Sociolinguistics

SOCIOLINGUISTICS
Posted by fatchulfkip on March 19, 2008
Introduction
When a study of language in which the linguistic factors are related to the factors beyond
the language, such as language use that is done by its speakers in a certain speech community, it
refers to sociolinguistics. According to Fishman, for instance, socially, the language use involves
“Who speaks, what language, to whom, when and where” Fishman, 1972:244).. When some
aspects of sociology are adopted in studying a language, this means it presents an
interdisciplinary study; and its name represents a combination of sociology and linguistics. In
this relation, some experts call it as sociology of language; and some others call it as
sociolinguistics.
The following discussion involves some terms such as language, linguistics, sociology or
its aspects, and sociolinguistics as well as relationships between language and society
Sociolinguistics
A term sociolinguistics is a derivational word. Two words that form it are sociology and
linguistics. Sociology refers to a science of society; and linguistics refers to a science of
language. A study of language from the perspective of society may be thought as linguistics plus
sociology. Some investigators have found it to introduce a distinction between sociolinguistics
and sociology of language. Some others regard sociolinguistics is often referred as the sociology
of language.
Sociolinguistics is defined as:

1. The study that is concerned with the relationship between language and the context in
which it is used. In other words, it studies the relationship between language and society.
It explains we people speak differently in different social contexts. It discusses the social
functions of language and the ways it is used to convey social meaning. All of the topics
provides a lot of information about the language works, as well as about the social
relationships in a community, and the way people signal aspects of their social identity
through their language (Jenet Holmes, 2001)
2. The study that is concerned with the interaction of language and setting (Carol M.
Eastman, 1975; 113).
3. the study that is concerned with investigating the relationship between language and
society with the goal of a better understanding of the structure of language and of how
languages function in communication ( Ronald Wardhaugh, 1986 : 12)
Socio-cultural Aspects
A group of people is required by both community and society. They communicate and
interact between and another. They have a membership consciousness on the basis of the
common goals and their behaviour is ordered and patterned. If they live in a given area, have the
same culture and living styles, and can collectively act in their effort to reach a certain goal, they
will be known as a community.
A society in which some groups of people are living may show what we call social
stratification. A term social stratification used to refer to any hierarchical ordering of group
within a society (Trudgill, 1983).
A system of social stratification is not always similar to one another; it may be represented in
castes (such as in India); it may be represented in different social classes: high class, middle
class, and lower class (such in United States); and it may be represented in some terms such as:
elite group vs. common people, “kawula vs. gusti” (such as in Indonesia). A society in which its
members are stratified shows social classes followed by social status and role.

Social class may be defined primarily by wealth, or by circumstances of birth, or by
occupation, or by criteria specific to the group under investigation. If wealth is a criterion, this
may be calculated in terms of money, or in terms of how many pigs, sheep, or blankets an
individual or family possesses, or how much land they claim. Social status is often largely
determined by social class membership (Troike and Blackwell, 1982: 87).
A married man automatically has a status as a husband of his wife and as a father of
child(ren); in his office, he may be a director; and in his neighbourhood, he may be a religious
leader. According to Soerjono Soekanto, social role is a dynamic aspect of status ( Soekanto,
1982: 236-237).
Thus, the man has three statuses: as a father, a director, and a religious leader. When he
fulfils his duties and responsibilities in accordance with his single status, he plays one role.
Whatever the groups are called, each of them must occupy a position in a social rank or have a
social status. Therefore, a member of a given social rank or social status plays a role in
accordance with his status.
Social relationships among people in society are based on some rules, values, etiquette, etc. In
communication, for instance, people are ordered by rules (of speaking); they are guided by
values (of how to behave in a good manner) than can be conducted through etiquette (of using a
language).
Social Units of Language Use
a. Speech Community

An important concept in the discussion of communication is the speech community. It refers to a
group of people who use the same system of speech signals. (John T. Plat and H.K. Plat, 1975:
33).
Troike and Blackweel state that speech community must meet three criteria: (1) it is any group
within a society which has anything significant in common (including religion, ethnicity, race,
age, deafness, sexual orientation, or occupation), (2) it is a physically bounded unit of people
having range of role-opportunities (a politically organized tribe or nation), (3) it is a collection of
similarly situated entities that something in common (such as the Western World, European
Common Market, or the United Nations) (1982:19).
b. Speech Situation
According to Dell Hymes, a speech situation is a situation in which a speech occurs. Within a
community, we may detect many situations associated with (or marked by the absence of)
speech. Such situations will be described as ceremonies, fights, hunts, meals, lovemaking, and
the like (in Gumperz, John J. and Dell Hymes, eds., 1972: 54).
c. Speech Event
According to Dell Hymes, a speech event refers to activities or aspects of activities that are
directly governed by rules or norms for the use of speech. An event may consist of a single
speech act; and it often comprises several speech acts (in Gumperz, John J. and Dell Hymes,
eds., 1972: 56).
d. Speech Act

According Dell Hymes, speech act is the minimal term of the speech event. It represents a level
distinct from the sentence, and cannot be identified with any single portion of other levels of
grammar, nor with segments of any particular size defined in terms of other levels of grammar.
An utterance may have the status of command depending on a conventional formula. When we
ask someone to leave the building, we may say: “Go!” not “Go?” An interrogative sentence
“Can you help me?” may be meant to ask someone to do something; “what time is it?” may be
meant to remind that the listener comes very late (in Gumperz and Dell Hymes, eds., 1972: 56).
e. Speech Styles
The term style refers to a language variety that is divided based on the criterion of
formality. This criterion tends to subsume subject matter, the audience of discourse, and the
occasion. Based on the criterion, Martin Jose (in Brown, 1982: 192) recognizes the speech into
frozen, formal, consultative, casual and intimate styles. A frozen (oratorical) style is used in
public speaking before a large audience; wording is carefully planned in advance, intonation is
somewhat exaggerated, and numerous rhetorical devices are appropriate. A formal (deliberative)
style is also used in addressing audiences, usually audiences too large to permit effective
interchange betweens speaker and hearers, though the forms are normally not as polished as
those in a frozen (oratorical) style. A typical university classroom lecture is often carried out in a
formal (deliberative) style. A consultative style is typically a dialogue, though formal enough
that words are chosen with some care. Business transactions, doctor-patient conversations, and
the like are consultative in nature. Casual conversations are between friends or colleagues or
sometimes numbers of a family; in this context words need not be guarded and social barriers are
moderately low. An intimate style is one characterized by complete absence of social inhibitions.

Talk with family, loved ones, and very close friends, where you tend to reveal your inner self, is
usually in an intimate style.
Someone may speak very formally or very informally; his choice of the styles is
governed by circumstances. Ceremonial occasions almost require very formal speech; public
lectures are somewhat less formal; casual conversation is quite informal; and conversation
between intimates on matters of little importance may be extremely informal and casual.
We may try to relate the level of formality chosen to a number of factors: (1) the kind of
occasion, (2) the various social, age, and other differences that exist between the participants, (3)
the particular task that is involved, e.g., writing or speaking, and (4) the emotional involvement
of one or more of the participants (Wardhaugh, 1986: 48).
f. Ways of Speaking
A way of speaking refers to how a language speaker uses in accordance with behavior of
communication regulated in his speech community. This means that he has to apply “regulation”
of using his language. That is why Fishman suggests that in using a language someone has to
consider to whom he speaks. Considering the person to whom he speaks, he will determine what
language or its varieties he wants to use to speak. His consideration is not only based on to whom
he speaks, but also on when or where he speaks. The language speaker will consider the setting
of time and place.
In relation to the ways of speaking Dell Hymes states that the point of it is the regulative idea that
the communicative behavior within a community is analyzable in terms of determinate ways of

speaking, that the communicative competence of persons comprises in part a knowledge of
determinate ways of speaking (in Gamperz and Hymes, eds., 1972 : 57).
g. Components of Speech
A language use occurring in a speech community must be in relation to speech situation,
speech event, speech act, and speech styles, as well as components of speech. Those form an
integrated parts in the communicative behavior. Dell Hymes (in Gumperz and Hymes, 1972 : 59-
65) states the speech are in the sixten components, being grouped together under the letters of the
word SPEAKING. SPEAKING here stands for (S)etting, (P)articipants, (E)nds, (A)act sequence,
(K)ey, (I)nstrumentalities, (N)orms, and (G)enres. The further explanation will be explained
later.
Factors Influencing Language Use
They are four dominant factors influencing someone’s language use in a given speech
community: (a) the participants: who speaks, to whom he speaks, (b) the setting: where does he
speak? (c) the topic discussed, and (d) the function: what and why does he speak?. These factors
(and the other factors) will be discussed in detail in the next chapter (Wardhaugh, 1983). These
four factors can be illustrated as follows:
For instance, there are two persons involving in a speech act. They are called as
participants. They are identified as father and his son. At home (setting), in order to be familiar
between them (function), both father and his son (participants) speak Javanese language to talk
about daily activities (topic); they use Indonesian language in another topic. Both speakers never
Javanese outside their home to each other; they use Banjarese or Indonesian language.

