Formal and semantic adaptation of lexical boorowings in the language-recipient (the end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st centuries)

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Formal and semantic adaptation of lexical boorowings in the language-recipient (the end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st centuries)

Oleksandr Piskunov,

Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor at the Department of Germanic and Slavonic Linguistics

Donbass State Pedagogical University (Sloviansk, Donetsk region, Ukraine)

Viktoriia Roman,

Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor at the Department of Germanic and Slavonic Linguistics

Donbass State Pedagogical University (Sloviansk, Donetsk region, Ukraine)

The paper outlines the research into the problem of stages and degrees of adaptation of lexical borrowings in Linguistics in the end of the 20lh - the beginning of the 21st c. from the point of linguistic historiography. The objectives of the article are to determine the differential features of the degrees of adaptation of lexical borrowings at various stages and levels of the language system while penetrating borrowed words into language-recipient and study the degrees of the assimilation process of borrowed words in the interpretation of the linguists at the end of the 19th - the beginning of the 21st cc. Most linguists distinguish three stages of adaptation of lexical borrowings: the first stage is phonetic where the causes of phonetic variants are investigated and the ways of appearing of phonetic variations of lexical borrowing are suggested; the second stage is characterized by lexical- semantic assimilation of foreign words, where the semantic and functional development of borrowing process in language- recipient is investigated; the third stage is the phase offull adaptation or rooting, when codification in dictionaries of language- recipient is identified. The stages of adaptation of foreign words have been defined to be as formal and semantic assimilation. The conducted research shows that formal adaptation is characterized by assimilation of borrowed lexical units into phonetic, graphic and morphological levels of language-recipient. The results obtained illustrate that formal criteria are considered to be the adaptation of lexical borrowings to the lexical system of the recipient language with the maximum convergence of their graphic, phonetic and grammatical characteristics. According to the results of the research, semantic adaptation can be a formation of an independent lexical meaning of a foreign word in a new linguistic environment and formation of definite connections with other words within the thematic group in language-recipient. The prospects of the given research consist in further combining the best scientific achievements of the past with the development of new approaches to the investigated problem and involving Indo-European languages in particular studying the causes and ways of adaptation of lexical borrowings in language-recipient.

Key words: linguistic historiographic aspect, process of adaptation, stages and degrees of adaptation, lexical borrowing, language-recipient.

ФОРМАЛЬНА ТА СЕМАНТИЧНА АДАПТАЦІЯ ЛЕКСИЧНИХ ЗАПОЗИЧЕНЬ У МОВІ-РЕЦИПІЄНТІ (КІНЕЦЬ ХХ СТ. - ПОЧАТОК ХХІ СТ.)

Олександр ПІСКУНОВ,

кандидат філологічних наук, доцент кафедри германської та слов'янської філології Донбаського державного педагогічного університету (Слов'янськ, Донецька область, Україна)

Вікторія РОМАН,

кандидат філологічних наук, доцент кафедри германської та слов'янської філології Донбаського державного педагогічного університету (Слов'янськ, Донецька область, Україна)

У статті представлено дослідження питання етапів та ступенів адаптації лексичних запозичень у лінгвістичній науці кінця ХХ ст. - початку ХХІ ст. в контексті лінгвоісторіографії. Завданнями студій убачаємо у визначенні диференційних ознак ступенів адаптації лексичних запозичень на різних етапах та рівнях мовної системи входження запозичень до мови-реципієнта в інтерпретації мовознавців кінця ХХ ст. - початку ХХІ ст. та дослідженні ступенів процесу адаптації запозичених слів в інтерпретації вчених ХХ ст. - початку ХХІ ст. Більшість мовознавців виокремлюють три етапи адаптації лексичних запозичень: перший - фонетичний - досліджуються причини виникнення фонетичних варіантів та пропонуються шляхи подолання фонетичної варіантності лексичних запозичень; другий етап характеризується лексико-семантичним освоєнням іншомовних слів, де з'ясовується семантико-функціональний процес освоєння запозичень у мові-реципієнті; третій - це етап повної адаптації (укорінення), коли відбувається кодифікування у словниках мови-реципієнта. Визначено етапи адаптації іншомовних слів: формальну й семантичну адаптацію. Проведене дослідження демонструє, що формальна адаптація характеризується асиміляцією іншомовних слів на фонетичному, графічному й морфологічному рівнях. Отримані результати показують, що формальними критеріями вважаються - пристосування лексичних запозичень до лексичної системи мови-реципієнта з максимальним зближенням їхніх графічних, фонетичних та граматичних характеристик. Згідно з результатами дослідження підсумком семантичної адаптації є формування самостійного лексичного значення іншомовного слова в новому лінгвістичному оточенні та встановлення певних відносин з іншими словами мови-реципієнта всередині тематичної групи. Перспективним до вирішення в подальших наукових розвідках уважаємо принцип поєднання найкращих наукових досягнень минулого з розвитком новітніх підходів щодо досліджуваної проблеми та в широкому залученні до аналізу матеріалу індоєвропейських мов, зокрема дослідженні причин адаптації лексичних запозичень у мові-реципієнті.

