This is the first study that empirically investigates preposition placement across all clause types. The study compares first-language (British English) and second-language (Kenyan English) data and will therefore appeal to readers interested in world Englishes. Over 100 authentic corpus examples are discussed in the text, which will appeal to those who want to see 'real data'
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 00:11:45 +0100 From: Marcin Kilarski <email@example.com> Subject: English in Europe
EDITOR: Görlach, Manfred TITLE: English in Europe PUBLISHER: Oxford University Press YEAR: 2002
Marcin Kilarski, School of English, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland
[This review was originally submitted in January 2005, but not received. We apologize to the reviewer, editor, and publisher for the delay in posting it. --Eds.]
The book under review is a collection of 16 chapters and constitutes a part of a research project on the influence of English on selected European languages. The project includes also the "Dictionary of European anglicisms" (Görlach 2001) and the "Annotated bibliography of European anglicisms" (Görlach 2002), together with the volume "English words abroad" (Görlach 2003). The following languages are treated: Germanic (German, Dutch, Norwegian and Icelandic), Romance (French, Spanish, Italian and Romanian), Slavic (Russian, Polish, Croatian and Bulgarian) and four other languages (Finnish, Hungarian, Albanian and Greek).
The collection consists of a List of Contributors (pp. vii-viii), and an Introduction by the Editor (pp. 1-12), followed by 16 chapters dealing with the individual languages, and three indexes (of subjects (pp. 331- 334), names (pp. 335-336), and anglicisms (pp. 337-339)). In addition to some methodological issues involved in the project, the Introduction contains an overview of the results of the volume, within the same format as the main chapters. The 16 chapters have been written by the contributors to the Dictionary and the Bibliography; they have the same structure, with the chapter on German serving as a model. An overview is first presented of the chronology, origins and types of English influence. Sociolinguistic and political aspects are then considered, including a chronology of purist phases, regional and stylistic differences, the rate of innovation and obsolescence, the role of mediating languages and finally the status of English in education. The contents are as follows:
Görlach, Manfred. Introduction (pp. 1-12) Busse, Ulrich and Manfred Görlach. German (pp. 13-36) Berteloot, Amand and Nicoline van der Sijs. Dutch (pp. 37-56) Graedler, Anne-Line. Norwegian (pp. 57-81) Kvaran, Guðrún and Ásta Svavarsdóttir. Icelandic (pp. 82-107) Humbley, John. French (pp. 108-127) Rodríguez González, Félix. Spanish (pp. 128-150) Pulcini, Virginia. Italian (pp. 151-167) Constantinescu, Ilinca, Victoria Popovici and Ariadna Stefanescu. Romanian (pp. 168-194) Maximova, Tamara. Russian (pp. 195-212) Manczak-Wohlfeld, Elzbieta. Polish (pp. 213-228) Filipovic, Rudolf. Croatian (pp. 229-240) Alexieva, Nevena. Bulgarian (pp. 241-260) Battarbee, Keith. Finnish (pp. 261-276) Farkas, Judit and Veronika Kniezsa. Hungarian (pp. 277-290) Ködderitzsch, Rolf and Manfred Görlach. Albanian (pp. 291-300) Stathi, Ekaterini. Modern Greek (pp. 301-329)
The subsequent three sections of the chapters deal with the four types of integration of English loanwords and are preceded with contrastive analyses of English and the given borrowing language. The analysis of phonological assimilation focuses on substitutions in cases of missing equivalent phonemes or contrasts, and distributional differences. Graphemic integration poses a problem in languages using a non-Latin script (Russian, Bulgarian, Greek) but also in the case of missing graphemes or different phoneme-grapheme correspondences. The next section deals with the morphology of anglicisms, including the inflection of the individual lexical categories, the derivation of selected types of nouns, verbs and adjectives, and the word-formation processes in compounds, combining forms and calques. Finally, semantic changes are considered such as narrowing or the development of new semantic features in the borrowing language.
