extent on its stylistic affiliation. It is customary to evaluate the borrowing of a term and a common literary word differently. However, in the course of the analysis of the semantic description of the borrowings of languages, the phenomenon of a foreign word leaving the framework of a special sphere and its penetration into other thematic areas was observed. This is due to the high permeability of certain areas of modern discourse.
CONCLUSION
Based on the provisions submitted for defense, I would like to conceptually expand the conclusions of this dissertation research and outline its future prospects.
At the present stage of language development, changes in the lexical fund of the studied languages are primarily manifested in the intensification of the process of lexical borrowing. However, the volume of foreign language innovations and the speed of their penetration into the Russian and Chinese languages are not the same, which is associated with linguistic and extralinguistic factors. The lexical fund of the Russian language is more permeable than the vocabulary of Chinese. A complex phonetic organization, the semantic significance of syllables, hieroglyphic writing and mentality of native speakers of the Chinese language are a kind of barrier to the penetration of foreign words into its system. In addition, they are of great importance historical background and public policy of the People's Republic of China. China has been isolated for centuries Western world and limited himself to occasional contact with his immediate neighbours. After the implementation of the political course of "openness", a large stream of foreign vocabulary poured into the Chinese language, most of which, in connection with handicapped language system is still unassimilated. For this reason, the PRC government has taken a number of measures aimed at combating the unjustified use of foreign words.
The nature of borrowing in the two languages is also not the same, it differs not only in the speed and scale of foreign language units entering the language, but also in other factors, among which we can distinguish the ways of penetration and the method of borrowing. In Russian, foreign language innovations directly penetrate into the literary language, while in Chinese, most foreign words do not enter the national Putonghua language directly, but through the vocabulary of other dialects. More permeable, in terms of linguistic infusions, is the lexical system of the Guangdong dialect, which is common in the Guangdong province of the same name, in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Interlingual contacts here take place constantly, so the percentage of foreign words is higher, and they are more actively used by native speakers. Another equally significant feature of the process of borrowing in Chinese is connected with this fact: the sound-graphic version of borrowing is a kind of semantic and functional indicator. Thus, the vocabulary borrowed by the Chinese language can have the status of common or dialectally limited.
Differences in the ways of presenting foreign language material are manifested in the predominance of certain types of lexical borrowings. Thus, in Russian the number of phonetic borrowings prevails, in Chinese - word-formation cripples, which is also associated with different possibilities of the two language systems to adapt borrowed vocabulary. The Russian language is based on an alphabetic-sound script, while Chinese is based on a hieroglyphic script. Hieroglyphs are a means of recording semantically significant syllables, and not a means of conveying the sound of words. In addition, under the influence of national culture and traditions, the Chinese try to use in speech those words whose meaning clearly follows from the constituent morphemes.
Borrowing as a multifaceted linguistic phenomenon involves not only the appearance of foreign vocabulary in the language system, but also its subsequent development. Mastering a foreign word in a language implies its adaptation to phonetic, spelling, grammatical and lexical systems. However, the phonetic-graphic transmission of a foreign word by means of the recipient language, correlation with certain grammatical categories are only external signs of mastery. Being mastered by these systems, a foreign word, however, may not be mastered by native speakers and rarely used in speech. Thus, the concept of mastery includes not only formal, but also functional indicators: the word must not only be adapted to the system of the recipient language, but also mastered by native speakers. We are talking about two sides of a single process: the adaptation of borrowed vocabulary in the system of language and speech of native speakers. The first side is dictated by the need to adapt a foreign word to the sound-graphic forms typical of the recipient language, the second - directly by the tasks of communication.
The focus of this study on carriers is explained by the fact that Ferdinand de Saussure noticed even earlier: there is nothing in the language that would not come into it from speech, and speech is an individual category, directly related to the carrier. In the process of mastering foreign language vocabulary by native speakers of the recipient language, the word goes through a long and hard way from ignorance, false interpretation to adequate understanding. The concept of "mastery" implies not only an adequate understanding, but also the active use of a borrowed unit in the speech of native speakers. Not in all cases, contextually correct use is a guarantee of an accurate understanding of the semantics of a borrowed word. During the analysis of the materials obtained as a result of a survey of native speakers of the Russian language, cases of automatic memorization of a foreign word and its formally correct use without understanding the meaning were identified. In Chinese, such a phenomenon is ruled out by the very nature of the language and the peculiarities of national thinking.
