Ministry OF HIGHER AND SECONDARY SPECIAL EDUCATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN

GULISTAN STATE UNIVERSITY

The English and Literature section

& # 171 ; The borrowed words procedure development in English & # 187 ;

Gulistan & # 8209 ; 2006

Introduction

Borrowing as agencies of refilling the vocabulary of contemporary Uzbek is of much greater importance and is relatively active merely in the field of scientific nomenclature and social-political nomenclature as many footings are frequently made up of borrowed morphemes, largely morphemes from classical linguistic communications.

The portion played by adoptions in the vocabulary of a linguistic communication depends upon the history of each given linguistic communication, being conditioned by direct lingual contacts and political, economic and cultural relationships between states. Uzbek history contains countless occasions for all types of such contacts. It is the vocabulary system of each linguistic communication that is peculiarly antiphonal to every alteration in the life of the speech production community.

The development of the contacts between states and the laterality of English linguistic communication as concern linguistic communication cause a large flow of words into Uzbek linguistic communication, therefore enriching its word & # 8211 ; stock.

The influence which English exerted on our linguistic communication is seen in all facets of life, societal, political and barely any walk of live was unaffected by it. The first point to be emphasized is that here we are non covering with wholly new thoughts introduced from a different type of civilisation and civilization, but instead the imposing by a dominant race of their ain footings for thoughts which were already familiar to the topic race. Such a province of personal businesss evidently means that there will originate braces of words the indigen and the foreign term for the same thought and a battle for endurance between the two, so that one of the words was finally lost from the linguistic communication, or survived merely with some distinction of significance.

Borrowed words have been called & # 171 ; The mileposts of linguistics & # 187 ; & # 8211 ; said O. Jesperson & # 8211 ; because they permit us ( demo us ) to repair gratefully the day of the months of lingual alterations. They show us the class of civilisation and give us information of the states & # 187 ; . The well-known linguist Shuchard said & # 171 ; No linguistic communication is wholly pure & # 187 ; , that all the linguistic communications are assorted. Borrowed words enter the linguistic communication as a consequence of influence of two chief causes of factors ; lingual and extra-linguistic.

Borrowed words have been considered in many scientific plants, monographs and publications. But elaborate analysis of words borrowed into Uzbek from English in item hasn & # 8217 ;
t been done so far.

The chief constitutional portion of the vocabulary system of any linguistic communication is formed by borrowed words. Merely borrowed words which were loaned from English into Uzbek have been considered in the making paper.

The actuality
of the making paper is determined by increased involvement of lingual in analyzing the beginning of words and the beginning of adoptions. Still much is left to look into.

The intent
of the making paper is to uncover borrowed words that were loaned from English into Uzbek and find the beginning and the beginning of them.

The undertakings of the probe include:

& # 183 ; to uncover English adoptions in Uzbek linguistic communication.

& # 183 ; to find the grounds of enriching the vocabulary of any linguistic communication.

& # 183 ; to look into the correlativity of adoptions with native words.

The job under consideration in the making paper possesses definite theoretical value,
for, fist of all, it is based on the rules of attack, which is, revealed on all the phase of probe. The consequences of the probe present involvement for a figure of Fieldss of modern-day linguistics: lingual typology, theory of interlingual rendition, languishing, lexicology, theoretical grammar, lexicography.

Practical significance
of the consequences of probe consists in the fact they can be used in:

1. in learning English for Uzbek and Russian pupils.

2. in roll uping practical classs of English.

3. in roll uping bilingual lexicons.

4. in composing talks on lexicology and theory of interlingual rendition.

Probes have been carried out on a huge linguistic communication stuff, based on lexicographic beginnings. We used chiefly monolingual, bilingual and encyclopaedic lexicons.

The construction
of the making paper.

It includes debut, chapters, decision, list of used literature.

Chapter I & # 171 ; Borrowed words and their belongingss & # 187 ; is dedicated to the survey of borrowed words, their beginning and their significance.

In the 2nd
Chapter the job of assimilation of borrowed words has been discussed.

