There is no agreement on the etymology and meaning of Phoen. ḥsp in the Aḥirom sarcophagus inscription, but the corresponding Egyptian verb ḥsb, “to break”, may help to resolve both issues. In support, several other words where Eg. /b/ corresponds to Semitic /p/ are discussed.
Five years ago Vasilis Orfanos published an excellent monograph on the Turkish lexical borrowings attested in the Cretan dialect of Modern Greek (Orfanos 2014). In this paper the present authors increase the number of the possible Cretan Turkisms, providing and explaining additional items not listed in Orfanos’s book.
In their handling of colour, Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayan region show multiple lexical similarities to one another as well as apparent influences from more dominant languages such as Hindi, Nepali, Tibetan, and Chinese. As an understudied family, Tibeto-Burman languages also serve as an important site to explore modern colour theory and conceptualisation. Outlier languages in the Tibeto-Burman family that do not appear to follow either traditional or revised versions of Brent Berlin & Paul Kay's theories are of particular significance. This survey provides a systematic review of the existing literature and a baseline of comparative colour terminology for these generally vulnerable and often endangered languages.
“How come you’re not shipping them??? They’re canon”: a look at the language of Italian fandom – The aim of this article is to examine a relatively recent phenomenon in the language of fandom, i.e. various communities of fans that form around a cultural event or artifact, such as a book, a TV show, a movie, etc. This research is located within fan studies, however, it mainly investigates the linguistic aspects of being a fan in Italian. The distinctive feature of the language of fandom as a specific variety, associated with a particular topic and activity and mediated by Internet communication tools, is a specialist lexicon, understandable only to community members. The article concentrates on loanwords from English which in the case of Italian primarily comprise the vocabulary of fandom.
The borrowed lexis from the Polish language contained in the Russian-Ukrainian dictionaries of the early twentieth century is analyzed in the article. Its state and prevalence in the modern Ukrainian language is being clarified. Polonisms that are now out of use or on the periphery of the Ukrainian literary language have been investigated. Examples of actualized words were considered.
The article deals with the patterns of segmental adaptation of Polish voiceless affricates in initial and fi nal CC (consonant + consonant) clusters by native speakers of English. The data have been collected in an online loanword adaptation experiment in which 30 native speakers of Southern British English reproduced Polish words containing such sequences. The major problem posed by the data is the divergent adaptation of the post-alveolar /͡tʂ/ vs. the pre-palatal /͡tɕ/, with the former substituted mainly with the coronal plosive [t] and the latter realised as the palato-alveolar affricate [͡tʃ]. It is argued that these patterns of nativisation are due to the highlyranked IDENT-IO[dist] constraint, which militates against the modifi cation in the value of the feature [distributed]. Furthermore, it is demonstrated that the experimental results provide evidence in favour of the fundamental assumptions underlying the phonological approach to loan assimilation, namely the phonological input view as well as the faithful perception view.
The purpose of this article is to show the function and frequency of Turkish loanwords in modern Croatian language based on a questionnaire survey. Respondents were diversified in age, gender nad origin. The subject of analysis were stylistically marked loanwords that have fallen victim to a puristic language policy pursued by the Croatian linguists in popular language guides, especially in the 1990s. As survey results show, these activities aimed at removing Turkish loanwords from Croatian languague proved to be ineffective. Most of these words are still being used by the Croats simultaneously with the native synonyms. Puristic view declared by some of the respondents does not affect the usage of the Turkish loanwords in unofficial situations.
Two types of names for ‘Turkish delight’ are known in the Slavic languages: rahat-lokum ~ ratluk, and lokum. Even though most etymological dictionaries derive them from the same Arabo-Turkish etymon, their different structures are not discussed and the phonetic differences not explained. The aim of this paper is to establish the relative chronology of changes made to the original phrase, as well as to point out some problems which still remain more or less obscure.
Out of concern for language ‘purity’ ‘Polonizing’ dictionaries/dictionaries of Polish equivalents were published in Poland, whose authors (language purists) aimed to replace words/expressions of foreign origin with native-language equivalents (or with assimilated loanwords). Besides Latinisms or Gallicisms under criticism were also German loanwords. The main focus of the paper is on the pre-sentation of the dictionary by E.S. Kortowicz (1891), in which the author seeks to eliminate Germanisms from the Polish language.
Following G. Bellmann, the article divides the German loanwords in Czech and Slovak roughly into two groups, namely those lexical units that represent a basic code extension (= type A) and those that are used immediately after adoption as (approximately) synonymous lexical duplicates of already existing designations (= type B). While type A words have the best chances of lasting integration, type B words elicit a competitive situation between old and new designations, which can result in substitution, negative integration or semantic diversification. Furthermore, the paper deals with idiosyncrasies of German loanword integration such as the expressiveness of German loanwords in Czech and Slovak and the emotional attitude towards German loanwords in those languages. The article also discusses the causality of displacement and substitution of German loanwords, subsequently elaborates on the loss of terms and realities, the change in domain-specific language use, the role of language awareness and language culture, the loss of immediate contact areas as well as the question of prestige, and concludes with an outlook on future developments.
The aim of this article is to verify the data regarding the period when selected foreign nouns were introduced to the Russian language in relation to information provided by Russian dictionaries. A corpus created for the purpose of this paper consists of source texts from the years 1600‒1670 – the time preceding the rule of Peter the Great. The verification of data from Russian dictionaries is expected to show that, contrary to popular opinion, a significant number of foreign words were introduced to the Russian language even a century earlier than suggested in etymology and historical dictionaries. This observation can be proved by the analysis of literary monuments of the first half of the 17th century that have not been thoroughly investigated.
The article is devoted to the problem of language interaction in Polish and East Slavic languages phraseology. Polish had a signifi cant impact on the formation of the phraseology of the East Slavic languages of the late XVI – early XIX century, which led to the emergence of similar Polish-Ukrainian-Belarusian-Russian phraseological units. It is often very difficult to determine the donor language. In some cases, the idiom (or proverb) could migrate from one language to another, enriching itself with new elements (in terms of vocabulary or semantics) and returning to the donor language in a new capacity. In the search for the source of phraseology in the article the authors propose to consider the date of the earliest fixation of the unit, the extended context of its use, which may contain linguistic or ethnographic details that help to identify the donor language. The article investigates the origin of one of the most obscure and recalcitrant items in Slavic phraseology: Polish zbić z pantałyku, Belorussian збіць з панталыку, Ukrainian збити з пантелику and Russian сбить с панталыку. In all four languages the meaning is ‘to confuse, befuddle, baffle’. This phraseological expression is shown to be first attested in Ukrainian at the end of the 18th cent.; from Ukrainian it was borrowed into Russian and then migrated into Polish. It is proposed that the expression originated in Ukrainian vernacular on the basis of Polish loanword pontalik ‘ornament, jewel’ adopted in Ukrainian as пантелик.