A generalized analysis of the results of the study made it possible to determine the criteria for mastering foreign vocabulary. Relevant features of mastery of borrowings in the language system are:
1) phonetic-graphic transmission of a foreign word by means of the recipient language;
2) the use of a foreign word within the framework of the grammatical categories of the recipient language;
3) consolidation (stabilization) of the value.
The necessary parameters for mastering foreign borrowings in the speech of native speakers are the following:
1) recognition - is determined by the coefficient of novelty;
2) reproducibility - is determined by the number of speakers using borrowing in speech;
3) semantic assimilation - is determined by the ability of carriers to explain the meaning of a borrowed unit;
4) functional assimilation - is determined by the ability to semantically correctly use a borrowed word in speech.
Thus, based on the listed features, it is possible to distinguish five degrees of mastery of foreign vocabulary: I. higher, II. high
III. middle,
IV. low, V. zero.
Words with the highest degree of mastery - words that are fixed in dictionaries, have a zero coefficient of novelty, the maximum frequency of use, are formally correctly and semantically accurately used by speakers in speech constructions.
A high degree of assimilation is characterized by words recorded in dictionaries, which are characterized by a low coefficient of novelty, a high rate of word usage, and correct contextual use.
Words recorded in the dictionary in at least one of the meanings, with average indicators of novelty, frequency of use in speech, correctly / partially incorrectly used by speakers in speech constructions, have an average degree of mastery.
Words with a low degree of mastery are words that have appeared in the language, but have not yet been recorded in dictionaries, with a low coefficient of frequency of use, with a high degree of novelty, incorrectly used by speakers in speech constructions.
Words that have appeared in the language, but have not yet been recorded in dictionaries, which are not recognized by native speakers and are not used in their own speech, have a zero degree of mastery.
It should be noted that when deciding on the distribution of borrowed vocabulary according to the degree of mastery, it is more expedient to rely on the results of an experiment in which representatives of the younger generation took part, since it is they who form the modern speech usage. In addition, the degree of mastery of common and terminological vocabulary should be assessed differently, since the scope of the latter is functionally limited.
The work does not cover all the parameters that affect the nature of the development of borrowed vocabulary by the language community. Further analysis of the experimental materials may include a description of the semantic modifications of words, taking into account the gender attribute. Observations show that the ways of explicating the meanings of borrowed words are different for men and women: men explicate meanings at the level of archisemes, women at the level of differential semes. In addition, men are more expressive in their assessment. However, these facts need careful experimental verification. The study can also be expanded by including such parameters of speakers as education, occupation, since foreign vocabulary includes great amount a variety of social assessments.
List of references for dissertation research candidate of philological sciences Borisova, Olga Sergeevna, 2009
1. Avrorin, V. A. Problems of studying the functional side of the language. Text. / V. A. Avrorin. M.: Nauka, 1975. - 276 p.
2. Azimov, E. G. Russian language on the Internet: (method, and linguist, aspects) Text. / E. G. Azimov // Linguistic and didactic search at the turn of the century. -M., 2000.-S. 7-16.
3. Aleksakhin, A. N. The structure of the Chinese syllable as a manifestation of the system-forming properties of consonants and vowels (the theory of consonant-vowel coarticulation) Text. / A.N. Aleksakhin // Questions of linguistics. 1990. - No. 1 - S. 72-78
4. Alemasov, D. Self-borrowing in Chinese Electronic resource. Access Mode http://www.daochinasile.com/studv/zijieyyu.shtml Saturday, 12 Apr 2008 17:32:29
5. Amirova, T. A. Functional relationship between written and sound language. M.: Nauka, 1985. - 286 p.
6. Aristova, V. M. English-Russian language contacts Text. / V. M. Aristova. L .: Publishing house of the Leningrad University, 1978. - 152 p.
7. Arnold, IV Lexicology of Modern English Text. / I. V. Arnold. - M.: Higher school, 1973. 295 p.
8. Arutyunova, I. D. Language and the world of man Tex. / N. D. Arutyunova. - M.: Languages of Russian culture, 1999. 896 p.