Ключові слова: лінгвоісторіографічний аспект, процес адаптації, етапи та ступені адаптації, лексичне запозичення, мова-реципієнт.

Statement of problem and analysis of publication

The problem of adaptation of lexical borrowed words and the ways of their adaptation in the language-recipient appears in the second half of the 19th century. The research of borrowed words was comprehensively advanced to a new level of etymology and general theoretical grounds of adaptation taking into consideration general principles in Linguistics of the period mentioned above. In the second half of the 20th century, the range of research problems became extended relating to the process of borrowing words which resulted in the reinterpretation put on traditional understanding of the essence of borrowing as a process. A great number of stages of adaptation in the lexical composition of the language-recipient has been identified and systematized. The main achievements in the investigated field belong to such scientists as T. Savory, L. Krysin, Yu. Zhluktenko, L. Kysliuk, H. Serheeva O. Styshov, L. Arkhypenko, V. Simonok and others. Therefore some contradictions still take place in the classification and features of the distinction concerning adaptation signs of borrowed words among linguists, who divide them into fundamental and optional (although all criteria of adaptation can be considered essential), there is a necessity to determine the stages of adaptation of borrowed words in the theory of studying lexical borrowings. Unfortunately, we are forced to state the lack of linguistic historiographic research on the problem of adaptation of lexical borrowings in the language-recipient carried out on the basis of a systematic investigation taking into account the grounds of specific material.

In linguistic works some considerations can be found as to the problem of approaches distinguished by different scientists of linguistic schools and directions concerning the question in the outlined field. The topicality of the paper is predetermined by the fact that the adaptation of borrowed words in the language-recipient from the point of view of Linguistic Historiography has not been considered comprehensively. The object of research is a set of scientific texts on the adaptation of lexical borrowings, the authors of which are the linguists of the late 20th - the beginning of the 21st cc. The subject of the research is the views of linguists of the given period on the problem of adaptation of lexical borrowings at different stages into a particular language. The aim of the paper is to outline the main features of stages at adaptation levels of borrowed words in the light of linguistic historiographic direction in present-day Linguistics.

The research methodology is grounded on the principle of actualistic method (Hlushchenko, 1998: 6) as a scientific method based on theoretical level, the lack of which makes impossible the investigation and existence of historiography of any science. The given method allows us to trace the evolution of certain linguistic concepts based on modern knowledge and predict certain trends in the future development of relevant theories based on contemporary understanding. This or that concept and methodology is interpreted from the point of view of what new ideas the linguists have contributed to science in comparison with their predecessors and what significance their work had for solving the corresponding problems. The operational component of the actualistic method in works on the historiography of linguistics is a set of the following techniques and procedures: analysis of sources (linguistic texts) and synthesis of the obtained data, comparison, abstraction and logical historical and scientific reconstruction.

Results and Discussion

lexical boorowings language

Extensive usage of foreign words has been a subject of great interest among the linguists in general and the society in particular. The process of formation of a new word takes a long time whereas the degree of adaptation of borrowed words depends on different factors which are determined by various stages of the borrowing process. When studying foreign words according to the degree of adaptation, the scientists indicate the duration (degree) of assimilation of borrowed elements, dividing this process into certain stages. The procedure of assimilation takes place at each level, so the process of penetrating of a foreign word into the language-recipient presupposes several stages. Having studied the scientific sources in the outlined field, we can point out that the majority of scholars determine three stages of adaptation of lexical borrowings and use the definitions of their own. It should be specified the essential features of lexical borrowings at different stages of their adaptation.

