«Коллеги», педагогический журнал Казахстана, 2014г

Горская Л. Н. Начальный этап обучения диалогической речи// Иностранные языки в школе. – 1984. - № 2.

 http://esl.about.com/od/businessenglishdialogues/a/b_dialogues.htm

http://www.tolearnenglish.com/english_lessons/sample-dialogue

In linguistics, there are two main standpoints when it comes to language change: evolution and degradation. Evolution supporters see any change in language as a natural progression which cannot be stopped; language is the only true democracy, we all vote whenever we speak or write and for better or worse cause the language to change. Those who favour the degradation argument are usually purists who see language change as language destruction, simplification, the victory of public ignorance, etc.

Both views are correct to a degree. I believe that languages evolve over time and that they have a natural tendency towards simplification. People control language and not institutions so, in this sense, languages are fully-functioning democracies, in which each of us votes and the majority dictates which words are added to the dictionary each year and become the accepted norm. However, we think there is a case for promoting the use of adequate native expressions over unnecessary foreign borrowings where the two words are (close) synonyms. This last point is crucial when it comes to modern Russian language.

Borrowing from English into Russian is not a new phenomenon by any means and has been happening for centuries. However, what we are seeing now in modern Russian is the language being flooded with anglicisms via the mass media, internet and marketing industry.

Borrowing as means of replenishing the vocabulary of present-day Russian is of much greater importance and is comparatively active only in the field of scientific terminology and social-political terminology as many terms are often made up of borrowed morphemes, mostly morphemes from classical languages.

The part played by borrowings in the vocabulary of a language depends upon the history of each given language, being conditioned by direct linguistic contacts and political, economic and cultural relationships between nations. Russian history contains innumerable occasions for all types of such contacts. It is the vocabulary system of each language that is particularly responsive to every change in the life of the speaking community.

The development of the contacts between nations and the dominance of English language as business language cause a big flow of words into Russian language, thus enriching its word – stock.

Borrowed words have been called «The milestones of philology» – said O. Jesperson – because they permit us (show us) to fix appreciatively the dates of linguistic changes. They show us the course of civilization and give us information of the nations». The well-known linguist Shuchard said «No language is entirely pure», that all the languages are mixed. Borrowed words enter the language as a result of influence of two main causes of factors; linguistic and extra-linguistic.

Borrowed words have been considered in many scientific works, monographs and publications. But detailed analysis of words borrowed into Kazakh from English in detail hasn^’t been done so far. Still much is left to investigate.

The main constituent part of the vocabulary system of any language is formed by borrowed words. Only borrowed words which were loaned from English into Russian have been considered in this article.

A number of different definitions have been provided over the last century to describe the true meaning of a loanword or borrowings. Nevertheless, the majority of linguists tend to agree that loanwords or borrowings are words which are taken from one language and used by another. However, many prominent scholars have distinguished between the two terms mentioned above by attributing different characteristics to each one. To give an example, Haugen defines borrowing as ‘the attempted reproduction of patterns in one language previously found in another one” and states that loanwords are only one type of borrowing. [1, 210]

Heath also believes that the two terms express different notions and suggests that a borrowing is a stem and not a complete lexical item or in other cases it can be more than that, it can even constitute a full phrase, whereas loanwords are always single words. [2, 432] On the other side of the spectrum stands Myers-Scotton who states that both loanwords and borrowings describe the same linguistic function, namely words which are loaned by one language, which is the donor language, to another, which acts as the recipient language. [3, 152]

Before proceeding to the reasons that drive individuals to use words of other languages, it is important to provide the different types of loanwords or borrowings. According to Myers-Scotton there are two different types of borrowings: cultural and core borrowings. Cultural borrowings constitute words which express concepts that do not exist in the lexicon of the recipient language. Many of them are lexical elements related to technology and science and in some cases they can even constitute new words for the donor language as well. He places the example of computer-related terminology which was introduced to the world a few decades ago and was new even to native speakers of English. [3, 212]

However, cultural borrowings are not always words referring to science, but also words that describe items of clothing or food which as it was aforementioned, do not have a lexical equivalent in the recipient language’s lexicon.

As for core borrowings, they are not new words, but words that are already expressed by an equivalent lexical item in the recipient language. Although there seems to be no reason for the existence of this kind of borrowing, it does not only take place but according to the data collected for the present study, it constitutes a large amount of overall borrowing. But the crucial question still remains: Why do people, and in the case of these study primarily monolingual speakers, feel the need to use loanwords? Since this study focuses on the use of English loanwords, due to the global character of the English language the reasons that lead to such use will be discussed. [1, 213]

Here are some reasons for borrowing. Sometimes new concepts are introduced including the words that are used for them. English terms that are associated with computers, with technology, but also with football (UK) or soccer (USA) were introduced in other languages together with their concepts. The other languages simply did not have the words for the new concepts. After some time, some equivalents are introduced, but not always.