9. Amosova, N. N. Etymological bases vocabulary Modern English Text. / N. N. Amosova. M.: Publishing House of Literature in Foreign Languages, 1958. - 218p.
10. Apresyan, Yu. D. Ideas and methods of modern structural linguistics Text. / Yu. D. Apresyan. M.: Education, 1966. - 305 p.
11. Arapova, N. S. From the history of borrowed words in Russian Text. / N. S. Arapova // Russian language at school. 2001. - No. 3. - S. 86-89
12. Afonkin, S. Yu. Look at the root Text.: Explanatory Dictionary of Foreign Words of Greek and Latin Origin / S. Yu. Afonkin. St. Petersburg: Himizdat, 2000. - 336 p.
13. Akhmanova, O. S. Dictionary of linguistic terms Text. / O. S. Akhmanova. Ed. 2nd, stereotypical - M .: Editorial URSS, 2004. - 576 ".
14. Baginskaya, I. N. On the problem of borrowing assimilation (on the material of English and Russian languages) Electronic resource. Access mode http://www.isuct.ru/shcherba/trud/ baginskaya.htm Tuesday, 5 Feb 2008 11:15:42
15. Belyaeva, S. A. English words in Russian of the XVI-XX centuries Text. / S. A. Belyaeva. Vladivostok: FEGU, 1984. - 108 p.
16. Birzhakova E. E. Essays on the historical lexicology of the Russian language in the 18th century. Language contacts and borrowing text. / E. E. Birzhakova, L. A. Voinova, L. L. Kutana. L.: Nauka, 1972. - 429 p.
17. Bloomfield, L. Language Text. / L. Bloomfield. Ed. 2nd, stereotypical. - M.: Editorial URSS, 2002. - 608 p.
18. Big psychological dictionary Text. / Comp. and general ed. V. Zinchenko, B. Meshcheryakov. St. Petersburg: PRIME - EUROZNAK, 2004. - 672 p.
19. Bonfante, J. Position of neolinguistics Text. / J. Bonfante. In the book: Zvegintsev V.A. History of linguistics of the 19th and 20th centuries in essays and extracts. - Part 1. -M.: Enlightenment, 1964. -466 p.
20. Big Dictionary of the Russian Language Text. Moscow: Bustard; Russian language, 1998.-672 p.
21. Borisova, O. S. Identification of the meanings of borrowed words by speakers of Russian and Chinese languages. Text. / O. S. Borisova // World of science, culture, education. Gorno-Altaisk, 2009. - No. 3 (15) - S. 74-78
22. Bragina, A. A. Neologisms in Russian Text. / A.A. Bragina. M.: Nauka, 1973.- 188 p.
23. Breyter M. A. Interaction of cultures - interaction of languages: on the material of modern lexical borrowings from English into Russian Text. / M. A. Breiter // Russia and the West: Dialogues of Cultures. M., 1996. - S. 6-14
24. Brinev, K. I. inner form of the Russian word as a carrier of the potential of its derivational functioning: avtoref. dis. . cand. philol. Sciences. / K. I. Brinev. Kemerovo, 2002. - 20 p.
25. Brockhaus, F. A. Encyclopedic Dictionary. Philosophy and Literature. Mythology and religion. Language and culture Text. / F. A. Brockhaus, I. A. Efron. M.: Eksmo, 2004. - 592 p.
26. Bruner, J. Psychology of knowledge. Beyond immediate information Text. / J. Bruner. M.: Progress, 1977. - 418 p.
27. Bugorskaya, NV Anthropocentrism as a category of modern linguistics Electronic resource. Access mode http:// psycholing.narod.ru/bugorsk-l.htm Friday 6 March 2009 13:04:57
28. Bushev, A. Russian language and modern society Text. / A. Bushev // October. 2007. - N1 1. - S. 172-176
29. Bykov, A. A. Anatomy of terms. 400 word-building elements from Latin and Greek Text.: educational dictionary-reference book / A. A. Bykov. M.: ENAS, 2008. - 196 p.