The first stage is defined by functioning borrowed words in the language-recipient and corresponds to the level of penetration. Significant peculiarities characterizethestagementionedaboveastransliteration or transcription, retaining foreign spelling or graphical change of foreign words, transformation from Latin to Cyrillic coding and variation in pronunciation and accent (Kamynin, 1994: 32-33). It should be mentioned that the stage of penetration is characterized by, primarily, transliteration what identifies the written way of borrowing, pronunciation instability and spelling of borrowed words indicating their phonetic assimilation and quality to accept a tendency of spelling and orthoepy of the language- recipient.

The first stage is considered to be the phonetic development of foreign words where the sources of appearing phonetic variations as well as the ways of overcoming phonetic modifications of lexical borrowings in the language-system are explained; grammatical adaptation comprises derivational productivity of foreign words (Serheeva, 2002: 4-12). The second stage is the stage of adaptation of borrowed words which lose the features of originality, relate to the morphological categories of the language-recipient and reveal paradigmatic connections, namely, polysemantic, synonymic and antonymic. Lexical borrowing is perceived as a permanent element in the language-recipient, its form is stabilized, and the sphere of usage is expanded taking into consideration the system of the language- recipient (the semantic influence of the source language on borrowed words is determined to be the strongest at this stage).

It is possible to notice an intensification of morphological divisibility of the borrowed words and adaptability to the grammatical system of the language-recipient (Kysliuk, 2000: 34). Within this stage lexical-semantic adaptation of borrowed words is used as well as semantic and functional process of adaptation of borrowed words in the language- recipient, which is accompanied by the changes of the semantic structure and the values of borrowed words and changes in the separate components of the lexical-semantic system of the language (Serheeva, 2002: 4-12). The next stage to be mentioned is the stage of full adaptation (the so-called rooting), which is codified in the dictionaries of the language- recipient. Derivatives appear from borrowed words, an entry of new words into the morphological system of the language-recipient is observed. Borrowed words are intensively used in the language, the stage outlined is defined as “integration”, distinguished by the fact that the borrowed element can be embedded and become an integral part of lexical-semantic system of the language-recipient which is no longer perceived by native speakers as a foreign word and it fully complies with the rules of the language that takes (Kamynin, 1994: 32-33).

The indicator of the highest level of adaptation of foreign words in the language-recipient is word-building in connection with the regulations ofthe language-recipient.Withinthe structure ofthelast phase it is necessary to distinguish the following types of semantic changes of the borrowed words that accompany the stages of adaptation, primarily, on the semantic and word-building levels such as the simplification of the semantic structure, the complication of the semantic structure, the contraction of the meaning of the borrowed words due to their specification, widening of meaning due to the generalization of the corresponding concept and changing of the meaning of borrowed words (Serheeva, 2002: 4-12).

Studying the process of adaptation of borrowed words at all levels L. Arkhypenko proposes the classification of assimilating features of a borrowed word and points out initial, in-depth and full development stages of adaptation, each of which corresponds to a certain degree of adaptation such as low, medium and high. Within the structure of each stage the signs of a borrowed word are defined relating to all levels of the language-recipient (Arkhypenko, 2005: 6-7).

Thus, the stages defined in the works of scholars reflect the hierarchy in succession of the adaptation process of borrowed words based on main indicators at each stage. However, we can observe the lack of differentiation and specificationoffeatures at various language levels. Having analyzed the scientific works and the characteristics of the stages of adaptation of lexical borrowings, we come to conclusion that semantic adaptation as a matter of fact is considered to be the only and necessary criterion to assign a foreign word the status of a borrowed element, since it is unavoidable the fulfillment of the first two criteria, otherwise the word cannot be considered borrowed. Taking into account all the peculiarities we can point out two stages: formal and semantic adaptation.

However, it is not entirely appropriate to attribute only a certain lexical unit to the borrowing proper that has successfully has passed the stage of semantic adaptation since identifying this fact requires a clear and detailed description of the pattern of lexical- semantic connections that a borrowed word possesses in the language-recipient makes it possible to say about the completion of the stage at the adaptation level.

