From Jazz and Rap to Dzhaz and Rep

Laidler, Kateryna

From Jazz and Rap to Dzhaz and Rep

Phonological Adaptation of English Loanwords in Russian

by Kateryna Laidler (Author)

Linguistics

Series: Sounds – Meaning – Communication, Volume 15

Summary

The book provides a significant insight into the complex process of English loanword adaptation in Russian. It is based on an in-depth analysis and comparison of a rich body of experimental data on the adaptation of both established and online loans of those English sounds absent from Russian phonemic inventory. The analysis is couched within the Optimality-Theoretic framework. The uncovered patterns offer valuable contribution to the ongoing debate on loanword phonology.

Excerpt

Cover
Title
Copyright
About the author
About the book
This eBook can be cited
Acknowledgements
Table of contents
List of figures
List of tables
List of tableaux
Introduction
List of abbreviations
Note on transliteration
CHAPTER 1. Introduction to English loanwords in Russian
1. Introduction
2. A brief history of English loanwords in Russian
3. Definition and classification of lexical borrowings
3.1. Reasons and factors behind lexical borrowing
3.2. Classification of borrowings
4. Adaptation of loanwords
4.1. Spelling
4.2. Semantics
4.3. Inflexion
4.3.1. Nouns
4.3.2. Adjectives
4.3.3. Verbs
4.3.4. Word formation
4.4. Phonology
4.5. Loan-translations (calques)
5. Conclusions
CHAPTER 2. Introduction to the English and Russian sound systems
1. Introduction
2. Phoneme inventories of Russian and English
2.1. Consonants
2.2. Vowels
3. Russian consonantal phonology
3.1. Voicing
3.2. Palatalisation
Distribution of palatalisation
Palatal assimilation and depalatalisation
3.3. Assimilation in the place of articulation
3.4. Dissimilation
3.5. Cluster simplification
4. Russian vocalic phonology
4.1. Vowel Reduction
4.2. Yer vowels
5. Irregularities in grapheme-phoneme correspondences in Russian
6. Conclusions
CHAPTER 3. Basic tenets and mechanisms of Optimality Theory: Theories of loanword adaptation
1. Introduction
2. Major principles and mechanisms of Optimality Theory
3. Adaptation of loanwords in production
3.1. Theory of Constraints and Repair Strategies
3.2. Loanword adaptation and stratification of the lexicon
3.3. The role of perceptual similarity
4. Adaptation of loanwords in perception
4.1. Psycholinguistic Theory of Loanword Adaptation
4.2. Bidirectional model of L1 processing
5. Multiple scansions model
6. Conclusions
CHAPTER 4. Adaptation of selected English consonants
1. Introduction
2. Experimental design
2.1. Goals
2.2. Stimuli
2.3. Participants
2.4. Procedure
2.5. Justification of experimental procedure
3. Adaptation of E /h/
3.1. E /h/ in established loans
3.2. E /h/ in online loans
3.3. Comparison of E /h/ adaptation in established and online loans
3.4. An OT analysis of online loans
3.5. An OT analysis of established loans
4. Adaptation of E /d͡ʒ/
4.1. E /d͡ʒ/ in established loans
4.2. E /d͡ʒ/ in online loans
4.3. Comparison of E /d͡ʒ/ adaptation in established and online loans
4.4. An OT analysis of online loans
4.5. An OT analysis of established loans
5. Adaptation of the interdental fricatives
5.1. E /θ/ in established loans
5.2. E /ð/ in established loans
5.3. E /θ/ in online loans
5.4. E /ð/ in online loans
5.5. Comparison of /θ, ð/ adaptation in established and online loans
5.6. An OT analysis of online loans
5.7. An OT analysis of established loans
6. Adaptation of consonants in view of the selected approaches to loanword nativisation
7. Conclusions
CHAPTER 5. Adaptation of selected English vowels
1. Introduction
2. Adaptation of E /ɒ/
2.1. E /ɒ/ in established loans
2.2. E /ɒ/ in online loans
2.3. Comparison of E /ɒ/ adaptation in online and established loans
2.4. An OT analysis of E /ɒ/ adaptation in online and established loans
3. Adaptation of E /ɜ:/
3.1. E /ɜ:/ in established loans
3.2. E /ɜ:/ in online loans
3.3. Comparison of /ɜ:/ adaptation in online and established loans
3.4. An OT analysis of E /ɜ:/ adaptation in online and established loans
4. Adaptation of E /æ/
4.1. E /æ/ in established loans
4.2. E /æ/ in online loans
4.3. Comparison of E /æ/ adaptation in online and established loans
4.4. An OT analysis of /æ/ adaptation in online and established loans
5. Adaptation of vowels in view of the selected approaches to loanword nativisation
6. Conclusions
Closing remarks
References
Index of Names
Series index