30. Weinreich, U. Language contacts: Status and problems of research Text. / W. Weinreich. Blagoveshchensk: BSU im. I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, 2000. - 264 p.
31. Valgina, N. S. Active processes in the modern Russian language: Textbook for university students. / N.S. Valgin. M.: Logos, 2003.-304 p.
32. Vasyukova, I. A. Dictionary of foreign words Text. / I. A. Vasyukova. -M.: AST-PRESS, 1999. 640 p.
33. Vaulina, E. Yu. Let's speak correctly: the latest and most common borrowings in Russian Text. / E. Yu. Vaulina, G. N. Sklyarevskaya. St. Petersburg: Academia, Faculty of Philology, St. Petersburg State University, 2004. - 224 p.
34. Vendina, T. I. Linguistic consciousness and methods of its research. Text. / T. I. Vendina // Linguistics and intercultural communication, 1994. No. 4. - P. 37-49
35. Ventsov, A. V. Problems of speech perception Text. / A. V. Ventsov, V. B. Kasevich. Ed. 2nd. - M.: Editorial URSS, 2003. - 240 p.
36. Vinogradov VV Lexicology and lexicography of the Russian language Text. / V. V. Vinogradov. M.: Nauka, 1977. - 312 p.
37. Vinogradova T. Yu. Specificity of communication on the Internet. Text. / T. Yu. Vinogradova// Russian and comparative philology: linguoculturol. aspect. Kazan, 2004. - S. 63-67
38. Volodarskaya, E. F. Borrowing as a universal linguistic phenomenon Text. / E. F. Volodarskaya // Questions of Philology, 2001. -№1. -FROM. 11-27
39. Volodarskaya, E. F. Borrowing as a reflection of Russian-English contacts Text. / E. F. Volodarskaya // Questions of linguistics. 2002. -№ 4. - P.96-112
40. Voronkova, I. S. On the concepts of "exoticism" and "barbarism" Electronic resource. Access mode http://www.vestnik.vsu.ru/pdf/lingvo/2006/02/voronkovarus.pdf Monday, 23 Feb 2008 19:15:02
41. Vorotnikov, Yu. JI. Russian culture and Russian language at the turn of the century. Text. / Yu. L. Vorotnikov // Vestn. Ros. academy of sciences. 2002. - T. 72, No. 9-S. 771-778
42. Vysochina, O. V. Understanding the meaning of a foreign word (psycholinguistic study) Text.: dis. . cand. philol. Sciences. / O. V. Vysochina Voronezh, 2001. - 183 p.
43. Gibalo, E. N. Anglo-American semantic papers in modern German(on the material of the press of the FRG and the GDR) Text.: dis.cand. philol. Sciences. / E. N. Gibalo M., 1979. - 214 p.
44. Ginzburg, R. 3. On the replenishment of the vocabulary: (the experience of the analysis of the replenishment of the dictionary. The composition of the modern, English.) Text. / R. 3. Ginzburg // Foreign. lang. in school 1954. - No. 1. - S. 19-31.
45. Year of Russia in China and Year of China in Russia: new stage good neighborliness, friendship and cooperation Text. // Breath of China. Moscow. - 2006 - No. 3. - S. 2
46. Gorelov, V. I. Lexicology of the Chinese language Text. / V. I. Gorelov. -M.: Enlightenment, 1984.-216s.
47. Gorelov, V. I. Stylistics of the modern Chinese language: textbook. allowance for students ped. In-tov in specialty No. 2103 “Foreign. Yaz." / V. I. Gorelov. M.: Enlightenment, 1979. - 192 p. - Bibliography: p. 182-184
48. GOST 7.1-2003. Bibliographic record. Bibliographic description. General requirements and rules for drafting Text. Introduction 07/01/2004. M.: Publishing house of standards, 2004. - 47 p.
49. Grinev SV Introduction to terminology Text. / S. V. Grinev. M.: Moscow Lyceum, 1993. - 309 p.
50. Gurevich, I. S. Reader on the history of the Chinese language III-XV centuries Text. / I. S. Gurevich, I. T. Zograf. M.: Nauka, 1982. - 198 p.