Social Dimensions Influencing Language Use
Starting from the factors above, language use is determined by social dimensions: (a) social
distance scale: how well we know someone, (b) a status scale: high-low status in social life;
superior-subordinate status, and (c) a formality: formal-informal; high-low formality.
Social structure may either influence or determine linguistic structure and/or behaviour.
The age-grading phenomenon can be used as evidence. In this relation, for instance, young
children speak differently from other children; and children speak differently from mature.
Consequently, there are some varieties of the same language (dialects, styles, speech levels, etc.)
and ways of speaking, choices of words, and rules for conversing. Linguistic structure and/or
behaviour may either influence or determine social structure.
Sociolinguistics studies a language and its varieties, and how they are used in the speech
community in relation to the socio-cultural background of the language use itself.
Bilingualism, Code Switching and Interference
Bilingualism
A language is used by its speaker for the sake of communication and interaction. Initially,
a newborn child tries to master one language used his immediate social environment such as:
family (father and mother) and surrounding people. In the age of pre-elementary school, he may
have a mastery of one language; or, he may have a mastery of his mother tongue or native
language. In the age level, he can be said as being a monolingual speaker. For him, to be able to
use one language is sufficient.

In the next development, when he wants to go to elementary school, the new social environment
‘force’ him to learn another language until he has a mastery of the language (Indonesian
language, for example). When he can be stated as having a mastery of Indonesian language, he is
called as bilingual speaker.
According to Weinreich, bilingual is a person who involved in alternately using two languages.
In this case, it can be said that before someone can be stated as bilingual speaker, of course, he
has to master two languages. Mastering two languages enables him to use two languages
alternately. That is to say that in one situation he uses one language, and in the other situation he
uses the language. Therefore, he, then, can be stated as a person involved in what is called as
bilingualism, the practice of alternately using two languages (Weienreich, 1968: 1). William F.
Mackey defines bilingualism as the alternate use of two or more languages by the same
individual (Mackey, in Fishman, ed., 1972: 555).
Code Switching
We may refer to a language or a variety of a language as code. This is useful because it is
neutral. This is to say that such terms as language, standard language, dialect, style, speech
level, register, pidgin, Creole, and the other variety of the language can be called as codes. In
other words, the term code is meant to refer to one of the varieties in language hierarchy. If a
language is a variety of human languages, we, for example, will know that English, Javanese,
Banjarese, Arabic, and Indonesia languages respectively, are codes. In reality a language has a
number of varieties, and its varieties (dialect, style, pidgin, Creole, speech level, register, etc) are
also referred to as codes. In this relation, Fishman states that each language variety can be

identified its sound systems, vocabularies, grammatical features, and meaning (Fishman,
1972:5).
The use of language in a situation of bilingualism and/or multilingualism often involves
the problems of who speaks, what language, to whom and when (Fishman, 1972:244). In such
situation, we often look at a speaker changes his language or a variety of the same language for
one to another. This language change depends on a situation or a necessity of using a language or
its varieties.
When a language is regarded as a system of code, the language change from one to
another is known as a code switching. For instance, a speaker uses Indonesian language, and then
he changes it to the other one. This language phenomenon is known as a code switching.
However, as illustrated above, there may be some possibilities of language varieties of
the same language either in the forms of dialects, speech levels, styles or registers. Also, as steted
above, all languages and/or varieties are known as codes. In this relation, the concept of code
switching covers a switching of one language to another, that of one dialect to another, that of
one speech level to another, that of one style to another, and that of one register to another.
Interference
Discussion on interference must be related to the use of two or m ore languages by the
same individuals. This is to say that the use of those languages (or the languages are in contact)
may result in interference phenomenon. So, bilingualism and bilingual have a close relationship
to the language phenomenon.
As stated above, the concept of bilingualism has become broader and broader. It was regarded as
the equal mastery of two languages, as explicitly defined by Bloomfield as “the native-like
control of two languages”. When a speaker has the mastery of two languages whose bilingualism
is in line with the Bloomfield’s concept, it seems that he will not make a linguistic deviation
known as interference.

Originally, the concept of interference referred to the use of formal elements of one of
code with the context of another, i.e. any phonological, morphological, lexical or syntactic
element in a given language that could be explained by the effect of contact with another
language (Troike and Blackwell, 1986).
Mackey defines interference as “the use of features belonging to one language while
speaking or writing another”. The description of bilingualism must be distinguished from the
analysis of language borrowing (Fishman, ed., 1972:569). The language borrowing will be
illustrated under the discussion of integration.
The use of languages in the alternate way may result in linguistic deviations in one language
used by a given language user. This deviation is known as interference. In this relation,
Weinreich says that the practice of alternately using two languages will be called bilingualism
and the persons involved, bilingual. Those instances of deviation from the norms of either
language either language that occurs in the speech of bilinguals as a result of their familiarity
with more than one language, i.e. as a result of language contact, will be referred to as
interference phenomena (1968:1).
The levels of interference may be cultural, semantic, lexical, grammatical, and
phonological.
<!–[if !supportLists]–>1. <!–[endif]–>In cultural level, cases of interference may be found in the
speech of the bilingual; their causes may be found, not in his other language, but in the
culture that it reflects. The foreign element may be result of an effort to express new
phenomena or new experience in a language that does not account for them. For instance, an

Indonesian speaking English is ‘forced’ to use such words as sampan, kelotok, and ketinting
because of no equivalent words in English language. The foreign element may result of the
introduction of the custom of greeting and thanking in his own language. For instance, he
may say ‘Good night’ instead of ‘Good evening’; or he may say ‘Thanks’ instead of ‘No
thanks’.
<!–[if !supportLists]–>2. <!–[endif]–>In semantic level, interference occurs when a speaker
introduces new semantic structures. Even though the semantic units may be the same in both
languages, a foreign way of combining them may introduced as a new semantic structure.
Both Indonesian and English, for instance, have comparable units for mengandung – consist
of; but when an Indonesian language speaker uses a sentence Paragraf itu mengandung
beberapa kalimat he introduces into his speech a foreign semantic structure based on the
English model The paragraph is pregnant of several sentences instead of The paragraph
consists of several sentences.
<!–[if !supportLists]–>3. <!–[endif]–>In lexical level, interference may involve the introduction
of morphemes of language A into B. For instance, an Indonesian commentator using the
words such as hand ball, kick off, off side, goal, keeper, etc in an Indonesian-language foot
ball broadcast; the other speaker may say Banyak handicap dalam perjuangan ini or Dalam
pembuktian kita perlu melakukan cross check, etc.
<!–[if !supportLists]–>4. <!–[endif]–>In grammatical level, interference may involve the use of
grammatical patterns of one language in another. The grammatical patterns or categories may
be morphological or syntactical. The possible examples are: (a) An English speaking
Indonesian language does not know its word-formation (using the affixes me-kan) may say

Dia meninggal tempat ini satu jam yang lalu” instead of Dia meninggalkan tempat satu jam
yang lalu. In the other side, in making a plural noun, Indonesian language shows a different
way from that of English language, (b) A student learning English may meet difficulties (and
the same time, makes interference) when he wants to say many book instead of many books.
This can be explained that he is influenced by the Indonesian language word-order banyak
buku. Although, a word banyak is a marker of plurality, it is not followed by a plural noun
buku-buku; (c) A student learning English may use say He go to school everyday instead of
He goes to school everyday. This interference occurs as a result of no system of agreement or
concord between noun and verb (subject and predicate) in Indonesian language; all the
subjects are followed by the same predicate (verb) such as Saya pergi; Dia pergi, Mereka
pergi, etc.
<!–[if !supportLists]–>5. <!–[endif]–>In phonological level, the problem of interference
concerns the manner in which a speaker perceives and reproduces the sounds of one language
in terms of another. This interference occurs in the speech of bilingual as a result of the fact
that there are different elements in sound system between one language and another, or
between native and foreign language. In some cases, the native and foreign languages have
the similarity in sound system and in grammatical system. However, in most cases, both
languages have different either in sound system or in grammatical system. Different elements
in sound system between both languages may be of several kinds.
First, it is the existence of a given sound in the latter, which is not found in the former.
Second, both languages have the same phonetic features but they are different in their
distribution, namely: when and where they may occur in an utterance. Third, both have

similar sounds that have different variants or allophones. Interference arises when a bilingual
speaker identifies a phoneme of one language with that in another. For instance, an
Indonesian speaking English may pronounce bag as [bæk] instead of [bæg]. This interference
occurs because of the fact that /g/ never arises in the final position of Indonesian language
words; so, /g/ is identified as /k/ in that position. In addition, he may replace /v/ with /p/, /f/
with /p/; he may not use a /p/ with aspiration.
Conclusion
A language is an important thing in a given community, a speech community. It is not a means
for communication and interaction but also for establishing and maintaining human relationships.
One characteristic of a language is that is social. That is to say that all speech events must be in
relation to the social aspects. A new-born child acquires a language in the social environment
(family as a part of the speech community). A language use also occurs in the speech
community.
Based the geographical area, one community may be different from one to another. This results
in the different varieties of language: dialects. These kinds of dialects are known as geographical
or regional dialects. The fact also shows us that the members of a community or speech
community are in the same social hierarchy. Consequently, there are also varieties of the same
language used by the different types of the language users. These kinds of language varieties are
known as social dialects.
Sociolinguistics studies a language and its varieties, and how they are used in the speech
community in relation to the socio-cultural background of the language use itself.