On the other hand, E. Marinova has quite a contrary idea that the specification of features and criteria of formal adaptation is quite possible that in its turn it allows to distinguish the indicators of formal adaptation of certain foreign words as a criterion of defining them as borrowed words (Marinova, 2008: 70-76). Let us consider both stages separately: formal adaptation (to identify a specific register of such features), and semantic adaptation (to determine the indicators of semantic assimilation).

To realise the proposed classification, it is necessary to find out the differential features characterizing each stage of adaptation of a foreign word in the language- recipient at each level of the language system.

Formal adaptation of foreign words includes assimilation at phonetic, graphic and morphological levels. Formal criteria are considered to be “incorporation” (adaptation) of lexical borrowings in the lexical system of the language-recipient with a maximum convergence of their graphic, phonetic and grammatical characteristics; functional criteria include various indicators of lexical and semantic changes, word-building properties of lexical borrowings in the language-recipient.

Phonetic adaptation consists in the fact that a foreign word is to be reproduced and conveyed using the sounds of the phonetic system in the language-recipient, thus breaking away from the phonetic system of the source language; there is a kind of replacement of sounds in a foreign language with similar phonemes of the language-recipient (Marinova, 2008: 81-85).

Phoneme substitution is the first stage of phonetic adaptation (it can be called phonemic adaptation). Then the word consisting of phonemes ofthe language-recipient aims as adapting to typical pronunciation of sounds of a definite language and a tendency of phonetic and orthoepic adaptation can be seen. The pronunciation of a borrowed word is regulated by the rules of phonetic system of the receiving language. Such phenomena as reduction of vowels, softening of consonants before the vowels of the front row are extended to the pronunciation of a new word. Such phenomenon exists only in some cases when the borrowed word cannot fully adapt to the phonetic system of the language- recipient and retains some sound characteristics of its original variant (Marinova, 2008: 81-84).

When borrowing the word stress of a lexical unit can be changed in the language-recipient. So English words finishing in -man, penetrating, for example, into the Ukrainian language are pronounced with a stress on a final syllable (бізнесмен, рекордсмен, спортсмен, яхтсмен and others). Whereas in the source language the accent is usually fallen onto the first syllable businessman ['biznosmmsn], recordsman ['reko:dzmon], sportsman ['sportsman], yachtsman ['ja:tsmon] (Macmillan English Dictionary, 2002).

While functioning of a new foreign word, the accent often corresponds to its accentuation in the source language. However, later under the influence of tendencies characteristic to the accent of the language-recipient or based on analogy with the words of a similar morphemic structure, a foreign word can change its accent. Accordingly, the anglicisms бюджет, комфорт, пікап, репортер, тандем at the very moment of borrowing are pronounced in keeping with the stress of their etymons in the source language.

The next stage to be mentioned is graphic adaptation. For a great number of foreign words penetrating into the language-recipient, the adopting language with its original alphabet turns out to be a “foreign environment”, therefore the graphic adaptation, change of letter composition of a lexical unit in the language-recipient becomes a significant stage in its development. The development of graphic adaptation can be determined taking into account the correspondence in spelling norms of a foreign word acceptable in the language-recipient (Marinova, 2008: 81-84; Arkhypenko, 2005: 70-72).

One can take into account the fact of the historical graphic principle established in the language-recipient according to which pronunciation rules can have some differences in keeping with a graphic structure of the word penetrating into a new language along with its sound form.

Morphological adaptation determines the beginning of internal “rooting” of a lexical element into a new language system which consists in adapting grammatical categories of the language-recipient depending on a foreign word in the language-system directly from which it incorporates into a new system. Consequently, the availability of a complete grammatical paradigm in foreign lexical units indicates the highest degree of their morphological adaptation (Marinova, 2008: 121-124).

The signs of formal adaptation are extensively used by linguists in differentiating foreign lexical units that function in the language-recipient. When determining foreign inclusions, the scientists pay a special attention to the factor of adaptability (Zhluktenko, 1974; Arkypenko, 2005).

The divergence of opinions and significant differences in determining a particular classification of adaptation signs correlating with a specific cluster of foreign lexical units (barbarisms, proper borrowings and others) indicates that the features of formal adaptation correspond to the requirements of necessity and sufficiency for the differentiation of foreign lexical units. Within the context of the outlined aspect the following types of foreign lexical units are distinguished such as foreign inclusions / incorporations, barbarisms and borrowings proper which chronologically reflect the stages of entering a foreign lexical unit into a new language-recipient.