51. Demyanov, V. G. Foreign vocabulary in the history of the Russian language of the XI-XVI1 centuries. Problems of morphological adaptation. Text. / V. G. Demyanov. -M.: Nauka, 2001.-409 p.
52. Dissertation: Methods of scientific creativity Text.: Toolkit/ Compiled by: O. N. Apapasenko, A. Yu. Arutyunyan; Biysk ped. state un-t im. V. M. Shukshina, 2007. 143 p.
53. Dubenets, E. M. Modern English: textbook. allowance for students of the humanities, universities / E.M. Dubenets. M.: Glossa-Press, 2004. - 192 p.
54. Dyakov, AI The reasons for the intensive borrowing of Anglicisms in modern Russian Text. / A. I. Dyakov // Language and culture. -Novosibirsk, 2003. S. 35-43
55. Egorova, N. Yu. Mastering foreign cultural terminology in English Text. / N. Yu. Egorova // Communicative and nominative aspects of language units. Intercollegiate collection scientific papers.-L., 1989.-S. 110-119
56. Efremov, L.P. The essence of lexical borrowing and the main features of the development of borrowed words. Text. / L. P. Efremov. -Alma-Ata, 1958.-288 p.
57. Zhinkin, N. I. Mechanisms of speech Text. / N. I. Zhinkin. M.: APN RSFSR, 1958.-370s.
58. Zhluktenko, Yu. A. Linguistic aspects of bilingualism Text. / Yu. A. Zhluktenko. Kyiv: Vishcha school, 1974. - 176 p.
59. Zavyalova, O. Chinese dialects today Text. / O. Zavyalova // Problems of the Far East, 1996. No. 2. - P. 108-118
60. Zadoenko, T. P. Fundamentals of the Chinese language. introductory course. Text. / T. P. Zadoenko, Huang Shuying 2nd ed., Rev. - M.: Eastern literature, 1993. -271 p.
61. Zelenin, A. V. Multimedia: On the peculiarities of borrowing technical concepts in Russian. Text. / A. V. Zelenin // Russian speech. 2004. - No. 2. - S.64-68
62. Zorkina, O. S. On the psycholinguistic approach to the study of text Text. / O. S. Zorkina // Language and culture. Novosibirsk, 2003- P.205-210
63. Ivanov VV Terminology and borrowings in modern Chinese Text. / V. V. Ivanov. M.: Nauka, 1973. - 171s.
64. Izyumskaya, S. S. eternal question on the extent of the use of foreign words in the Russian language. Text. / S. S. Izyumskaya // Rus. literature. - 2000. No. 4.-S. 9-12
65. Ilyina, O. V. Semantic assimilation of foreign language lexical innovations by the Russian language "Linguistic units in semantic and lexicographic aspects". Novosibirsk, 1998.
66. History of China Text. / V. V. Adamchik, M. V. Adamchik, A. N. Badan and others. Mn.: Harvest, 2004. - 736 p.
67. Kozlova, A. V. Features of the functioning of English borrowings in fixed oral speech: on the material of records of network communication Text. / A. V. Kozlova // Romano-Germanic Philology. Saratov, 2005. - Issue. 5. - S. 73-78
68. Komlev, N. G. Dictionary of foreign words: more than 4.5 thousand words and expressions Text. / N. G. Komlev. M.: Eksmo, 2008. - 672 p.
69. Kotov, A. V. New Chinese-Russian Dictionary Text. / A. V. Kotov. M., Bustard, 2001 - 142 p.
70. Concise Dictionary cognitive terms Text. / E. S. Kubryakova, V. Z. Demyankov, Yu. G. Pankrats, L. G. Luzina. / Ed. E. S. Kubryakova. -M.: MGU, 1996.-245 p.
71. Krysin, L. P. Foreign words in modern Russian Text. / L. P. Krysin. M.: Nauka, 1968.- 237 p.
72. Krysin, L.P. Stages of mastering a foreign word Text. / L. P. Krysin // Russian language at school. 1991. - No. 2. - S. 78
73. Krysin, L. P. Foreign word in the context of modern social life Text. / L. P. Krysin // Russian language of the end of the XX century (1985-1995). M., 2000. - S. 142-161
74. Krysin, L. P. Lexical borrowing and tracing in Russian recent decades Text. / L. P. Krysin // Questions of linguistics. 2002. - No. 6. - S.27-34
75. Krysin, L.P. Russian word, one’s own and someone else’s: Studies in the modern Russian language and sociolinguistics Text. / L. P. Krysin. -M.: Languages of Slavic culture, 2004. 888 p.