Exercises
1. What is meant by sociolinguistics?
2. Explain a language from the viewpoint of social perspective?
3. What are the social units of language use? Explain!
4. What are meant by a bilingual, bilingualism, interference, and code switching? Explain
and give some examples to support your answers!
Language Interference
Posted on April 2, 2013 by Marlin Dwinastiti Standard
INTRODUCTION
A. Background
Applied linguistics is the branch of linguistics which concerned with practical applications of
language studies, with particular emphasis on the communicative function of language, and
including such professional practices as lexicography, terminology, general or technical
translation, language teaching (general or specialized language, mother tongue or second
language), writing interpretation, and computer processing of language.
Applied linguistics has influenced or may influence in the future the teaching and learning of
English as a foreign language. The observations in applied linguistics may help us to improve the
methods of language teaching. The observation that can be done is by contrasting native
language and target language. By contrasting the two languages we can find the similarities and
differences. One kind of contrastive analysis is language interference. It is most commonly
discussed in the context of English language learning and teaching, but it can occur in any
situation when someone does not have a native-level command of a language, as when
translating into a second language.
B. Problems of Identification
The working paper has objectives as follow:
1. to explain what language interference is
2. to explain the factors that cause interference
3. to mention the effects of interference

DISCUSSION
A. Language Interference
Language transfer (also known as L1 interference, linguistic interference, and cross meaning)
refers to speakers or writers applying knowledge from their native language to a second
language. Dulay et al (1982) define interference as the automatic transfer, due to habit, of the
surface structure of the first language onto the surface of the target language. Lott (1983: 256)
defines interference as ‘errors in the learner’s use of the foreign language that can be traced back
to the mother tongue’. Ellis (1997: 51) refers to interference as ‘transfer’, which he says is ‘the
influence that the learner’s L1 exerts over the acquisition of an L2’. He argues that transfer is
governed by learners’ perceptions about what is transferable and by their stage of development in
L2 learning. In learning a target language, learners construct their own interim rules (Selinker,
1971, Seligar, 1988 and Ellis, 1997) with the use of their L1 knowledge, but only when they
believe it will help them in the learning task or when they have become sufficiently proficient in
the L2 for transfer to be possible.
When an individual’s understanding of one language has an impact on his or her understanding
of another language, that individual is experiencing language transfer. There can be negative
transfers, otherwise known as interference, when the understanding of one language complicates
the understanding of another language. Alternatively, there can be positive transfers such that
knowing one language can aid in developing skills for a second language. Language interference
is the effect of language learners’ first language on their production of the language they are
learning. It means that the speaker’s first language influences his/her second or and his/her
foreign language.
The effect can be on any aspect of language: grammar, vocabulary, accent, spelling and so on.
Language interference is considered as one of error sources (negative transfer), although where
the relevant feature of both languages is the same it results in correct language production
(positive transfer). The greater the differences between the two languages, the more negative the
effects of interference are likely to be. It will inevitably occur in any situation where someone
has not mastered a second language.
Corder outlines one way in which interference can be recast as a learner strategy. He suggests
that the learner’s L1 may facilitate the development process of learning an L2, by helping him to
progress more rapidly along the universal route when the L1 is similar to the L2. Krashen when
he suggests that the learners can use the L1 to initiate utterances when they do not have sufficient
acquired knowledge of the target language for this purpose.
The relationship between the two languages must then be considered. Albert and Obler (1978)
claim that people show more lexical interference on similar items. So it may follow that
languages with more similar structures (e.g. English and French) are more susceptible to mutual
interference than languages with fewer similar features (e.g. English and Japanese). On the other
hand, we might also expect more learning difficulties, and thus more likelihood of performance

interference at those points in L2 which are more distant from L1, as the learner would find it
difficult to learn and understand a completely new and different usage. Hence the learner would
resort to L1 structures for help (Selinker, 1979; Dulay et al, 1982; Blum-Kulka&Levenston,
1983; Faerch& Kasper, 1983, Bialystok, 1990 and Dordick, 1996).
B. Factors that Cause Language Interference
Interference is a general problem that occurs in bilingualism. There are many factors that
contribute interference (Weinrich, 1970:64-65):
First, speakerbilingualism background. Bilingualism is the major factor of interference as the
speaker is influenced by both of the source and the target language. Indonesia’s student who is
Javanese and is studying good Bahasa tends to put his Javanese language into Indonesia. Look
the example, ‘Andi, apakah kamu bisa mengerjakan soal matematika ini?” tanya guru. Then
Andi answered, “Tidak bisa, Bu Guru, lha wong itu angel.” The impression of ‘lha wong’ is
usual in Javanese cultural insight. The word ‘angel’ means difficult in Bahasa, the student should
reply his teacher with “Tidak bisa, Bu Guru, soalnya sulit’. Regarding this condition, the student
is a second grade of elementary school.
Second, disloyalty to target language. Disloyalty to target language will cause negative attitude.
This will lead to disobedience to target language structure and further force the bilingualist to put
uncontrolled structure of his first language elements to output in practicing words utterances both
oral and written. Students whose language background of TL is limited tend to put words in
sentences or oral in structure and sense of first language. For example is occurred in Facebook
status made by an Indonesian, “So must to spirit.” While the correct sentence is “I must keep
spirit.”
Third, the limited vocabularies of TL mastered by a learner. Vocabularies of certain language
mostly are about words of surroundings connected to life. Thus, a learner who is willing to
master another language will meet new words differ from his native words. In order to be able to
speak as natives of TL, vocabularies take a big role. The more vocabularies someone has, the
better he masters TL. Foreign language learner will try to put deliberately his native word to state
some points when he cannot find the best words of TL. For example, when an Indonesian wants
to mention‘rambutan’, he stills mention ‘rambutan’ when he speaks in English. Since there is no
English word for ‘rambutan’.
Fourth, needs of synonym. Synonym in language usage plays an important role as word chosen
variation in order not to repeat similar word during the communication process (redundancy).
Implementing synonym in a language contact will contribute to interference in the form of
adoption and borrowing of new words from SL to TL. Thus, need of synonym for certain word
from SL to TL is seemingly aimed to intensify meaning.
Fifth, prestige and style. Applying unfamiliar words (foreign words) during a communication
practice which dominant words are languages of both speaker and receiver is something else.
Those unfamiliar words usage is aimed to get a pride. Interference will appear as there are
certain words even though the receiver probably cannot catch the real idea of the speech. The

usual unfamiliar words usage will become a style of the user. Unfortunately, the user sometimes
does not understand the real meaning whether the meaning is denotative or connotative. The
common feature is that many language users put derivational affix –ization in every word. To
note, affix –ization is an adopting and borrowing process from English to state nouns.
According to Lott (1983: 258 -259), there are three factors that cause the interference:
1. The interlingual factor
Interlingual transfer is a significant source for language learners. This concept comes from
contrastive analysis of behaviouristic school of learning. It stresses upon the negative
interference of mother tongue as the only source of errors. The construction – ‘I like to read’ is
uttered as ‘I read to like’ by many Hindi speakers. In Hindi, the verb is pre-positioned while in
English it is post positioned. This type of error is the result of negative transfer of L1 rules to L2
system.
Commonly, errors are caused by the differences between the first and the second language. Such
a contrastive analysis hypothesis occurs where structures in the first language which are different
from those in the second language produce the errors reflecting the structure of first language.
Such errors were said to be due to the influence of learners’ first language habits on second
language production (Dulay et. al, 1982: 97).
Corder in Richard (1967: 19) says that errors are the result of interference in learning a second
language from the habits of the first language. Because of the difference in system especially
grammar, the students will transfer their first language into the second language by using their
mother tongue system.
2. The over extension of analogy
Usually, a learner has been wrong in using a vocabulary caused by the similarity of the element
between first language and second language, e.g. the use of cognate words (the same form of
word in two languages with different functions or meanings). The example is the using of month
and moon. Indonesian learners may make a mistake by using month to say moon in the space.
3. Transfer of structure
There are two types of transfer according to Dulay et.al (1982: 101), positive transfer and
negative transfer. Negative transfer refers to those instances of transfer, which result in error
because old habitual behavior is different from the new behavior being learned. On the contrary,
positive transfer is the correct utterance, because both the first language and second language
have the same structure, while the negative transfer from the native language is called
interference.
Interference is the deviation of target language as a result of their familiarity with more than one
language. Dulay et.al (1982: 98) differentiates interference into two parts, the psychological and
sociolinguistic. The psychological refers to the influence of old habits when new ones are being

learned, whereas sociolinguistic refers to interactions of language when two language
communities are in contact. Therefore students will find it difficult in mastering the second
language due to the interference, which is influenced by old habit, familiar with mother tongue
and interaction of two languages in the communities.
C. Effects of Language Interference
The background of L1 for learning L2 has both advantages and disadvantages. The factor of
‘language universal’ helps in learning. All languages have tense system, number, gender, plural
etc. This helps the learner in identifying these areas in the target language. But the interference of
L1 in L2 leads to errors. One of the assumptions of the contrastive analysis hypothesis was that
learners with different L1s would learn a L2 in different ways, as a result of negative transfer
imposing different kinds of difficulty.
Interference may be viewed as the transference of elements of one language to another at various
levels including phonological, grammatical, lexical and orthographical (Berthold, Mangubhai &
Batorowicz, 1997). Berthold et al (1997) define phonological interference as items including
foreign accent such as stress, rhyme, intonation and speech sounds from the first language
influencing the second. Grammatical interference is defined as the first language influencing the
second in terms of word order, use of pronouns and determinants, tense and mood. Interference
at a lexical level provides for the borrowing of words from one language and converting them to
sound more natural in another and orthographic interference includes the spelling of one
language altering another.
The most common source of error is in the process of learning a foreign language, where the
native tongue interferes; but interference may occur in the other contact situations (as in
multilingualism). In learning L1 certain habits of perceiving and performing have to be
established and the old habits tend to intrude and interfere with the learning, so that the students
may speak L2 (or FL) with the intonation of his L1 or the word order of his L1 and so on.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
Language interference influences in learning language target. It has positive and negative effects.
The greater the differences between the two languages, the more negative the effects of
interference are likely to be.
B. Suggestion