Foreign inclusions are considered lexical units possessing features of incomplete adaptation at each level which are combined under formal adaptation. Barbarisms and foreign inclusions, being the elements of a foreign language, are mechanically transferred to the language-recipient and retain the spelling norms adopted in the source language and they are identified as the least assimilated entries. Some scholars suggest distinguishing between barbarisms and foreign incorporations depending on the frequency of their usage (Krysin, 1968: 169).

However, a complete adaptation of lexical units at least at one level of formal adaptation undoubtedly contributes to the establishment of closer “contacts” with native or previously borrowed words of the language- recipient. The result of such interaction presupposes an intensification in the degree of adaptation of a definite lexical unit at other levels of other language system. Unlike foreign inclusions the lexical elements mentioned above are practically undistinguishable from native words but, on the other hand, “inner meaning” reveals their foreign origin. Such lexical units belong to barbarisms, for instance, ноу-хау, уїк-енд, хедлайнер and so on (Krysin, 1968: 76).

The group of borrowings proper includes foreign lexical units completely assimilated in terms of formal adaptation: at phonetic, graphic and morphological levels of the language-recipient. Absolute formal adaptation allows foreign words to interact without restrictions with other lexical items functioning in the language-recipient resulted in the development of basic syntagmatic connection between a foreign word and within the once “foreign” language system. The availability of such connections provides it both external and internal “freedom”; foreign words can interact then at the level of paradigmatic relations, constituting the essence of semantic adaptation (Kamynin, 1994).

Consequently, the indispensable and sufficient features attributing a foreign word to the borrowings proper (the borrowings) predetermine principally functioning a word in the system of the language- recipient in single sound and graphic forms and, secondly, existence of complete grammatical paradigm which corresponds to the rules and norms adopted in a receiving language. However, it is necessary to emphasize a successful completion of the stage of formal adaptation can assume the lexical unit a status of a borrowing one but it does not suppose a successful semantic assimilation. Thus, with reference to semantic adaptation, formal assimilation of borrowed words is essential but cannot be an obligatory requirement.

Semantic adaptation can be the following stage for a foreign word to be assimilated. Thus, the order followed in considering the adaptation stages - phonetic, graphic, morphological and only then - semantic assimilation fundamentally reflects the sequence of passing the given stages done by a foreign word. To understand and then convey what a foreign word means (that is to use it in a definite context), one should at least pronounce or write it using one of its grammatical forms. Semantic adaptation of a foreign word is initiated at the stage of non- assimilated foreign incorporations characterized by a zero degree adaptation (Beliaeva, 1984: 53).

Semantic adaptation is defined as the introduction of a foreign word into lexico-semantic system of the language-recipient which determines the stage of its entry into syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations with native elements of the language-recipient (native or previously borrowed), valence development, connection in various processes (broadening and specification of meaning and so on), change of stylistic characteristics. The result of such process is considered to be a formation of an independent lexical meaning of a foreign word in a new linguistic environment and the establishment of definite relationships with other words of the language- recipient within the thematic group.

It should be added that essential characteristics comprise semantic adaptation of lexical borrowings, introduction in different chains of correlations, attributions of foreign words to synonymic rows of words with similar meaning and their differentiation - stylistic or semantic with other lexical elements of a definite chain taking a certain place in new semantic changes caused by the entry of new words. Three main types of semantic development of borrowed words have been identified such as zero stage supposing when borrowed words retain the value of etymon without changes, partial phase denotes narrowing the number of semes in borrowed words compared to its etymon, broadening the quantity of semes as well as combinations of these changes), free stage represents extreme extension of the meaning of borrowed words to the level when the semantic connection with the original borrowed meaning is lost (Bytkivska, 2008: 5-6).

A foreign word passing semantic assimilation turns out to be an element of the procedures as the neologism itself formed on the basis of elements already existing in the language. The only difference lies in the fact that a foreign word is influenced not by one as in the case of the neologism itself but quite two different language systems - the source language and the language-recipient; the semantic development of a foreign word is influenced by two systems. This double effect is retained throughout the existence of the word in a new language environment as long as the living contacts of these languages are preserved. The essence of this development is altered at different stages of adaptation owing to the strengthening of the influence of one or another language system.