Two further sections deal with related sociolinguistic and stylistic aspects, as well as the documentation of three forms of lexical influence - - by way of borrowing, replacement (including calques, hybrids and semantic loans) and pseudo-anglicisms. This section includes examples of different types of calques, arranged with respect to the degree of acceptance, as a supplement to the material collected in the Dictionary. Each chapter is concluded with an attempt at predicting the future of anglicisms in the given language, as well as an overview of previous research with a bibliography.
This collection is extremely valuable as it makes easily accessible a large amount of data that has so far been available only in publications on the individual languages or has not been available at all, as in the account of English influence on Albanian. This allows us to compare the influence of English on the 16 European languages with respect to several aspects, e.g., the degree and length of English influence, tendencies in the adaptation of English loanwords, status of the borrowing languages, degree of restrictive attitudes or presence of dialectal differences. While the study is not concerned with non-lexical influence, examples are also given of developments in phonology and the writing system (new phonemes, graphemes, phoneme-grapheme correspondences), and morphology and syntax (retention of the English plural and derivational affixes as well as new word-formation patterns). In addition, the volume makes an important contribution to future research on English influence, as it provides an ideal starting point for further studies, including BA and MA theses, articles, dissertations and monographs, as well as more systematic large-scale projects.
However, it should be noted at this point that the information given on the cover and in the Introduction, according to which "[t]here has never been a survey of the type presented here" (p. 2), is misleading, since a comparable study, albeit less complete and systematic, was attempted in Filipovic (1982) (which is notably missing as a separate entry in the bibliographies in the whole volume).
The following comments concern a number of methodological and technical problems which should be taken care of before the publication of the 2nd edition of the collection planned for 2008-9.
The section "Pronunciation" might have been divided into subsections for consonants, vowels, etc., as has been done in some chapters (Dutch, Norwegian, Romanian, Greek). In addition, the contrastive analysis of inventories could have been illustrated with tables and charts in all chapters, and not only for Norwegian, Icelandic, Italian (for consonants), Russian and Greek. No attempt at a comparison has been made in the chapter on Croatian and only types of substitution are mentioned, together with examples. Likewise, the section in the chapter on Polish largely consists of a list of substitutions for vowels and consonants. As regards the section "Graphemic integration", tables with the transliteration of graphemes might have been given for all three languages using a non-Latin script (Russian, Bulgarian, Greek), and not only for Greek. A comparison of graphemic systems is missing for Croatian. Finally, several parts of the chapters are missing, including whole sections (Finnish) and examples of individual types of anglicisms (Dutch, Icelandic, Polish, Greek); irrelevant information is provided in some sections (Bulgarian, Finnish).
To begin with, no explicit statement is given in the Introduction about the structural differences between the 16 languages. The Editor does not mention the fact that these "European" languages include in fact two non- Indo-European languages (Finnish, Hungarian), and this contrast underlines several structural differences. In this connection, some of the statements in the book are unclear or misleading, e.g., the use of the terms "European" and "Indo-European", as in "European languages tend to have two or three grammatical genders" (p. 7), which is problematic with respect to Finnish and Hungarian, and in "English and Russian are from different language families" (p. 200). As regards regional differences, there is a certain imbalance in the treatment of dialects spoken in Europe and the Americas. For example, both varieties are treated in the French chapter, while the chapter on Spanish discusses differences between the Spanish-speaking areas closer and away from the US but does not refer to dialectal differences within Spain. Further, no reference is made to other languages spoken in Spain. Likewise, while American English is regarded by most authors as the primary source of influence, British English is chosen instead as the model in pronunciation (cf. however the references to English regional differences in pronunciation in the Greek chapter).