It is important for teacher to know the differences and similarities between learner’s native
language and the target language. By knowing them teacher will be easier to decide what
strategy, methodology or what material that will be used in teaching second or foreign language.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ellis, Rod. Understanding Second Language Acquisition. 1986. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Shastri, Pratima Dave. Communicative Approach To The Teaching Of English as A Second
Language. 2010. Mumbai: Himalaya Publishing House.
Surono. Guidelines on Applied Linguistics. 2013. Yogyakarta.
Electronic sources:
http://ehlt.flinders.edu.au/education/iej/articles/v1n1/bhela/bhela.pdf (Taken on Monday, April
2nd, 2013 at 20.00)
http://www.education.com/definition/language-transfer/ (Taken on Monday, April 2nd, 2013 at
20.13)
http://eprints.stainsalatiga.ac.id/79/1/99-115.pdf (Taken on Monday, April 2nd, 2013 at 20.20)
Создан 22 мар 2011
The Definition of Borrowing Language
 Share
 Pin
 Email

"Thisprocessissomewhatcuriouslycalled borrowing--'curiously'because of course the lending
language doesnotlose the use of the word,nor doesthe borrowinglanguage intendtogive itback"
(Trask'sHistorical Linguistics, 2015). (OscarWong/GettyImages)
Languages
 EnglishGrammar
o Glossaryof KeyTerms
o UsingWords Correctly
o WritingTips& Advice
o Sentence Structures
o Rhetoric& Style
o Punctuation&Mechanics
o DevelopingEffective Paragraphs
o DevelopingEffective Essays
 Englishasa SecondLanguage
 Spanish
 French
 German
 Italian
 Japanese
 Mandarin
by RichardNordquist
UpdatedApril 10, 2017
In linguistics, borrowing (also known as lexical borrowing) is the process by which a word from
one language is adapted for use in another. The word that is borrowed is called a borrowing, a
borrowed word, or a loanword.
The English language has been described by David Crystal as an "insatiable borrower." More
than 120 other languages have served as sources for the contemporary vocabulary of English.
Pause
0:50
/
1:41
Fullscreen

Learn CommonSpanishLoanwords
Present-day English is also a major donor language--the leading source of borrowings for many
other languages.
See Examples and Observations below.
 LoanwordsinEnglish:The Bastard Tongue
 LearnedBorrowing
 Lexicon
 Loan Shift
 Loan Translation
 SomethingBorrowed:A MatchingQuizon Loanwords
Etymology
From Old English, "becoming"
ExamplesandObservations
 "English.. . has freelyappropriatedthe majorpartsof its vocabulary fromGreek,Latin,French,
and dozensof otherlanguages.Eventhough Theofficial'sautomobilefunctioned erratically
consistsentirelyof borrowedwords,withthe singleexceptionof the,itisuniquelyanEnglish
sentence."
 "The problemwithdefendingthe purityof the Englishlanguage is thatEnglishisaboutas pure
as a cribhouse whore.We don'tjust borrow words;onoccasion,Englishhaspursuedother
languagesdownalleywaystobeatthemunconsciousandrifle theirpocketsfornew
vocabulary."
 Explorationand Borrowing
"The vocabulary of Englishbasedonexplorationandtrade [was] oftenbroughttoEnglandin
spokenformor inpopularprintedbooksandpamphlets.Anearlyexampleis assassin (eaterof
hashish),whichappearsinEnglishabout1531 as a loanwordfromArabic,probablyborrowed
duringthe Crusades.Many of the otherwordsborrowedfromeasterncountriesduringthe
Middle Ageswere the namesof products(Arabic lemon,Persian musk,Semiticcinnamon,
Chinese silk) andplacenames(like damask,fromDamascus).These were the mostdirect
examplesof the axiomthatanew referentrequiresanew word."
 Enthusiastic Borrowers
"Englishspeakershave longbeengloballyamongthe mostenthusiastic borrowersof other
people'swordsandmany,manythousandsof Englishwordshave beenacquiredinjustthis
way. We getkayak froman Eskimolanguage, whisky fromScottishGaelic, ukulelefrom
Hawaiian, yoghurtfromTurkish, mayonnaisefromFrench, algebra fromArabic, sherry from
Spanish, skifromNorwegian, waltzfromGerman,and kangaroo fromthe Guugu-Yimidhirr
language of Australia.Indeed,if youleaf throughthe pagesof anEnglishdictionarythatprovide
the sourcesof words,youwill discoverthatwell overhalf the wordsinitare takenfromother

languagesinone wayor another(althoughnotalwaysbythe sort of straightforwardborrowing
we are consideringhere)."
 Reasons for Language Borrowing
"One language maypossesswordsforwhichthere are no equivalentsinthe otherlanguage.
There may be wordsfor objects,social,political,andcultural institutionsandeventsorabstract
conceptswhichare not foundinthe culture of the otherlanguage.We can take some examples
fromthe Englishlanguage throughoutthe ages. Englishhasborrowedwordsfortypesof houses
(e.g. castle,mansion,teepee,wigwam,igloo,bungalow).Ithasborrowedwordsforcultural
institutions(e.g. opera,ballet).Ithasborrowedwordsforpolitical concepts(e.g. perestroika,
glasnost,apartheid).Itoftenhappensthatone culture borrowsfromthe language of another
culture wordsor phrasesto expresstechnological,socialorcultural innovations."
(ColinBakerandSylviaPrysJones, Encyclopedia of Bilingualismand BilingualEducation.
Multilingual Matters,1998)
 Contemporary Borrowing
"Todayonlyabout five percentof ournew wordsare takenfrom otherlanguages.Theyare
especiallyprevalentinthe namesof foods: focaccia,salsa,vindaloo,ramen."
 Borrowings From English
"Englishborrowingsare enteringlanguageseverywhere,andinmore domainsthanjustscience
and technology.Notsurprisingly,the reportedreactionof aParisdiskjockeytothe French
Academy'slatestpronouncementsagainstEnglishborrowingswastouse an Englishborrowing
to call the pronouncement'pastrèscool' ('notverycool')."
Pronunciation
BOR-owe-ing
Sources
Peter Farb, Word Play: What Happens When People Talk. Knopf, 1974
James Nicoll, Linguist, February 2002
W.F. Bolton, A Living Language: The History and Structure of English. Random House, 1982
Trask's Historical Linguistics, 3rd ed., ed.
by Robert McColl Millar. Routledge, 2015
Allan Metcalf, Predicting New Words. Houghton Mifflin, 2002
Carol Myers-Scotton, Multiple Voices: An Introduction to Bilingualism. Blackwell, 2006
Types ofborrowings.
English For All :: Lexicology :: Lectures

of 1 • Share • Actions







Types of borrowings.
by anya onThu Feb24, 2011 7:29 pm
Language contact
From Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia
Language contact occurs when speakers of two or more languages or varieties interact and
influence each other. The study of language contact is called contact linguistics.
Multilingualism has likely been common throughout much of human history, and today most
people in the world are multilingual.[1]
When speakers of different languages interact closely, it is typical for their languages to
influence each other. Language contact can occur at language borders,[2] between adstratum
languages, or as the result of migration, with an intrusive language acting as either a
superstratum or a substratum.
Language contact occurs in a variety of phenomena, including language convergence, borrowing
and relexification. The most common products are pidgins, creoles, code-switching, and mixed
languages. Other hybrid languages, such as English, do not strictly fit into any of these
categories.
Contents
 1 Formsof influence of one language onanother
o 1.1 Borrowingof vocabulary
o 1.2 Adoptionof otherlanguage features
o 1.3 Language shift
o 1.4 Stratal influence
o 1.5 Creationof newlanguages:creolizationandmixedlanguages
 2 Mutual and non-mutual influence

 3 Linguistichegemony
 4 Dialectal andsub-cultural change
 5 Signlanguages
 6 See also
 7 References
o 7.1 Notes
o 7.2 General references
Forms of influence of one language on another
Loanword
From Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia
For loanwordsinthe Englishlanguage,seeListsof Englishwordsbycountryor language of origin.
A loanword (also loan word or loan-word) is a word adopted from one language (the donor
language) and incorporated into another language without translation. This is in contrast to
cognates, which are words in two or more languages that share an etymological origin in
common.
Contents
 1 Examplesandrelatedterms
 2 Fromthe arts
 3 Linguisticclassification
 4 Popularandlearnedloanwords
 5 InEnglish
 6 InlanguagesotherthanEnglish
o 6.1 Transmissioninthe OttomanEmpire
o 6.2 Dutch wordsinIndonesian
o 6.3 Loan wordsinJapanese
 7 Cultural aspects
 8 Changesinmeaningandpronunciation
 9 See also
 10 Notes
 11 References
 12 External links
Examples and related terms
A loanword is distinguished from a calque (loan translation), which is a word or phrase whose
meaning or idiom is adopted from another language by translation into existing words or word-
forming roots of the recipient language.