←11 | 12→←12 | 13→

List of figures

Figure 1. Stressed and unstressed vowel inventories of Russian. Barnes (2007).

Figure 2. TCRS model

Figure 3. Periphery and core in TCRS

Figure 4. Two loci for loanword adaptations according to Peperkamp & Dupoux (2001, 2003).

Figure 5. Bidirectional model for L1 processing according to Boersma and Hamann (2008, p. 1).

Figure 6. Adaptations of E /h/ – general results

Figure 7. The word half-done (/h/ = 0.59s) in the experimental stimuli

Figure 8. The word has (/h/ = 0.102s) in the experimental stimuli

Figure 9. The word misbehave in the experimental stimuli

Figure 10. Adaptation of /d͡ʒ/ – general results

Figure 11. Adaptation of the feature [voice] of E /d͡ʒ/ in different positions

Figure 12. The word John in the experimental stimuli

Figure 13. The word reject in the experimental stimuli

Figure 14. The word huge in the experimental stimuli

Figure 15. Most frequent adaptations of /θ/ – general results.

Figure 16. Most frequent adaptations of /ð/ in online loans – general results.

Figure 17. The word that in the experimental stimuli.

Figure 18. The word bathe in the experimental stimuli.

Figure 19. Most frequent adaptions of /ɒ/ as pronounced by a native British English speaker

Figure 20. Most frequent adaptions of /ɒ/ as pronounced by a native American English speaker

Figure 21. The comparison of the most common adaptations of BE /ɒ/ and AE /ɑ/

Figure 22. The comparison of the average F1 and F2 values of BE /ɒ/ and AE /ɑ/ in the experimental material with R /o/ and R /a/

Figure 23. Adaptation of /ɜ:/ in online loans

Figure 24. The comparison of the average F1 and F2 values of E /ɜ:/ and R /o/, [e]‌, /ɛ/ and /a/

Figure 25. Adaptation of /æ/ – general results

Figure 26. The comparison of the average F1 and F2 values of /æ/ in BE & AE examples, and Russian /ɛ/ & /a/

Figure 27. Phonology-perception interaction in the adaptation of English loanwords into Russian

←14 | 15→

List of tables

Table 1. The number of loanwords borrowed into Russian at different periods of time.

Table 2. Some of the differences in the realisation of consonants and vowels in BE and AE

Table 3. English consonantal phonemes

Table 4. Russian consonantal phonemes

Table 5. Classification of English diphthongs

Table 6. Vowel reduction pattern in Russian (adapted from Jaworski, 2010)

Table 7. The irregularities in grapheme-phoneme correspondence in Russian

Table 8. Experimental items containing English consonant sounds absent from Russian.

Table 9. Experimental items containing English vowel sounds absent from Russian.

Table 10. A complementary list of experimental items.

Table 11. Experimental items used for American English.

Table 12. Adaptations of E /h/ in each experimental item

Table 13. Distinctive features of E /dʒ/ & R /t͡ɕ/ and /t͡s/

Table 14. Adaptation of /dʒ/ in different word positions

Table 15. A comparison of adaptation variants of /d͡ʒ/ in established vs online loans

Table 16. Distinctive features of E /dʒ/ and R /t͡ɕ/

Table 17. Distinctive features of E /d͡ʒ/ & R /d/ and /ʐ/

Table 18. Distinctive feature specifications for /θ/ and its most common substitutes in the experiment.

Table 19. Most common adaptations of /θ/ in each experimental item.

Table 20. Most common adaptations of /ð/ in each experimental item.