76. Krysin, L. P. Foreign vocabulary in Russian speech during the Great Patriotic War Text./ L. P. Krysin // Russian speech. M., 2005. - No. 3. - S. 44-52
77. Krysin, L.P. Explanatory dictionary of foreign words Text. / L. P. Krysin. M.: Eksmo, 2006. - 944 p.
78. Kurdyumov, V. A. Chinese language course. Theoretical grammar Text. / V. A. Kurdyumov. Moscow: CITADEL-TRADE; LADA, 2005. - 576 p.
79. Li, Xiangdong. Linguistic differences and their reflection in the lexical semantics of the Chinese and Russian languages. / Li Xiangdong // Questions of Philology. M., 2003 - No. 2. - S. 30-34
80. Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary Text. / Ch. ed. V.N. Yartsev. -M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1990. 685 p.
81. Lokshina, S. M. Brief Dictionary of Foreign Words Text. / S. M. Lokshina. M.: Russian language, 1988. - 632 p.
82. Makovsky, M. M. Theory of lexical attraction Text. / M. M. Makovsky. M., 1971. - 127 p.
83. Makovsky, M. M. Modern English slang: Ontology, structure, etymology Text. / M. M. Makovsky. - Ed. 3 M.: LKI, 2007.- 168 p.
84. Mikitich, L. D. Foreign vocabulary Text. / L. D. Mikitich. L .: Education, 1967. - 104 p.
85. Mikhalyuk, T. M. Intensification of the processes of borrowing foreign vocabulary in modern Russian Text. / T. M. Mikhalyuk // The vital forces of the Slavs at the turn of the century and worldviews: Materials of the international congress: 4 hours - Barnaul, 2001. P. 19-24
86. Mol, A. Sociodynamics of culture Text. / A. Mol. M.: Progress, 1973.-408 p.
87. Musorin, A. Yu. On the characteristics of lexical specificity in the description of the language Text. / A. Yu. Musorin // Proceedings of the third scientific conference. Novosibirsk, 2002. - S. 126-129
88. Nemov, R. S. Psychology Text.: Proc. for stud. higher ped. textbook Institutions. In 3 books. Book. 1: General foundations of psychology / R. S. Nemov. M.: 1998. 4th ed. - M.: VLADOS, 2003. - 688 p.
89. Novikova, T. B. Borrowing of linguocultural concepts (on the material of English and Russian languages) Text.: author. dis. .cand. philol. Sciences / T. B. Novikova; Volgograd state ped. un-t. Volgograd, 2005. -21 p.
90. General psychology: a course of lectures for the first stage teacher education Text. / Comp. E. I. Rogov. M.: VLADOS, 1995.-448 p.
91. Ogienko, I. I. Foreign elements in Russian Text. / I. I. Ogienko. Kyiv, 1915. - 136 p.
92. Allport, H. F. Phenomena of Perception: A Reader in the Psychology of Sensation and Perception Electronic resource. Access mode: http: // www.psvchology-online.net/ Wednesday, 4 March 2009 21:55:32
93. Ozhegov S. I. Dictionary of the Russian language: 700 words Text. / Ed. N. Yu. Shvedova. 21st ed., revised. and additional - M.: Rus. yaz., 1989. - 924 p.
94. Popova, 3. D. Semantic-cognitive analysis of language Text. / 3. D. Popova, I. A. Sternin. Voronezh, 2006. - 226 p.
95. Potebnya, A. A. Thought and language Text. / A. A. Potebnya. M.: Labyrinth, 1999.- 134 p.
96. Pryadokhin M. G. Manual for the Study of the New Chinese Phonetic Alphabet Text. / M. G. Pryadokhin. Moscow: Oriental Literature, 1960.-21 p.
97. Pryadokhin, M. G. A Brief Dictionary of the Difficulties of the Chinese Language Text. / M. G. Pryadokhin, JI. I. Pryadokhina. M.: Ant, 2002 - 464 p.