Examples of loanwords in the English language include café (from French café, which literally
means "coffee"), bazaar (from Persian bāzār, which means "market"), and kindergarten (from
German Kindergarten, which literally means "children's garden").
In a bit of heterological irony, the word calque is a loanword from the French noun, derived from
the verb calquer (to trace, to copy);[1] the word loanword is a calque of the German word
Lehnwort;[2] and the phrase "loan translation" is a calque of the German Lehnübersetzung.[3]
Loans of multi-word phrases, such as the English use of the French term déjà vu, are known as
adoptions, adaptations, or lexical borrowings.[4][5]
Strictly speaking, the term loanword conflicts with the ordinary meaning of loan in that
something is taken from the donor language without it being something that is possible to
return.[6]
From the arts
Most of the technical vocabulary of classical music (such as concerto, allegro, tempo, aria, opera,
and soprano) is borrowed from Italian,[7] and that of ballet from French.[8]
Linguistic classification
The studies by Werner Betz (1949, 1939), Einar Haugen (1950, also 1956), and Uriel Weinreich
(1953) are regarded as the classical theoretical works on loan influence.[9] The basic theoretical
statements all take Betz’s nomenclature as their starting point. Duckworth (1977) enlarges Betz’s
scheme by the type “partial substitution” and supplements the system with English terms. A
schematic illustration of these classifications is given below.[10]
The expression "foreign word" used in the illustration below is, however, an incorrect translation
of the German term Fremdwort, which refers to loanwords whose pronunciation, spelling, and
possible inflection or gender have not yet been so much adapted to the new language that they
cease to feel foreign. Such a separation of loanwords into two distinct categories is not used by
linguists in English in talking about any language. In addition, basing such a separation mainly
on spelling as described in the illustration is (or, in fact, was) not usually done except by German
linguists and only when talking about German and sometimes other languages that tend to adapt
foreign spellings, which is rare in English unless the word has been in wide use for a very long
time.
According to the linguist Suzanne Kemmer, the expression "foreign word" can be defined as
follows in English: "[W]hen most speakers do not know the word and if they hear it think it is
from another language, the word can be called a foreign word. There are many foreign words and
phrases used in English such as bon vivant (French), mutatis mutandis (Latin), and
Schadenfreude (German)."[11] This is however not how the term is (incorrectly) used in this
illustration:

On the basis of an importation-substitution distinction, Haugen (1950: 214f.) distinguishes three
basic groups of borrowings: “(1) Loanwords show morphemic importation without
substitution.... (2) Loanblends show morphemic substitution as well as importation.... (3)
Loanshifts show morphemic substitution without importation”. Haugen later refined (1956) his
model in a review of Gneuss’s (1955) book on Old English loan coinages, whose classification,
in turn, is the one by Betz (1949) again.
Weinreich (1953: 47ff.) differentiates between two mechanisms of lexical interference, namely
those initiated by simple words and those initiated by compound words and phrases. Weinreich

(1953: 47) defines simple words “from the point of view of the bilinguals who perform the
transfer, rather than that of the descriptive linguist. Accordingly, the category ‘simple’ words
also includes compounds that are transferred in unanalysed form”. After this general
classification, Weinreich then resorts to Betz’s (1949) terminology.
Popular and learned loanwords
There is a distinction between "popular" and "learned" loanwords. Popular loanwords are
transmitted orally. Learned loanwords are first used in written language, often for scholarly,
scientific, or literary purposes.[12]
In English
See also:Listsof Englishwordsbycountryor language of origin
Thissection needsadditional citationsfor verification. Please help improvethisarticle by
addingcitationstoreliable sources.Unsourcedmaterial maybe challengedandremoved.
(August 2013) (Learn howand when to removethistemplate message)
The English language has often borrowed words from other cultures or languages:
Spanish
definition
English definition
sombrero
"hat" "a wide-brimmedfestive Mexicanhat"
Other examples of words borrowed by English
from Hindi
from
Afrikaans
from Malay
 jungle
 dacoit
 loot
 juggernaut (from Sanskrit 'Jagannath')
 syce/sais
 dinghy
 chutney
 pundit
 wallah
trek
aardvark
laager
wildebeest
veld
orangutan
shirang
amok
[via Afrikaans from
Malay]

 bangle
 cheetah
 cot
 blighty
 shampoo
 thug
 karma (from Sanskrit)
 sari
 bungalow
 jodhpurs

 [from Persian origin]
 pajama/pyjamas
 bazaar
sjambok
Some English loanwords remain relatively faithful to the donor language's phonology even
though a particular phoneme might not exist or have contrastive status in English. For example,
the Hawaiian word ʻaʻā is used by geologists to specify lava that is relatively thick, chunky, and
rough. The Hawaiian spelling indicates the two glottal stops in the word, but the English
pronunciation, /ˈɑː.ɑː/ or /ˈɑːʔɑː/, contains at most one. In addition, the English spelling usually
removes the ʻokina and macron diacritics.[13]
The majority of English affixes, such as un-, -ing, and -ly, were present in older forms in Old
English. However, a few English affixes are borrowed. For example, the English verbal suffix -
ize (American English) or ise (British English) comes from Greek -ιζειν (-izein) via Latin -izare.
In languages other than English
TransmissionintheOttoman Empire
During more than 600 years of the Ottoman Empire, the literary and administrative language of
the empire was Turkish, with many Persian, and Arabic loanwords, called Ottoman Turkish,
considerably differing from the everyday spoken Turkish of the time. Many such words were
exported to other languages of the empire, such as Albanian, Bulgarian, Serbian, Greek,
Hungarian and Ladino. After the empire fell after World War I and the Republic of Turkey was
founded, the Turkish language underwent an extensive language reform led by the newly
founded Turkish Language Association, during which many adopted words were replaced with
new formations derived from Turkic roots. That was part of the ongoing cultural reform of the
time, in turn a part in the broader framework of Atatürk's Reforms, which also included the
introduction of the new Turkish alphabet.
Turkish also has taken many words from French, such as pantolon for trousers (from French
pantalon) and komik for funny (from French comique), most of them pronounced very similarly.
Word usage in modern Turkey has acquired a political tinge: right-wing publications tend to use

more Arabic or Persian originated words, left-wing ones use more adopted from European
languages, while centrist ones use more native Turkish root words.[14]
Dutchwordsin Indonesian
Almost 350 years of Dutch presence in what is now Indonesia have left significant linguistic
traces. Though very few Indonesians have a fluent knowledge of Dutch, the Indonesian language
inherited many words from Dutch, both in words for everyday life and as well in scientific or
technological terminology.[15] One scholar argues that 20% of Indonesian words can be traced
back to Dutch words.[16]
Loanwordsin Japanese
Main article:Gairaigo
Cultural aspects
According to Hans Henrich Hock and Brian Joseph, "languages and dialects ... do not exist in a
vacuum": there is always linguistic contact between groups.[17] The contact influences what
loanwords are integrated into the lexicon and which certain words are chosen over others.
Changes in meaning and pronunciation
In some cases, the original meaning shifts considerably through unexpected logical leaps. The
English word Viking became Japanese バイキング baikingu meaning 'buffet', because Imperial
Viking was the first restaurant in Japan to offer buffet-style meals.[18]
See also
 Cognate
 Hybridword
 Inkhornterm
 Language contact
 Listsof Englishwordsbycountryor language of origin
 Phono-semanticmatching
 Semanticloan
 Neologism
Notes
1.
 Calque,The AmericanHeritage Dictionaryof the EnglishLanguage:FourthEdition.2000.
  Carr,CharlesT. (1934). The German Influenceon the English Language.Society forPureEnglish
Tract No.42. Oxford:Clarendon Press.p. 75.Retrieved 25 February 2016.