In Dutch, for example, one can talk about penalties, sometimes in the English way, but also with a Dutch pronunciation (penàlties) or about strafschoppen, which means the same. Corned beef is also something borrowed from the English speaking word, not only the stuff, but also the word. Again it is adjusted to Dutch: it is pronounced as cornètbeef and not recognized as English anymore. One might say: Ikgaeenfiletjesaven (I am going to save a small file). The words file and save are recognized. People don’t use many Dutch equivalents for computer terms. [2,434]

Another reason why speakers borrow from other languages is that it helps them to make distinctions that were impossible otherwise. An example: in Dutch the word huis (house). With the help of loan words (borrowed words) from other languages that speakers certainly will recognize, they can distinguish between several types of house.

Words are sometimes so well adjusted to their new language that it is hard to recognize their roots. For example, Japanese Makudonarudo or Amusuterudamu. To find the origin, you should know that Japanese does not allow (most) clusters of two or more consonants. If a borrowed word contains such clusters, Japanese simply inserts an extra vowel. Now, with this knowledge the speaker can see that the first word is MacDonald’s, and the second one Amsterdam. [2, 436]

An interesting phenomenon is that speakers only borrow from languages that they look up to, languages with a higher status. Not necessarily in every respect, but at least in some specific areas. Some centuries ago, Russian borrowed sailing terms from Dutch that are still used nowadays. The Dutch navy was very important in those days, and provided Russian with the necessary lexicon. Examples that are still in use are ankor (from anker), skipper (from schipper) and kajuta (from kajuit). In the area of food languages borrow from other languages for obvious reasons: pizza, tandoori and nasi have spread all over the world. [4, 177]

For Myers-Scotton loanwords are used due to the prestigious and attractive character of the donor language. In the case of English, the achievements that occurred in the U.S. through the medium of the English language have lead individuals all around the globe to use the same language in order to refer to them. Additionally, due to these achievements, it has become a common belief that English is the language of power, success and modernity. [3, 216]

In the case of core loanwords it is not only the prestige of the donor language that leads to the borrowing, but the most crucial element is the cultural dominance of the donor language. [3, 217] Nonetheless, it should be taken into consideration that the use of loanwords may in some cases be an unconscious choice without a clear intention.

Minority languages borrow numerous words from dominant languages spoken in the same physical space: Spanish or Chinese in the US have adopted and integrated countless words from English; Moroccan Arabic in the Netherlands Turkish in Germany, Punjabi in the UK: all these languages have borrowed many words from Dutch, German and English, respectively, the dominant languages of the surrounding world of those minority languages.

The opposite does occur but it is more rare: English does use words from Spanish (tortilla, tequila), but fewer, and more specific (food and drink!) than Spanish uses from English. In the Netherlands, people know and use only a few words from Arabic, Berber or Turkish: they have to do with food (döner kebab, couscous, which is more French than Arabic) and sometimes other areas such as religion (muezzin, ramedan). The reason is that the migrants have adjusted to the majority community (although some people believe this is not the case). They have adopted concepts and words from the majority community. [4, 178]

Most countries or communities don’t welcome foreign words with enthusiasm. Some governments are even overtly opposed against linguistic ‘pollution’ and spend a lot of money on so called purist measures against (in their eyes) heavy borrowing. An example is France: it is not so long ago that people were fined if they would use too many non-French (i.e., English, usually) words in official texts.

An often-quoted example of a very purist country is Iceland. The Icelandic government used to play an active role in replacing words with other than (old-) Icelandic roots. The Icelandic people accept the proposals from a special linguistic committee and there are daily radio programs in which Old Icelandic words for new concepts are discussed. This used to be the situation for a long period of time, but there are some facts that even Icelandic has started to borrow words from English now. [3, 220]

Linguists study borrowing and they often conclude that it is alogical consequence of language contact. Languages have always changed and will always change. Whatever the measures or the amounts of money that are spent on this type of language policy: it does not work if the people are not willing to accept the proposals and keep their language ‘clean’. [1, 218] The question rises why some linguistic communities are keener than others to keep loan words at a distance. We wonder if it is true or just a wrong impression that some linguistic communities are more caring about their language than others.