1. Borrowed words and their belongingss

1.1 Etymological study of the word-stock of a linguistic communication

Etymologically the vocabulary of any linguistic communication consists of two groups & # 8211 ; the native words and the borrowed words. E.g. , in its 15 century long history recorded in written manuscripts the English linguistic communication happened to come in long and close contact with several other linguistic communications, chiefly Latin, French and Old Norse ( or Scandinavian ) . The etymological lingual analysis showed that the borrowed stock of words is lager than the native stock of words. Uzbek linguistic communication, every bit good as English has been in long and near touch with other linguistic communications, chiefly Arabic, Persian, Russian.

A native word is a word which belongs to the original stock. An English native word is a word which belongs to Anglo-Saxon beginning. To the native words we include words from Common Germanic linguistic communication and from Indo-germanic stock.

A borrowed word, a loan word or adoption is a word taken over from another linguistic communication and modified in phonemic form, spelling, paradigm or intending harmonizing to the criterions of the linguistic communication.

The native words in English are farther subdivided by historical linguistics into those of the Indo-germanic stock and those of Common Germanic beginning. The native words of Uzbek linguistic communication belongs to Turkic linguistic communication household, the beginning of which based on Altay-Yenisey manuscripts. It has been noticed that native words readily fall into definite semantic groups. Among them we find footings of affinity: male parent & # 8209 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1072 ; , mother & # 8209 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1072 ; , boy & # 8209 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1075 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1083 ; , girl & # 8209 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1079 ; , brother & # 8209 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1072 ; etc ; words calling the most of import objects and phenomena of nature: Sun & # 8209 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1105 ; & # 1096 ; , moon & # 8209 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1081 ; , star & # 8209 ; & # 1102 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1076 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1079 ; , wind & # 8209 ; & # 1096 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1084 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1083 ; , H2O & # 8209 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1074 ; ; names of animate beings and birds: bull & # 8209 ; & # 1093 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1079 ; , cat & # 8209 ; & # 1084 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1096 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1082 ; , goose & # 8209 ; & # 1075 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1079 ; ; parts of human organic structure: arm & # 8209 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1083 ; , ear & # 8209 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1082 ; , oculus & # 8209 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1079 ; , bosom & # 8211 ; & # 1102 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1082 ;

Wordss belonging to the subsets of the native word & # 8211 ; stock are for the most portion characterized by a broad scope of lexical and grammatical valency, high frequence value and a developed lexical ambiguity ; they are frequently monosyllabic, show great word & # 8211 ; constructing power and enter a figure of fit looks, e. g. , ticker DE Weccan is one of the 500 most frequent English words. It may be used as a verb in more than ten different sentence forms, with or without object and adverbial qualifiers and combined with different categories of words.

1.2 Borrowed words, sorts of borrowed words

Borrowed words are words taken over from other linguistic communications. Many linguists consider foreign influence plays the most of import function in the history of any linguistic communication.

But the grammar and phonic system are really stable and are non frequently influenced by other linguistic communications.

For illustration, in its 15 century long history recorded in written manuscripts the English linguistic communication happened to come in long and close contact with several other linguistic communications chiefly Latin, French and Old Norse. The great inflow of adoptions from these beginnings can be accounted for by a figure of historical causes. Due to the great influence of the Roman civilisation Latin was for a long clip used in England as the linguistic communication of acquisition and faith. Old Norse was the linguistic communication of the vanquishers who were on the same degree of societal and cultural development and who nudged instead easy with the local population in the 9th
, 10th
and the first half of the 11th
century. Gallic ( Norman idiom ) was the linguistic communication of the other vanquishers. Who brought with them a batch of new states of a higher societal system developed feudal system it was the linguistic communication of upper categories, of official paperss and school direction from the center of the 11th
century to the terminal of the 14th
century.