The influence of the language-recipient to a great extent is primarily revealed in efforts to find an analogue among the number of native words or previously borrowed words which follow its using in the course of the entire stage of semantic adaptation. All subsequent changes happening to a borrowed word are not actually considered to be the process of adaptation but a reflection of its further semantic (syntactic, stylistic, etc.) functioning in the system of the language-recipient. Most words are penetrated into a new language being already a “borrowing proper”. Accordingly, the semantic changes proceeding to a foreign word from the moment of its fixation in the dictionary contain not only the processes related to the period of adaptation but also characterize the further development of the meaning in a borrowed word on the basis of the language-recipient.

Conclusions

Thus, the adaptation step allows to differentiate actually borrowing from foreign inclusions and barbarisms at the level of formal assimilation, as well as identifying indicators of semantic development, differentiate the stages of semantic adaptation of foreign words and further semantic development of foreign lexical borrowings in the system of the language-recipient. The adaptation of borrowed words can be perceived as a complex linguistic process, which due to its multidimensional integrated nature is studied by scholars from different points. The investigated period (the end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st cc.) characterized by a comprehensive analysis of lexical borrowings subsequently both formal and functional aspects can be considered as different phases of a single assimilation process. The above mentioned period is marked by the formation and improvement of principles of adaptation foreign words and development of a specific mechanism for determining the stages and degrees of assimilation of lexical borrowings in the language-recipient.

The prospects for study consist in further combining the greatest scientific achievements of the past with the developments of new approaches to studying the problem of adaptation of lexical borrowings in the language-recipient and extensive involvement of the material of Indo-European languages to be promising for further scientific research.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Архипенко Л. Іншомовні лексичні запозичення в українській мові: етапи і ступені адаптації (на матеріалі англіцизмів у пресі кінця XX - початку XXI ст.) : дис. ... канд. філол. наук : 10.02.01 / Харків. нац. ун-т ім. В. Н. Кара- зіна. Харків, 2005. 230 с.

2. Беляева С. Английские слова в русском языке XVI-XX вв. Владивосток : Изд-во ДВГУ, 1984. 108 с.

3. Битківська Я. Тенденції засвоєння та розвиток семантики англізмів у сучасній українській мові : автореф. дис. ... канд. філол. наук : 10.02.01 / Прикарпатський нац. ун-т ім. Василя Стефаника. Івано-Франківськ, 2008. 19 с.

4. Глущенко В. Принципи порівняльно-історичного дослідження в українському і російському мовознавстві (70-і рр. ХІХ ст. - 20-і рр. ХХ ст.) : монографія / НАН України, Ін-т мовознавства ім. О. О. Потебні ; відп. ред

О. Б. Ткаченко. Донецьк, 1998. 222 с.

5. Жлуктенко Ю. Лингвистические аспекты двуязычия. Киев : Вища школа, 1974. 176 с.

6. Каминін І. Структурно-семантичне освоєння запозичених слів у сучасній українській літературній мові : (на матеріалі побутової лексики) : дис. ... канд. філол. наук : 10.02.02 / Харків. пед. ун-т ім. Г С. Сковороди. Харків, 1994. 191 с.

7. Кислюк Л. Словотвірний потенціал запозичень у сучасній українській літературній мові (на матеріалі англійських та німецьких запозичень) : дис. ... канд. філол. наук : 10.02.15 / Інст. укр. мови НАН України. Київ, 2000. 238 с.

8. Крысин Л. Иноязычные слова в современном русском языке: монография / АН СССР, Ин-т русского языка. Москва : Наука, 1968. 208 с.

9. Лінгвоправова картина світу: сучасні проблеми лінгвістики та іншомовної дидактики : колективна моногра-фія / В. Сімонок. Харків : НТМТ, 2012. 258 с.

10. Маринова Е. Иноязычные слова в русской речи конца XX - начала XXI вв.: проблемы освоения и функ-ционирования : дис. д-ра филол. Наук : 10.02.01 / Инст-т рус. яз. им. В. В. Виноградова. 2008. 509 с.

11. Сергєєва Г. Англомовні запозичення в українській правничій термінології : автореф. дис. ... канд. філол. наук : 10.02.01 / Харків. нац. ун-т ім. В. Н. Каразіна. Харків, 2002. 16 с.