Several problems appear in the sections "Calques" and "Forms of linguistic borrowing", which provide examples of borrowings, replacements (calques, hybrids and semantic loans) and pseudo-anglicisms. First, if the terms "unadapted borrowings", "quotation words", "code-switching" are used throughout the volume, the basis for the distinction might have been provided in the Introduction; the only arguments given in the chapter on Romanian remain unclear. Otherwise, the terms are largely redundant since they are not illustrated with any examples in most chapters (only isolated examples are provided for French, Italian, Romanian, Russian and Croatian). Second, an inconsistency between the Introduction and the model chapter on German in the use of terms concerning translations has resulted in further inconsistencies in the other chapters. In the Introduction three types of translations are given, i.e. loan translations, loan renditions and loan creations, together with semantic calques for semantic extensions of native simple and compound words. It is explicitly stated that loan translations constitute "perfect rendering of constituents" (p. 9), while loan renditions involve change in meaning or word order, as in Romance forms of the type N+Adj or N+de+N. However, in the German chapter we learn that (loan) translations reflect "the morphologic structure of the English complex item as closely as the structure of the receiving language permits" (p. 29). This suggests that the above-mentioned Romance forms should not be classified as renditions but translations. Most chapters follow the terminology in the German chapter; thus examples of translations include also loan renditions according to the terms in the Introduction (e.g., French, Spanish, Italian, Romanian, Croatian, Albanian). In addition, further classifications or terms have been proposed which are absent in the Introduction and the German chapter: a classification based on etymology (Dutch, Italian), and the term "free translation" used for "loan creation" (Dutch) or "loan rendition" (French). The terms "loan translation" and "calque" are used generically in the chapter on Icelandic with no further classification provided. Finally, no attempt at a classification of calques is made in the chapters on Polish and Finnish.
It seems that considering the amount of material collected and analysed, in places the argumentation could have been taken further, especially since this is encouraged in the opening remarks in the Introduction (p. 1). One might thus question the validity of accounts such as the following, dealing with stylistic and sociolinguistic aspects of anglicisms in Polish: "Results from the Dictionary of European Anglicisms have only confirmed what had been known impressionistically before and is typical of other languages as well; most of the Anglicisms in Polish are either technical or colloquial." (p. 226). More seriously, the volume does not allow the reader to formulate any quantitative comparisons since no figures are given on the incidence of anglicisms in the Dictionary (with the exception of a single figure given for Bulgarian). The figures which are otherwise given from other sources are not comparable.
Apart from that, a number of misleading, erroneous or vague statements are made in the individual chapters. For example, the different realization of /r/ and the lack of aspiration and the velar nasal in Russian are described as "peculiarities [which] are important for language teaching but irrelevant for the borrowing process" (p. 202); likewise, we learn that the presence of vocalic differences between English and Bulgarian "presents a problem mainly for language teaching, whereas in lexical borrowing it leads only to doublet forms." (p. 245). Even if we disregard the obvious need for substitutions, such statements conflict with accounts of changes in the phonology of the borrowing languages which can be attributed to English (as in Bulgarian, p. 245). With respect to morphological adaptation, it is unclear why in Russian only uninflected animates are assigned on the basis of "[n]atural or semantic gender" (p. 203); likewise, no arguments are given why in Greek "[l]oanwords are assigned gender according to a series of rules which apply in a fixed order." (p. 317).
d) Formal Details
In the following, examples are given of errors and inconsistencies which occur in the volume; abbreviations are used for language names, while numbers in parentheses indicate the number of occurrences. Several of these problems also concern the Dictionary (see Ptaszynski and Kilarski 2002/2003). Standard two-letter abbreviations are used for language names.
i) Translation: Generally no translation is given if anglicisms are similar to the source; however, it is difficult to say whether examples of calques or native compounds in Hungarian and Albanian are properly classified without literal translation. Missing or inconsistent translation is given for anglicisms (assimilated, hybrids, pseudo- anglicisms) in Ro, Ru, Po, and for native words in Ge, Sp, Ro, Ru, Po, Cr, Hu, Al; translations of examples appear in the native language instead of English in Sp.