98. Reformatsky, A. A. On the comparative method Text. / A. A. Reformatsky // Linguistics and poetics. M., 1987. - S. 40-52
99. Rodionova, T. G. Some results of an experimental study of the identification features of neologisms-verbs. Text. / T. G. Rodionova // Word and text in the psycholinguistic aspect. -Tver, 1992.-S. 26-31
100. Rosenthal D.E. Handbook of the Russian language Text.: Dictionary of linguistic terms / D.E. Rosenthal, M.A. Telenkova. M.: LLC " Publishing House"ONIX 21st century": LLC "Publishing House" World and Education ", 2003. - 623 p.
101. Sadik, A. Kh. Lexical borrowings as a means of enriching and developing the Russian literary language in sociolinguistic coverage: avtoref. dis. . cand. philol. Sciences. / A. X. Sadik-Lipetsk, 2005. -21s.
102. Sazonova, T. Yu. Psycholinguistic study of strategies for identifying neologism adjectives Text. / T. Yu. Sazonova // Word and text in the psycholinguistic aspect. Tver, 1992. - S. 32-42
103. Safonova O. E. English linguistic component in the language situation of modern Russia. Text. / O. E. Safonova // Theoretical and applied linguistics. Voronezh, 2000. - Issue. 2: Language and social environment. - pp. 68-77
104. Semenas, A. L. Vocabulary of the Chinese language Text. / A. L. Semenas. - M.: Ant, 2000. 297p.
105. Semenas, A. L. Peculiarities of lexical borrowings in Chinese Text. / A. L. Semenas // Questions of linguistics. 1997. -№ 1. -S. 48-57
106. Modern Russian: Theory. Analysis language units Text:. textbook: at 2 pm Part 1 / Pod. ed. E.I. Dibrova. - M., 2001. - 544 p.
107. Dictionary of Russian linguistic terminology Text. / under total hands prof. A. N. Abregov. Maikop, 2004. - 347 p.
108. Smirnitsky, AI Lexicology of the English language Text. / A. I. Smirnitsky. M., 1956. -260 p.
109. Modern Russian language: Social and functional differentiation Text. / Ros. academy of sciences. Institute of the Russian Language. V.V. Vinogradov. M.: Languages of Slavic culture, 2003. - 568 p.
110. Solntsev, V. M. Essays on the modern Chinese language Text. / V. M. Solntsev. M.: Enlightenment, 1957. - 178s.
111. Sofronov, M. V. Chinese language and Chinese society Text. / M. V. Sofronov. M.: Nauka, 1979. - 312 p.
112. Sternin, I. A. Problems of analysis of the structure of the meaning of the word Text. / I. A. Sternin. Voronezh: Voronezh University, 1979. - 156 p.
113. Sternin, IA Speech nomination and variation of the lexical meaning of the word Text. / I. A. Sternin // Problems of the semantics of the Russian language. Yaroslavl, 1986.-S. 3-13.
114. Sternin, IA Cognitive interpretation of the results of linguistic research. Text. / I. A. Sternin // New in cognitive linguistics / Ed. M. V. Pimenova. Kemerovo, 2006. -S. 155-163.
115. Tarlanov 3. K. Methods and principles of linguistic analysis: textbook. Manual for students of universities and pedagogical institutes / 3. K. Tarlanov. Petrozavodsk: Petrozavodsk University, 1995. - 189 p.
116. Tayurskaya, K.M. On the issue of foreign inclusions in modern Chinese Electronic resource. - Access mode http://www.chiculture.net Monday, 8 Dec 2008 13:21:17
117. Timofeeva, G. G. English borrowings in Russian (phonetic and spelling aspect): Dis. . Dr. Philol. Sciences. SPb., 1992.-346 p.