Table 21. The influence of phonology, phonetics and spelling on key adaptation patterns of selected consonants

Table 22. Spellings of /ɒ/ (Cruttenden, 2014)

Table 23. Chi-square test results of the relation between the source accent and the most common adaptations

Table 24. Distinctive feature matrix of BE /ɒ/, AE /ɑ/ as well as R /o/ and /a/

Table 25. Average F1 and F2 values of BE /ɒ/ and AE /ɑ/ in the experimental items

Table 26. Average F1 and F2 values of BE /ɒ/ and AE /ɑ/ according to Cruttenden (2014, p. 104)

Table 27. F1 and F2 values of Russian /o/ and /a/

Table 28. Adaptation of BE /ɒ/ and its AE equivalent in online and established loans

Table 29. Spellings of E /ɜ:/

Table 30. Adaptation rates with regard to most frequent spellings of E /ɜ:/

Table 31. Feature matrix for E /ɜ:/ and R /ɛ/, /o/ and /a/

Table 32. Combined results for the adaptation of E /ɜ:/ as either R [ӧ] and [e]‌, or as R /a/, /o/ and /ɛ/

Table 33. Average F1 and F2 values of /ɜ:/ in the experimental items and in the literature

Table 34. F1 and F2 values of Russian /o/, [e]‌, /a/ and /ɛ/

Table 35. The comparison of the adaptations of E /ɜ:/ in online and established loans

Table 36. Russian adaptation of /æ/ in terms of the place of articulation of the preceding consonant

Table 37. Rendition of E /æ/ as R /a/ and /ɛ/ depending on the place of articulation of the preceding consonant in a source word

Table 38. Rendition of E /æ/ as R /a/ and /ɛ/ depending on the place of articulation of the preceding consonant in the adapted words

Table 39. Russian adaptation of /æ/ depending on the place of articulation of the following consonant

Table 40. Adaptation of BE /æ/ depending on the manner of articulation of the following consonant

Table 41. Average F1 and F2 values of /æ/ in experimental material

Table 42. F1 and F2 values of Russian /ɛ/ and /a/

Table 43. Distinctive feature matrix of E /æ/, R/a/ and R /ɛ/

Table 44. Adaptation of ash in established and online loans

Table 45. The influence of phonology, phonetics and spelling on key adaptation patterns of selected vowels

←16 | 17→

List of tableaux

Tableau 1. Evaluation of candidates for the input /kod/, assuming Russian ranking

Tableau 2. Evaluation of candidates for the input /sæd/, assuming English ranking

Tableau 3. E /h/ → R /x/ adaptation in established loans

Tableau 4. E /kh/ → R /k/ adaptation in online loans

Tableau 5. E /h/ → R /x/ adaptation in established loans

Tableau 6. E /d͡ʒ/ → R /t͡ɕ/ adaptation in online loans

Tableau 7. E /d͡ʒ/ → R /dʐ/ adaptation in online loans

Tableau 8. E /d͡ʒ/ → R /dʐ/ adaptation in established loans

Tableau 9. E /θ/ → R /s/ adaptation in online loans

Tableau 10. E /θs/ → R /ts/ adaptation in online loans

Tableau 11. E /ð/ → R /z/ adaptation in online loans

Tableau 12. E /ðs/ → R /tz/ adaptation in online loans

Tableau 13. E /ð/ → R /z/ adaptation in established loans

Tableau 14. E <th> → R <т> adaptation in established loans

Tableau 15. The adaptation of BE /ɒ/ as R /o/

Tableau 16. The adaptation of AE /ɑ/ as R /a/

Tableau 17. The adaptation of E /ɜ:/ as R /o/

Tableau 18. The adaptation of E /ɜ:/ as R /ɛ/

Tableau 19. The adaptation of E /ɜ:/ as R /a/

Tableau 20. The adaptation of E /æ/ as R /ɛ/

Tableau 21. The adaptation of E /æ/ as R /a/

←17 | 18→←18 | 19→

Introduction

The concept of a linguistic borrowing is hardly a new one and perhaps every language has enriched its vocabulary with loanwords at different periods in its history. This is not surprising considering that no culture develops in isolation but is subject to the outside influences. The popularity of American and British culture as well as the prominent position of the USA and Great Britain in technology, economy and politics have led to the omnipresence of English, often called the world’s lingua franca, in today’s media. While some countries attempt to preserve the purity of their language and make use of native vocabulary as much as possible, the majority have succumbed to the effects of the present-day globalisation and expansion of English. Hence, the last few decades have been marked by an influx of English loanwords in different languages and the number is growing exponentially.