ii) Use of terms: predicative (postpositive) (It); Ur-Germanic (Proto- Germanic) (Fi);
iii) Erroneous or unclear examples chosen (e.g., erroneous source language or lack of features suggested): Ge (2), Du (1), Po (3), Cr (1), Fi (1);
iv) Problems with grammar/style: Introduction (1), Ic (2), It (1), Ro (1);
v) Spelling: in the List of contributors (2), Ge (3), Ic (3) (e.g., drills for trills), Sp (1), Ru (1) (honophthongs for monophthongs), Gr (2); the Editor's name in the blurb is given as 'Gölach';
vi) References: Problems in the reference sections include missing or unclear references (Ge (1), Du (4), No (1), Ic (1), Fr (2), Sp (3), Ro (3), Ru (1), Po (3), Fi (2)); only last names given in citations (Sp, Ro (several)); inconsistent use of full first names in the bibliographies, given for most authors in most chapters but largely missing in No, Po, Ru; missing publishers (similarly, largely missing in Ru, Po); lack of translation of titles (Ic (2)); and occasional spelling errors.
vii) Phonetic Symbols: Greater care might have been taken in phonetic transcription and the use of phonetic symbols. Problems include: erroneous symbols for English and native sounds (Ge (1), Du (1), Nw (2), It (3), Ro (5), Ru (5), Po (6), Bu (3), Fi (1), Hu (1), Al (7), Gr (16)); inconsistent use of symbols for English and native sounds (Ge (3), Ru (3), Po (2), Al (2), Gr (8)); erroneous transcription of anglicisms, English words and native words (Fi (1), Gr (3)); inconsistent transcription of anglicisms, English words and native words (Ge (2), Po (9), Cr (1), Bu (1), Fi (1), Gr (1), Al (1)); erroneous formatting, with the English voiceless interdental fricative in italics (Ge, Du, Fr, Sp, It, Po, Cr, Hu); use of slashes for phonetic transcription (e.g., Po, Bu, Gr); lack of slashes in phonemic transcription (Gr); and inconsistent marking of stress by way of accents or double underline (Fi, Hu, Al, Gr), with single underline also used in transcription for emphasis (e.g., Ro).
viii) Other Symbols and Formatting: unclear use of asterisks (Ge, Ru, Po, Index); examples unclear due to formatting (use of spaces and backslashes) (It, Ro, Po); typographic errors (Po, Bu, Gr); occasional smaller type for phonetic characters; the character edh without italics (Ic);
In conclusion, these problems do not detract from the overall value of the collection. The volume edited by Görlach is a must for anyone with an interest in English influence and language contact generally, and more specifically in the developments in the 16 European languages included in the project. Since in several countries most of the research on anglicisms has been done by those who specialize in English, potential readers of the volume include also scholars, students and professionals who have primarily dealt with the borrowing languages and who may have missed important generalizations concerning other languages under English influence.
Filipovic, Rudolf ed. 1982. The English element in European languages. vol. 2. Zagreb: University of Zagreb.
Görlach, Manfred. 2003. English words abroad. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Görlach, Manfred ed. 2001. A dictionary of European anglicisms. A usage dictionary of anglicisms in sixteen European languages. Oxford: OUP.
Görlach, Manfred ed. 2002. An annotated bibliography of European anglicisms. Oxford: OUP.
Ptaszynski, Marcin, and Kilarski, Marcin. 2002-2003. Do they have 'autoscooters' in Poland? Investigating anglicisms. [Review article of A dictionary of European anglicisms. A usage dictionary of anglicisms in sixteen European languages and An annotated bibliography of European anglicisms edited by Manfred Görlach]. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 38:273-305. URL: http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~kilarski/research/download/g_review.pdf
ABOUT THE REVIEWER:
ABOUT THE REVIEWER
Marcin Kilarski is an assistant professor at the School of English, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan. His work has primarily dealt with language contact (Phd on English loanwords in the Scandinavian languages), and typology and historiography of linguistics (Habilitationsschrift in progress on nominal classification systems).