  Robb:German EnglishWordsgermanenglishwords.com
  Chesley,Paula;Baayen,R.Harald (2010). "Predicting New WordsfromNewer Words:Lexical
Borrowingsin French".Linguistics. 48 (4):1343–74.
  Thomason,Sarah G.(2001).LanguageContact:An Introduction.Washington:Georgetown
UniversityPress.
  Jespersen,Otto (1964). Language.New York:Norton Library.p. 208. ISBN 0-393-00229-2. Linguistic
'borrowing'is really nothing butimitation.
  Shanet1956: 155.
  Kersley&Sinclair1979: 3.
  Compare the twosurveyarticlesbyOksaar(1996: 4f.),Stanforth(2002) and Grzega (2003, 2004).
  The followingcommentsandexamplesare takenfromGrzega,Joachim(2004),
Bezeichnungswandel:Wie,Warum,Wozu?,Heidelberg:Winter,p.139, and Grzega,Joachim(2003),
“Borrowingas a Word-FindingProcessinCognitiveHistorical Onomasiology”,Onomasiology Online4:
22–42.
  Loanwords byProf.S. Kemmer,Rice University
  Algeo,John (2009-02-02). The Originsand Developmentof the English Language.CengageLearning.
ISBN 1428231455.
  Elbert, SamuelH.; Pukui,Mary Kawena (1986).Hawaiian Dictionary (Revised and enlarged ed.).
Honolulu:Universityof HawaiʻiPress.p. 389. ISBN 0-8248-0703-0.
  Lewis,Geoffrey (2002). The Turkish LanguageReform:A CatastrophicSuccess.London:Oxford
UniversityPress. ISBN 0-19-925669-1.
  Sneddon(2003),p.162.
  "A Hidden Language–Dutch in Indonesia [eScholarship]".Repositories.cdlib.org.Retrieved 2015-03-
29.
  Hock,HansHenrich; Joseph.,Brian D. (2009). "Lexical Borrowing".LanguageHistory,Language
Change,and LanguageRelationship:An Introduction to Historicaland ComparativeLinguistics(2nd ed.).
Berlin: Mouton deGruyter.pp. 241–78..
18.  [1][dead link]
References

 Best,Karl-Heinz,Kelih,Emmerich(eds.)(2014): Entlehnungen und Fremdwörter:Quantitative
Aspekte. Lüdenscheid:RAM-Verlag.
 Betz,Werner(1949): Deutsch und Lateinisch:Die Lehnbildungen deralthochdeutschen
Benediktinerregel.Bonn:Bouvier.
 Betz,Werner(1959): “LehnwörterundLehnprägungenimVor- undFrühdeutschen”.In:Maurer,
Friedrich/Stroh,Friedrich(eds.): DeutscheWortgeschichte.2nded.Berlin:Schmidt,vol.1,127–
147.
 Bloom,Dan (2010): "What'sThat Pho?".FrenchLoanWords inVietnamToday;Taipei Times, [2]
 Cannon,Garland(1999): “Problemsinstudyingloans”, Proceedingsof theannualmeeting of the
Berkeley Linguistics Society 25, 326–336.
 Duckworth,David(1977): “Zur terminologischenundsystematischenGrundlagederForschung
auf demGebietderenglisch-deutschenInterferenz:Kritische ÜbersichtundneuerVorschlag”.
In: Kolb,Herbert/Lauffer,Hartmut(eds.) (1977): Sprachliche Interferenz:FestschriftfürWerner
Betzzum 65. Geburtstag.Tübingen:Niemeyer,p. 36–56.
 Gneuss,Helmut(1955): Lehnbildungen und Lehnbedeutungen imAltenglischen.Berlin:Schmidt.
 Grzega,Joachim (2003): “Borrowingas a Word-FindingProcessin CognitiveHistorical
Onomasiology”,Onomasiology Online4,22–42.
 Grzega,Joachim(2004): Bezeichnungswandel:Wie,Warum,Wozu? Heidelberg:Winter.
 Haugen,Einar(1950): “The analysisof linguisticborrowing”. Language26,210–231.
 Haugen,Einar(1956): “Reviewof Gneuss1955”. Language32, 761–766.
 Hitchings,Henry (2008), The Secret Life of Words:How English Became English,London:John
Murray, ISBN 978-0-7195-6454-3.
 Hayakawa,Isamu(2014),A Historical Dictionary of JapaneseWordsUsed in English,Revised and
Corrected Edition, Amazon,Tokyo:Texnai, ISBN 978-4907162313.
 Kersley,Leo; Sinclair, Janet(1979), A Dictionary of Ballet Terms,Da Capo Press, ISBN 0-306-
80094-2 External linkin |title= (help).
 Koch,Peter(2002): “Lexical TypologyfromaCognitive andLinguisticPointof View”.In:Cruse,D.
Alanetal. (eds.):Lexicology:An Internationalon theNatureand Structureof Wordsand
Vocabularies/Lexikologie:Ein internationalesHandbuch zurNaturund Strukturvon Wörtern und
Wortschätzen.Berlin/NewYork:Walterde Gruyter,1142–1178.
 Oksaar,Els (1996): “The historyof contact linguisticsasa discipline”.In:Goebl,Hansetal. (eds.):
Kontaktlinguistik/contactlinguistics/linguistiquedecontact:ein internationalesHandbuch
zeitgenössischerForschung/an internationalhandbookof contemporary research/manuel
internationaldesrecherches contemporaines.Berlin/New York:Walterde Gruyter,1–12.
 Shanet,Howard (1956), Learn to Read Music,New York:Simon & Schuster, ISBN 978-0-671-
21027-4 External linkin |title= (help).
 Stanforth,AnthonyW.(2002): “Effectsof language contacton the vocabulary:an overview”.In:
Cruse,D. Alanetal. (eds.) (2002):Lexikologie:eininternationalesHandbuchzurNaturund
Strukturvon WörternundWortschätzen/Lexicology:aninternational handbookonthe nature
and structure of wordsand vocabularies.Berlin/New York:Walterde Gruyter,p. 805–813.
 Weinreich,Uriel (1953): Languagesin contact:findingsand problems.The Hague:Mouton.
 Zuckermann,Ghil'ad (2003), ‘‘Language ContactandLexical EnrichmentinIsraeli Hebrew’’,
Houndmills:Palgrave Macmillan,(ISBN 978-1-4039-3869-5)
External links

Look up loanword inWiktionary,the free dictionary.
 WorldLoanwordDatabase (WOLD)
Authority
control
 GND: 4035076-9
Categories:
 Historical linguistics
 Languages
 Etymology
 Cultural assimilation
 Calques
Navigation menu
 Notloggedin
 Talk
 Contributions
 Create account
 Log in
 Article
 Talk
 Read
 Edit
 Viewhistory
Search
 Main page
 Contents
 Featuredcontent
 Currentevents
 Randomarticle
 Donate to Wikipedia
 Wikipediastore
Interaction
 Help
 AboutWikipedia

 Communityportal
 Recentchanges
 Contact page
Tools
 What linkshere
 Relatedchanges
 Uploadfile
 Special pages
 Permanentlink
 Page information
 Wikidataitem
 Cite thispage
Print/export
 Create a book
 DownloadasPDF
 Printable version
In otherprojects
 WikimediaCommons
Languages
 Afrikaans
 ‫ية‬ ‫عرب‬ ‫ال‬
 Azərbaycanca
 Bân-lâm-gú
 Беларуская
 Беларуская(тарашкевіца)
 Български
 Boarisch
 Bosanski
 Brezhoneg
 Català
 Čeština
 Cymraeg
 Dansk
 Deutsch
 Ελληνικά
 Español
 Esperanto
 Euskara
 ‫سی‬ ‫ار‬ ‫ف‬

 Français
 Frysk
 Gaeilge
 Galego
 한국어
 Հայերեն
 Hrvatski
 Bahasa Indonesia
 Íslenska
 Italiano
 ‫עברית‬
 Қазақша
 Кыргызча
 Latviešu
 Lietuvių
 Limburgs
 La .lojban.
 Magyar
 മലയാളം
 ‫صرى‬ ‫م‬
 Bahasa Melayu
 Nāhuatl
 Nederlands
 日本語
 Norskbokmål
 Norsknynorsk
 Plattdüütsch
 Polski
 Português
 Русский
 Саха тыла
 Seeltersk
 Shqip
 සිංහල
 Simple English
 Slovenščina
 ‫ی‬ ‫وردي‬ ‫ک‬‫دی‬ ‫اوەن‬ ‫ن‬
 Suomi
 Svenska
 தமிழ்
 Татарча/tatarça
 తెలుగు
 ไทย
 Українська
 ‫اردو‬
 TiếngViệt
 Walon

 粵語
 中文
Editlinks
 Thispage waslasteditedon5 May 2017, at 22:21.
 Textisavailable underthe Creative CommonsAttribution-ShareAlike License;additional terms
may apply.Byusingthissite,youagree to the Termsof Use and PrivacyPolicy.Wikipedia®isa
registeredtrademarkof the WikimediaFoundation,Inc.,anon-profitorganization.
 Privacypolicy
 AboutWikipedia
 Disclaimers
 Contact Wikipedia
 Developers
 Cookie statement
 Mobile view


BorrowedWords in English
by Charles Fredeen
The “guests from another language,” or borrowed words, permeate the English language.
Through linguistic osmosis, these many thousands of words were taken over from one language
by another during the course of English history mainly due to the constant uninvited arrival of
invaders to the island.
If borrowings are testimonials to our (“our” being humans) “physical mobility and mental
laziness” then the British would probably win the gold medal. How could a country whose
original inhabitants were Celts have ceded that language to the one we currently know as
English? It is because of the many times that the British Isles were invaded, obviously by
outsiders, who brought their language, dialects and customs into the country. As the invaders
settled in, they transformed both the written and spoken words of the English residents, who
were able to adapt through the assimilation of borrowed words.
Otto Jespersen1, in his book Growth and Structure of the English Language, points out that the
English language is a “chain of borrowings” that was a result of the conquests of Britain by
various invaders. The foreigners brought their languages to England but were unable to
completely impose their languages on the British. Instead, the foreigners’ languages were
intermixed as if being thrown into a blender with the native speakers’ words. With that, these