The past 25 years in linguistic studies have also shown a conspicuous interest in the subject of loanword phonology. As an ever-growing number of new lexical items travel from one language to another, linguists have proposed new models and approaches that attempt to account for an array of modifications the phonological shape of these words undergo in the process of their nativisation in a target language. The motivation for such developments is twofold. On the one hand, new emerging theoretical models equip researchers with better tools for an in-depth investigation and a more comprehensive analysis of loanword adaptation phenomena that were earlier difficult to approach in an insightful way. Another important reason behind this trend is the access that loanword phonology provides to synchronic L1 phonological processes which serve as a direct window into the working of many aspects of L1 otherwise hidden from the scholar’s sight.

In view of the considerable interest that loanword adaptation has received in recent phonological studies, it is surprising how few works have been devoted to the investigation of this process in Russian. While lexical borrowings from English into Russian have been well described from the viewpoint of morphology, graphics as well as semantics (e.g. Aristova, 1978; Lychyk, 1994; Maximova, 2002; Proshina & Ettkin, 2005; Dyakov, 2001/2012; A lyunina & Nagel, 2020 etc.), the role of phonetics and phonology has not been given due attention. The majority of analyses are superficial in character and offer only a very general overview of the possible adaptation scenarios at best (Shimomura, 1956; Benson, 1959; Janurik 2010 etc.). Those aiming at a more in-depth examination ←19 | 20→of the phenomenon are often outdated and do not reflect accurately the present-day tendencies and new theoretical approaches (e.g. Holden, 1980).

This monograph sets itself two major goals: descriptive and theoretical. We intend to provide a more comprehensive description of the patterns and mechanisms behind the adaptation of selected English consonants and vowels in Russian anglicisms and to examine important theoretical implications which the adaptation facts suggest. The analysed data fall into two categories. The first of them involves established loans found in Dyakov’s Dictionary of Anglicisms of the Russian Language. The second set of data comes from a novel experiment on the online adaptation of 57 English words by 41 native speakers of Russian with no command of English. The latter offers a significant insight into the perception of English words by Russian listeners in the course of adaptation. Integrated borrowings, on the other hand, often show a combined effect of various other factors such as orthography, the type of source accent, time period and different channels of borrowing. We examine both types of loans and juxtapose the major nativisation patterns revealed within each of the two groups. Their comparison will shed more light on the mechanisms of the nativisation process. To our knowledge, this is the first such study based on a rich body of old and new data on loanwords and recent analytical models.

The key adaptation patterns uncovered in this monograph are formally analysed within the optimality-theoretic (OT) framework (Prince & Smolensky, 1993; McCarthy & Prince, 1995). The model in question provides an excellent tool for a theoretical interpretation of the loan adaption facts through the application of relevant constraints operating in the adaptors’ L1 phonology. We argue that there is no need for a separate loan phonology component in the grammar and the variation in the data is attributable to a different ranking of the same set of constraints. Thus, the analysis of the major nativisation scenarios offers an opportunity to verify the major OT assumptions and mechanisms against the loan data.

Details

Pages: 286
Year: 2022
ISBN (PDF): 9783631884621
ISBN (ePUB): 9783631885246
ISBN (MOBI): 9783631885253
ISBN (Hardcover): 9783631883242
DOI: 10.3726/b19999
Language: English
Publication date: 2022 (October)
Keywords: loanword phonology Optimality Theory online loanwords establish loanwords loanword nativisation
Published: Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Warszawa, Wien, 2022. 286 pp., 27 fig. b/w, 66 tables.

Biographical notes

Kateryna Laidler (Author)

Kateryna Laidler is an Assistant Professor at the Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin, Poland, where she teaches courses in phonetics and phonology. The topics she has published on include loanword phonology, English and Slavic phonology and Optimality Theory.

From <I>Jazz</I> and <I>Rap</I> to <I>Dzhaz</I> and <I>Rep</I>