It is customary to use the terms recipient language for the language that acquires a word, and donor language for the language that is the source of the loan word. A loanword can be defined as a word that is transferred from a donor language to a recipient language’. [4, 179]

Linguists Krysin and Breyter distinguish two groups of reasons for acquiring new words. The first group includes purely linguistic factors:

1. The first and the most important reason for borrowing is that a new word denotes a new concept. Breyter claims that about 15% of the latest Anglicisms were borrowed simultaneously with borrowing a new concept.

2. A loan word can be used when there is no word specific enough to denote a concept in the receiving language. Examples of this kind can be found if we look at the names of literary and cinematic genres that were borrowed into the Kazakh language: [fentez'i] ('fantasy'), ['mju:zik(ә)l] ('a theatrical performance that combines songs, spoken dialogue, acting, and dance') etc.

3. A loan word can be used if it is shorter than the native term, if it is easier to pronounce it, or if its etymology is more transparent. For example, the recent borrowing [praisl'ist] ('price list') has displaced the older borrowing from German [pr'eiskurant], because the etymology of the Anglicism is a lot more transparent for a Kazakh speaker.

4. A loan word can be acquired to specify different meanings of a native polysemantic word. For instance, the English word image, borrowed into Russian, has specified the Russian word obraz, which was highly polysemantic. Now, image has adopted some of the functions of the native term. In the modern discourse there are contexts that allow using only image, while other contexts require the usage of obraz.

5. A loan word can have a special emphatic function, referring to foreign contexts.

6. A loan word can have additional positive or negative connotations, which the native equivalent would lack. On the other hand, a loan word can help to avoid some unwanted negative or positive connotations, which the native term would have. For example, the English word killer, which was borrowed into Kazakh through Russian in the 90s, does not imply a strong negative connotation that the Russian equivalent has. Killer in Russian means someone whose job is to kill for money, while the Russian word ubijca has very strong negative and judgmental connotations. [5, 12]

The second group of reasons for borrowing a foreign word includes the extralinguistic factors:

1. Reinforcement of relationships between two societies;

2. Prestige and fashion;

3. Shift in the mentality of a people;

4. Another important social reason for intensified borrowing from English is the fact that more people nowadays tend to learn English, to use it as their working language or to go abroad, where they have to speak English. [6, 132]

Diakov claims that this factor makes it possible for a Russian speaker to switch their code when they talk about foreign countries or concepts. [7, 35]

Languages are in a constant process of evolution and our vocabulary is like a lexical fashion show in which words compete for popularity. New words appear every day, often enriching and adding colour to our languages. However, the global influence of English may be having a negative impact on modern Russian as people replace perfectly adequate pre-existing Russian words with “cooler” and more attractive English alternatives.

However, I think there is a case for promoting the use of adequate native expressions over unnecessary foreign borrowings where the two words are (close) synonyms. This last point is crucial when it comes to modern Russian.

Borrowing from English into Kazakh through Russian is not a new phenomenon by any means and has been happening for centuries. However, what we are seeing now in modern Kazakh is the language being flooded with English borrowings via the mass media, internet and marketing industry. In English, if you want a restaurant menu to sound up market then you add some French words and double the prices. In Kazakhstan, you remove some usual Kazakh words and add English ones in transliteration. Today, going for бизнес-ланч (business lunch) is infinitely more appealing than going for түскі ас (lunch). You may be eating the same meal but the two have very different associations and quite possibly price tags.

On the other hand if we do not borrow international words, scientific and technical terms from other languages Kazakh nation will be lagging behind other advanced countries. As we know borrowings enrich any language and may help to replenish the word-stock of the borrowing language. Borrowing is an inevitable language process. Any language (including Kazakh) should borrow lacking words and specific terms from other languages. Even English which has become the International language borrowed 70% of its word-stock from other languages.

1. 
   Jespersen, Otto. Growth and Structure of the English Language. 10th ed. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1982. – p. 210-220
   
2. 
   Shuchard, B. The structure of American English», New York. 1998. – p 73
   
3. 
   Haugen, Einar. The analysis of linguistic borrowing, Language. 1950. – p 210-231
   
4. 
   Heath, J. Borrowing. In Mesthrie R. (ed.) Concise Encyclopedia of Sociolinguistics, Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd, 2001 – p. 432-444
   
5. 
   Myers-Scotton. Multiple Voices: An Introduction to Bilingualism, Oxford Blackwell, 2006. – p 152-213
   
6. 
   Биккинин И.Д. “Тюркизмы в английском языке”, Ватандаш. – Уфа, 1998. – №1. – с.176-180
   
7. 
   Крысин Л.П. Иноязычные слова в современном русском языке. - М.: Просвещение, 1968. c. 12-37