groups succeeded, to varying degrees, in influencing the evolution of written and spoken English
as we now know it.
First came the Romans and with their occupation of England, introduced Latin to some, but not
all, its inhabitants. While the Celts co-existed with the Romans and “continental Germans,” only
a few hundred borrowed Latin words are found in Old English, which was basically a “self-
sufficing” language, according to Jespersen. With the Teutonic/Germanic invasions of 450 A.D.,
the Celtic language was relegated to the mists of its Irish island. But the inhabitants of England
needed to communicate with their new neighbors and the borrowing of words began.
The Christianization of the country in the 6th Century forced more inhabitants to adopt Latin
words and phrases through the Church. Still, these borrowed Latin words were used mainly in
the realm of the upper classes when “every educated Englishman spoke and wrote Latin as easily
as he spoke and wrote his mother tongue,” according to James Bradstreet Greenough and George
Lyman Kittredge2 in their book, Words and Their Ways in English Speech. These “educated”
men (and I would think women, too) could use the borrowed words both in conversation and on
the written page.
Once the Angles, Saxons and Jutes arrived in Britain, and with the Celts displaced, the language
literally began evolving as the new-arrivals began settling in. The Celtic influence began rapidly
diminishing as the so-called “superior” borrowed words began to take hold. While at first
speaking their own Teutonic languages, upon establishing themselves with the native inhabitants
their language gradually drifted away from their home countries and began to mesh with one
another. Of course, the language from this period would be barely recognizable to most, if not
all, (except for etymologists) present-day readers. Yet, while the Angles, Saxons and Jutes
brought us the original English language, the foundation of English as we know it today is
Germanic with a massive French influence.
The history of the English language, and its borrowings, is founded on three invasions: Teutonic;
Scandinavian (Vikings); and, most importantly, by the Norman conquest of England by the Duke
of Normandy in 1066. (Luckily, the Nazis never made it across the Channel.) The Teutonic and
Scandinavian invasions obviously affected the native language. But it was the French-speaking
Normans, led by William the Conqueror (Guillaume le Conquérant), who introduced the
greatest, most extensive and most permanent collection of borrowed or “loan” words, as
Jespersen is fond of writing, to the English language upon their successful 1066 invasion of the
island.
The Norman occupation lasted much longer than that of the Norse invasion and unlike the
Scandinavians, who co-existed with the invaded, the Normans overwhelmed the English. The
British status quo was tossed out as the Normans reconfigured the structures of England, from its
legal system to its religions, by becoming the ruling masters of the island.
While the Normans brought their French to the British Isles, they, too, were also operating in a
sense with borrowed words. If, as Greenough and Kittredge point out, French is simply Latin in a
“corrupt form” then the conquered British inhabitants would have had to absorb two borrowed
languages — French and Latin. And the question for them, if they chose to ask it, is from which

genesis the written or spoken words the Normans brought to the shores came from — Latin or
French.
The invading Normans also introduced a sort of language class warfare to the Britons. If a
foreign language is thrust upon the conquered, one would think that it would spread from top to
bottom through all strata of the inhabitants. The “losing” language would thus disappear. Yet,
that did not happen after the Normans’ arrival. The conquered nobles adopted the French model,
but the peasants retained the Germanic tongue, setting up both a class and a linguistic divide that
would remain until their languages, and borrowed words, blended into Middle English.
But morphing French words and phrases into the English language does not mean there was a
certain borrowing snobbery. Writers, such as Chaucer, or diplomats, the royalty, high-ranking
members of the military and businessmen who were familiar with French culture (and given the
closeness of European borders, easily attainable), readily adopted and adapted words borrowed
from the French into the English language. In many cases, the borrowing was not cavalier, but
was a necessity to communicate.
The Norman Conquest forced the creation of an entirely new way of English life, influencing the
language of its law, religion, medicine and arts. Since the French/Latin-speakers were the
dominant power, the Britons had to borrow words in order to simply communicate with their
new masters who “ousted” some of the local vernacular. These “newcomers” may have rid some
of the centuries-old English synonyms, but they became ingrained because of their ties to the
originals. The Anglo-Saxon king and queen survived the French influence, but with the Normans
along came such titles as duke and duchess. Well, Britons would have to be able to understand
what either of these two terms meant and, thus, they would assimilate these borrowed words into,
if not every day use, their sometime use.
According to Jespersen, many British adopted borrowed French words not only to communicate,
but because they felt it was the “fashion” to imitate their “betters.” Again, while some might
perceive this as a form of snobbery, many of us do strive to improve our language skills. While
saying someone tried to overthrow a government is basic and to the point, using coup d’etat as
the phrase is instantly recognizable to many readers and, almost, puts more of a sense of urgency
to the event. You could say a woman is stylish, which I am sure she would appreciate, but
substituting the borrowed chic usually makes more of an impact. Obviously, our knowledge of
borrowed words not only expands our vocabulary but enables us to converse with one another.
While it is understandable that the Britons would borrow words that did not exist in their native
language, such as majesty and mayor, it is somewhat mystifying why they would replace their
swin with the French porc. That is unless you consider how the English farmers and French
aristocrats dealt with livestock. With these two related words, the Germanic swin is more down-
to-earth while the French porc was considered more refined. Swin evolved into the present-day
swine, which is what English peasants would have been raising, while the porc or pork would
have been what the upper-class French would eat. It is “animal versus food” and, again, the
borrowings would elevate the perceived social standing of the English man or woman who used
the French word. And as Greenough and Kittredge illustrate, sometimes the foreign word, such
as divide, becomes more popular than the inhabitants’ cleave. Also, one word can crowd out

another, with the native being the one shunted aside as in what happened to the local ey which
was replaced by the Scandinavian egg.
The French language-influence on the English presented them with more abstract words than
what the Britons might have considered to be their clear and concrete definitions of their native
words. The English child as opposed to the borrowed French infant, or the English freedom
compared to the French liberty are examples.
The amazing thing about the transformation and evolution of the English language is the extent
to how receptive the country’s inhabitants were to outside languages, particularly French and
Latin. It is almost as if an invader could plant a language seed and the Britons would cultivate it.
But unlike the French who most likely would stay with that one language plant, the English
(perhaps because of their love of gardening) seemed intent on growing as many synonymous
words as possible. And, continuing with this somewhat silly gardening analogy, Jespersen points
out that many times “the English soil has proved more fertilizing than the French soil” for
transplanted words. Why offer one native word, as the French seem to enjoy, when you can
convert a multitude of borrowed words and multiply them into synonymous bits of language as
the English seem wont to do? Or, as the University of Minnesota’s professor and author of Word
Origins and How We Know Them, Dr. Anatoly Liberman3 asks in his lecture, A Coat of Many
Colors, is it “better to have two nostrils or one?” With a multitude of similar words, the English
at least, seem to have embraced the “two nostrils” theory, sometimes using both the native and
the borrowed words side-by-side.
This borrowing has also helped inflate the size of English dictionaries. The voluminous English
dictionaries, as compared to French, German or Dutch dictionaries for example, can credit their
size to the borrowings of foreign words the British adopted. If the English were originally
concerned that their native language was not up to snuff with the French or Latin tongues, the
Britons’ borrowings might give new meaning to “size matters.”
While I have mainly focused on the Norman Conquest and the seismic language shift 1066
created in the linguistic world, there were others that might have been subsequently involved in
English-word borrowings — if they had arrived in time. Among them are Spanish and Italian,
but as Greenough and Kittredge point out, while their influence upon English literature has “been
very great, but upon (English) vocabulary these languages have had no appreciable effect.” That
is because the Normans made the goal first and the English had basically borrowed all the words
and phrases they needed.
England’s emergence as a superpower brought it, in a sense, border expansion because of
colonialism. This also introduced its people to sights they had never seen and for which they
would need descriptive words. The Britons could only borrow them as there was no native term
to express what they encountered.
There were no such things as boomerangs or kangaroos in England, so when the Britons came
upon them instead of creating entirely new words to define them, the easier alternative was to
borrow the Australian words. Elephants, leopards and panthers also were not native to England
and, again, these animal names would have to be borrowed for Britons to describe them to one

another. Even the tomato, unknown in the country until its introduction from the New World,
would have to be named. Borrowing from the Spanish tomate, the British settled on tomato.
While these examples were new words to the English and diversified their vocabulary, they did
not affect the “structure” of their speech. Instead, they were “simply the adoption of names for
particular things,” according to Greenough and Kittredge.
The Renaissance brought a multitude of classical words, particularly from France and Italy,
increasing the Latin influence on language in England. But Italy, along with Spain, contributed
few borrowed words because the English language was nearly completely formed by this age.
The new words and phrases enriched the British language, but Jespersen believes at somewhat of
a cost. Because of the various invasions, the English had, over time, begun to “shrink from
consciously coining new words out of native material.” That concept brings us full circle back to
the “physical mobility and mental laziness” aspect of borrowing words.
These, in a sense, exotic words now easily roll off the tongues of English-speaking people. We
all know what a kindergarten, from the German, means. Most would know what a baguette or
croissant, from the French, also mean. And, staying with baked goods, the Yiddish bagel
(originally beygl) is certainly well known to many English-speaking people, particularly New
Yorkers.
But do all foreign or exotic words lend themselves to borrowing and become ingrained in the
English language? In The Lexicographer’s Dilemma, author Jack Lynch4 brings up the Arabic
jihad and questions whether it is an English word yet. Before September 11, 2001, I doubt many
English speakers had heard of the word. By September 12, I believe that jihad was as familiar a
phrase to us as the word bread.
Liberman, in one of his lectures, illustrated the borrowed words sputnik and perestroika. At
various points in time these borrowed words were all the rage. While I was too young to
comprehend sputnik when it was launched, throughout my early school years I learned its
significance. Yet, I doubt that any person in high school today would understand the word or
fathom how quickly it was borrowed into the English language.
The same fate awaited perestroika. About six years after it was proposed in the Soviet Union, the
word filled inches of newspaper copy in the mid 1980s. But I would be amazed to find any
mention of Gorbachev’s initiative for today’s English-speaking newspaper readers. If borrowed
words are a “result of language contact in a certain place at a certain time,” as Liberman phrases
it in Word Origins, then these two Russian words fit the bill perfectly. But these etymons
probably have little “staying power,” particularly since neither really forms ties with other
words. So, like the many borrowed words from the past that failed to live on, these two are also
probably consigned to the linguistic junk heap, at least for English readers.
In wrapping up, the borrowing of words illustrates that when two languages compete for
domination over one another, adaptability and adoptability are key ingredients. The Celts did not
understand this and their language was marginalized. The Germanic-speakers faced the same fate
when confronted with the Norman Conquest, but many of the higher-educated Britons saw the