118. Togoeva, S. I. Specificity of subjective definitions of verbal neoplasms. Text. / S. I. Togoeva // Psycholinguistic problems of semantics. Tver, 1990. - S. 24-30
119. Togoeva, S.I. New word: linguistic and psycholinguistic approaches. / S. I. Togoeva // Problems of semantics: psycholinguistic studies. Tver, 1991. - S. 2331
120. Togoeva, S.I. New word new knowledge in communicative and innovative human activity Text. / S. I. Togoeva // Psycholinguistic studies of the word and text: a collection of scientific papers. - Tver, 1997.-p. 115-120
121. Tokareva, N.D. English language course for continuing text.: Uchebn. / N. D. Tokareva, I. M. Bogdanova. M.: Higher. school, Dubna: Phoenix, 1996-383 p.
122. Trofimova, G. N. Russian speech on the Internet: Anglicisms in modern times, Rus. Speeches Text. / G. N. Trofimova // Rus. speech. 2002. - No. 1. - S. 125127.
123. Philosophical Dictionary Text. / I.T. Frolova. M.: Politizdat, 1987.-590 p.
124. Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary Text. M.: INFRA-M, 1999.-576 p.
125. Frolova, O. P. Word formation in terminological vocabulary Modern Chinese Text. / O. P. Frolova. - Novosibirsk: Science, 1981.- 182p.
126. Frumkina, R. M. Psycholinguistics Text. / R. M. Frumkina. M: Academy, 2001. - 320 p.f >194
127. Khamatova, A. A. Word formation of the modern Chinese language Text. / A. A. Khamatova. M.: Ant, 2003. - 2003. - 224 p.
128. Haugen, E. The process of borrowing Text. / E. Haugen // New in linguistics: Language contacts. Issue. VI. - M.: Progress, 1972. S. 344-382
129. Zhao, Yunping. Comparative grammar of Russian and Chinese. Text. / Zhao Yunping. M.: Progress, 2003. - 460 p.
130. Shansky, N. M. Lexicology of the modern Russian language Text. / N. M. Shansky. M.: Enlightenment, 1972. - 180 p.
131. Shcherba, L. V. Language system and speech activity Text. / L. V. Shcherba. L.: Nauka, 1974. - 428 p.
132. GTsichko, VF Chinese language. Theory and practice of translation: textbook / V. F. 2nd ed. - M.: ACT: East-West, 2007. - 223 p.
133. Yan, Wenwen. Foreign Borrowings in Chinese: Current Situation and Development Trends
134. Yartseva, VN Big Encyclopedic Dictionary Text. / V.N. Yartsev. 2nd ed. - M.: Great Russian Encyclopedia, 1988. - 685 p.
135. Sternberg R. Comprehending verbal comprehension / R. Sternberg, J. Powell // American Psychologist, 1983. Vol.38. - P. 878-893
136. Text. /"J] \p I SHMSHSHY^, 1999.-49-51 J158. 2006 -sh-.zh2007. 469
137. Y^Sh^-^MSh^dada Text.0 W: 2000.-4679 J161. (SHT*) Text./Zh^#±Sho Sh, 2000. 1250 Zh162. SHSH"/SHSH Text. / LYIF^o SHSH2006. 200 F
138. YSHR® Text. / -f&sh, -f&SHSH^o Shshh -T-"ZhSh±, 1999.-310 f
130
140. Text. / SHSH, SHIShShcho 1Sh-. YSH1, 2007. - 312 F
141. Text./Sh^ShSho -2 S Wrt) from 2001.-437172. Text. / ShZsShSho 2005.- 72Ж173. ttshbshsch^t Text. 2 f (W) . - itm-.1996. 1233 w174. shhhzd Text. /shttt. sh-. tt^sh-%J1K2002.- 1104 ^
142. Text./SHSH!1 o -2YY (SHSH) o -^fiilMi. 2004. 254 J176. "^tuyatschm- Text. /Ms, §?2001.- 1196 f177. Text. / 1993 ^ -1230 F178.
143. Text. / YSH1. -2003.-268 F
144. Text. / PSHSH * W "YSHCH^SHSH., 1987. -348 F
Please note that the scientific texts presented above are posted for review and obtained through recognition of the original texts of dissertations (OCR). In this connection, they may contain errors related to the imperfection of recognition algorithms. There are no such errors in the PDF files of dissertations and abstracts that we deliver.
Ege in physics results
How to apply for the exam for graduates of previous years
What are the chances to enter the budget: by the number of points, by university, by specialty