12. Стишов О. Українська лексика кінця ХХ століття (на матеріалі мови засобів масової інформації) : монографія. Київ : Центр КНЛУ, 2003. 388 с.

13. Macmillan English Dictionary. For Advanced Learners. Oxford. Macmillan Publishers Limited, 2002. 1690 p.

14. Savory T. H. The Language of Science. Its Growth, Character and Usage. London : Townbridge Printers, LTD, 1953. 184 p.

REFERENCES

1. Arkhypenko L. (2005). Inshomovni leksychni zapozychennia v ukrainskii movi : etapy i stupeni adaptatsii (na materiali anhlitsyzmiv u presi kintsia 20 - pochatku 21st.) [Foreign lexical loan-words in the Ukrainian language : stages and degrees of adaptation (based on anglicisms in mass media at the end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st cc.)]. Candidate's thesis. Kharkiv [in Ukrainian].

2. Beliaeva S. (1984). Angliyskie slova v russkom yazyke XVI-XX vv. [The English words in the Russian language of the 16 - 20 c.]. Vladivostok : DVGU [in Russian].

3. Bytkivska Ya. (2008). Tendentsii zasvoiennia ta rozvytok semantyky anhlizmiv u suchasnii ukrainskii movi : [Tendencies of adoption and development of semantics of the English words in Ukrainian]. Extended abstract of Candidate's thesis. Ivano-Frankivsk [in Ukrainian].

4. Hlushchenko V. (1998). Pryntsypyporivnialno-istorychnoho doslidzhennia v ukrainskomy i rosiiskomu movoznavstvi (70-i ХІХ s. - ХХ s.) [Principles of comparative-historical study in Ukrainian and Russian linguistics (the 70s of the 19th - the 20s of the 20th c.)]. Donetsk [in Ukrainian].

5. Zhluktenko Yu. A. (1974). Lingvisticheskie aspekty dvuyazychiya. [Linguistic aspects of bilingualism]. Kyiv : Vyshcha shkola [in Ukrainian].

6. Kamynin I. (1994). Strukturno-semantychne osvoiennia zapozychenykh sliv u suchasnii ukrainskii literaturnii movi: (na materiali pobutovoi leksyky) [Structural-semantic assimilation of loan-words in modern Ukrainian literary language: based on example of everyday words]. Candidate's thesis. Kharkiv [in Ukrainian].

7. Kysliuk, L. (2000). Slovotvirnyi potentsial zapozychen u suchasnii ukrainskii literaturnii movi (na materiali anhliiskykh ta nimetskykh zapozychen) [Word-formative potential of loan-words in modern Ukrainian literary language (based on material of the English and German loan-words)]. Candidate's thesis. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].

8. Krysin L. (1968). Inoyazychnye slova v sovremennom russkom yazyke [Foreign words in modern Russian language]. Moscow : Nauka [in Russian].

9. Simonok V. (2012). Linhvopravovakartynasvitu: suchasniproblemy linhvistyky ta inshomovnoi dydaktyky [Linguistic legal world picture: modern problems of linguistics and foreign didactics]. Kharkiv : NTMT [in Ukrainian].

10. Marinova Ye. (2008). Inoyazychnye slova v russkoy rechi kontsa XX - nachala XXI vv.: problemy osvoeniya i funktsionirovaniya [Foreign words in Russian speech at the end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st cc.: problems of assimilation and functioning]. Doctor's thesis. Moscow [in Russian].

11. Serheeva, H. (2002). Anhlomovni zapozychennia v ukrainskii pravnychii terminolohii [The English loan-words in Ukrainian legal terminology]. Extended abstract of Candidate's thesis. Kharkiv [in Ukrainian].

12. Styshov O. (2003). Ukrainska leksykakintsiaXX stolittia (namateriali movy zasobivmasovoi informatsii). [Ukrainian vocabulary of the end of the 20th century (based on material of mass media language)]. Kyiv : Tsentr KNLU [in Ukrainian].

13. Macmillan English Dictionary. For Advanced Learners. (2002). Oxford. Macmillan Publishers Limited.

14. Savory T. (1953). The Language of Science. Its Growth, Character and Usage. London : Townbridge Printers, LTD.

Размещено на Allbest.ru