(Gallic) writing on the wall and chose to borrow the necessary words and phrases to
communicate in a changed environment. By, out of necessity, opting to borrow from their
foreign rulers, the English language evolved into the most extensive and prolific on the planet.
Sources:
1. ^ Jespersen,Otto. GrowthandStructure of the EnglishLanguage.10th ed.Oxford:Basil
Blackwell,1982.
2. ^ Greenough,JamesBradstreet,andGeorge LymanKittredge. WordsandTheirWaysin English
Speech.Boston:BeaconPress,1962
3. ^ Liberman,AnatolyDr.(Ph.D.) Universityof Minnesota. WordOriginsandHow We Know
Them.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2009. Andassortedlecturesfromhis Originsof
EnglishWords course.
4. ^Lynch, Jack. The Lexicographer’sDilemma.New York:WalkerPublishingCo.,Inc.,2009.
Copyright © 2010 Charles Fredeen. All rights reserved. Used by permission.
History of the English language Indo-European Languages Dan’s home page
Loan Words and Borrowing:A Kind of Code-Switching?
by Jacomine · 6 comments
By Jacomine Nortier
Photo credit: Beatrice Murch
A few weeks ago I wrote about code-switching. People who switch back and forth between
languages are more or less aware of their behavior, or at least they know that they make use of
two (or more languages). But did you ever realize that we use elements from other languages
when we think, or are even sure, that we use only one language?
In this last sentence, there are at least five words that were borrowed from Latin: realize, use,
elements, language and sure. The words don’t only sound different in Latin, they look a little bit
different as well. We use such words every day, and we don’t need to speak the other language to
do so. We are often not even aware of using words from another language.
What is this borrowing about? Why do we do it? Is it restricted to English and Latin or is it more
universal? That is what this article is about.
In the Netherlands, many people are afraid that English will become so influential that Dutch
will disappear in the end. It is true that we use many, many English words in Dutch. The word

sale is now being used in place of the good old-fashioned word uitverkoop, not only in winkels
but more and more in shops. The boekhouder is a controller nowadays. Bestuurders are
managers. Although there are Dutch equivalents, we often choose to use the English words. On
the other hand, I type this on a computer, for which we have no Dutch equivalent.
This looks like code-switching, doesn´t it? But it is different: code-switching is not necessarily
concerned with single words. The examples I gave from English borrowed elements into Dutch
are single nouns or verbs, not full sentences. And there is more: these single nouns are perfectly
integrated into Dutch grammar, which makes them very ‘un-English’. We wrap them into Dutch
rules, so to say: we can talk about a computertje, where a Dutch diminutive ending –tje is
attached to computer, which makes it a small computer. Or we add infinitive –en to the verb
shop: what we like is shoppen. We borrow words from English and make them Dutch.
Although most people in the Netherlands speak (at least some) English, they do not necessarily
have to do so in order to use these English borrowed words. We can also talk about crème
(English cream) and English speaking people can talk about a garage without knowing any
French.
All languages borrow words from other languages and treat them as if they were their own. Or
rather: the speakers are the actors, not the languages themselves, of course. Why do speakers
borrow lexical material? Perhaps we (or they) find them cool and show that we are living in a
globalizing world. Are languages not rich enough to take care of themselves without the help of
words from outside?
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, we 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 we
borrowed from the English speaking word. Not only the stuff, but also the word. Again it is
adjusted to Dutch: it is pronounced as cornèt beef and not recognized as English anymore. I
might say: Ik ga een filetje saven (I am going to save a small file). You probably recognized file
and save. We don’t use many Dutch equivalents for computer terms.
Another reason why we borrow from other languages is that it helps us to make distinctions
that were impossible otherwise. An example: in Dutch we have the word huis (house). With the
help of loan words (borrowed words) from other languages that you certainly will recognize, we
can distinguish between several types of house: flat, appartement (apartment), split-level woning,
bungalow.

Words are sometimes so well adjusted to their new language that it is hard to recognize their
roots. Would you know what the origin of Japanese Makudonarudo or Amusuterudamu is? 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 you can see that the first word is MacDonalds, and the second one
Amsterdam!
An interesting phenomenon is that we only borrow from languages that we 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.
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, we 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 sometime 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.
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 rumors that even Icelandic has started to borrow words from
English now. I hope that there are Icelandic readers who can tell me what the situation is like
nowadays.
Linguists study borrowing and they often conclude that it is a logical 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’. The question rises why
some linguistic communities are more keen than others to keep loanwords at a distance. Is it true
or just a wrong impression that some linguistic communities are more caring about their
language than others? I will discuss that in my next article.
Readmore aboutloanwordsandborrowing:
On language contact in general:
 Sarah Thomason(2001): LanguageContact.An Introduction.Edinburg:EdinburghUniversity
Press.
More specific on borrowing:
 Einar Haugen(1950): The analysisof linguisticborrowing, Language26-2,page 210-231.
 RoelandvanHout andPieterMuysken(1994): ‘ModellingLexical Borrowability’, Language
Variation and Change 6,page 39-62.
In Dutch:
 Jacomine Nortier(2009):‘Taalcontact enOntlening’,chapter13 in Nederland Meertalenland,
Amsterdam:Aksant,page 169-181
Don’t miss the first post in this series: Code-switching Is Much More than Careless Mixing:
Multilinguals Know the Rules!
Loanwords in English
In Borrowed Words: A History of Loanwords in English I examine how words borrowed from
different languages have influenced English throughout its history. The above feature
summarizes some of the main data from the book, focussing on the fourteen sources that have
given the most words to English, as reflected by the new and revised entries in the Oxford
English Dictionary.
Using the date buttons at the top of the graphic, you can compare the impact that different
languages have made on English over time. In the “per period” view, you can see the proportions
of words coming into English from each source in 50-year slices from 1150 up to the present
day. Compare for instance how the input from German has grown and then declined again from
1800 to the present day. (The earliest period, pre-1150, is much longer than 50 years, because
more precise dating of words from this early stage in the history of English is very problematic.)
If you switch to the “cumulative” view, then you can see how the total number of loanwords
from each language has built up over time. Here the shifts from one 50-year period to another are
rather less dramatic, but the long-term shifts are still very striking. You can see, for instance,
how German, Spanish, and Italian all slowly come to greater prominence. You can see this very

clearly if you select any start date and then press the “play” button. (If you would like to see the
numbers behind the graphic, a selection of graphs and charts from Borrowed Words are available
on our companion website.)
A trulyglobal sweep
The data lying behind this graphic reflects some of the biggest changes in the history of English.
Today English borrows from other languages with a truly global sweep. For instance, borrowing
from Japanese has shot up over the past hundred years. Words like judo, sushi, or tsunami have
broken through into the vocabulary familiar to everyone. If we look back to the 1800s, Latin,
French, Greek, and German are much more dominant. This owes a great deal to the specialist
vocabularies of science, technology, and learning; compare for example oxygen, borrowed from
French (but formed from elements of Greek origin), or paraffin, borrowed from German (but
formed from elements of Latin origin). Looking a little further back, in the 1500s, 1600s, and
1700s there are familiar words entering English from Spanish, like guitar or cargo or (ultimately
from languages of the Americas) potato or tomato, and from Italian, like macaroni, opera, or
piazza. There is a slightly earlier seam of borrowings from Dutch, like deck, luck, or pickle.
Theelephantin the room
However, the elephant in the room is how Latin and French dominate the picture in just about
every period. Even the Anglo-Saxons borrowed from Latin (e.g. fork, street, wine), and ever
since the Norman Conquest English has been borrowing hugely from French and Latin – quite
often taking the same word partly from each of these languages, especially in the medieval
period. Words like government, pay, science, or war (from French), or action, general, person,
and use (French and/or Latin) have become an indispensable part of English. Even among the
1000 most frequently used words in modern English, not far short of 50% have come into the
language from French or Latin. Numbers do not always tell us everything, though: the total of
loanwords from early Scandinavian is relatively low, but the language of the Vikings has left
some of the most intimate traces in the vocabulary of English, with words like leg, skin, sky, and
even they, their, and them.
 The opinionsand otherinformation contained in OxfordWordsblog postsand commentsdo not
necessarily reflect theopinionsor positionsof Oxford University Press.

Sociolinguistics

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Sociolinguistics

Similar to Sociolinguistics (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Sociolinguistics