Uzbek linguistic communication besides developed under the influence of Persian, Arabic and subsequently Russian linguistic communications. Iranian linguistic communication spread in our district in 500 & # 8211 ; 300BC, since that clip peoples of Central Asia have been in close contact with Iran, the place of birth of Iranian linguistic communication. Till 15th
century it was & # 171 ; Fashion & # 187 ; and desirable to compose verse forms and prosaic plants in Persian, though old Turkic linguistic communication was besides used among state, chiefly by ordinary people. In the VII century Arabs conquered Central Asia, transporting their faith and linguistic communication to the peoples. Therefore, Arabic linguistic communication was prevailing boulder clay XI & # 8211 ; XII centuries. Books were written in Arabic linguistic communication excessively. e.g. outstanding scientists and bookmans Avicenna ( Ibn Sina ) , Farabi, Beruni created their plants in Arabic linguistic communication. Merely in Fifteen century Alisher Navoi, great author and solon proved the beauty and importance of the Turkic linguistic communication, get downing to compose his best chef-d’oeuvres in this linguistic communication, though he knew Iranian and Arabic languages really good. And get downing with Eighteen century Uzbek linguistic communication was under the influence of Russian linguistic communication. In the survey of the borrowed component in English the chief accent is as a ruled placed on the in-between English period and in Uzbek it is in-between Turkic linguistic communication.

Borrowings of subsequently periods became the object of probe merely in resent old ages. These probes have shown that the flow of adoptions has been steady and uninterrupted. They refer to assorted Fieldss of societal & # 8211 ; political, scientific and cultural life. A big part of them ( 41 % ) is scientific and proficient footings.

When we speak about the function of native and borrowed words in the linguistic communication we must non take into consideration merely the figure of them but their semantic, stylistic character, their word edifice ability, frequence value, collocability ( valency ) and the productiveness of their word-building forms.

If we approach to the survey of the function of native and borrowed words from this point of position we see, though the native words are non legion they play an of import function in the English and Uzbek linguistic communications. They have value, great word & # 8211 ; organizing power, broad collocability high frequence, many significances and they are stylistically impersonal. Almost all words of native beginning belong to really of import semantic groups. The figure and character of the borrowed words tell us of the dealingss between the peoples, the degree of their civilization, etc. It is for this ground that adoptions have frequently been called the mileposts of history.

The well known linguist Shuchard said & # 171 ; No linguistic communication is wholly pure & # 187 ; , that all the linguistic communications are assorted.

It must be pointed out that while the general historical grounds for borrowing from different linguistic communications have been studied with a considerable grade of through the strictly lingual grounds for adoptions are still unfastened to probe. The figure and character of adoptions do non merely depend on the historical conditions, on the nature and length of the contacts, but besides on the grade of the familial and structural propinquity of linguistic communications concerned. The closer the linguistic communications the deeper and more versatile is the influence.

Borrowed words enter the linguistic communication as a consequence of influence of two chief causes or factors: lingual and extra-linguistic. Economic, cultural, industrial, political dealingss of talkers of the linguistic communication with other states refer to extra-linguistic factors.

For illustration, due to the great influence of the Roman civilisation Latin was for a long clip used in England as the linguistic communication of acquisition and faith. Old Norse of the Norse folk was the linguistic communication of the vanquishers. Gallic ( Norman idiom ) was the linguistic communication of the other vanquishers who brought with them a batch of new impressions of a higher societal system, developed feudal system. It was the linguistic communication of upper categories, of official paperss and school. The same is in Uzbek linguistic communication. Due to the enlargement of Islam faith, Arabic was used for centuries in Central Asia as the linguistic communication of scientific discipline and faith [ 1 ]
. For about two centuries Russian linguistic communication keep a dominant place in the states of former Soviet Union. It was precedence to cognize Russian and it was a linguistic communication of communicating and friendly relationship. These factors are extra-linguistic 1s.

The absence of tantamount words in the linguistic communication to show new topics or a phenomena makes people to borrow words. E.g. the words football, volleyball, pitchman in Uzbek ; to conserve the lingual agencies, i.e. to utilize a foreign word alternatively of a long native looks and others are called lingual causes.

The closer the two interacting linguistic communications are in construction the easier it is for words of one linguistic communication to perforate into the other.

Borrowings enter the linguistic communication in two ways through unwritten address ( by immediate contact between the people ) and through written address by indirect contact through books ) Words borrowed orally are normally short and they undergo more alterations in the act of adoptive parent. Written adoptions are frequently instead long and they are unknown to many people, talking the linguistic communication.

We distinguish interlingual rendition loans, adoptions proper and semantic loans. Translation loans are words and looks formed from the stuff already bing in the linguistic communication but harmonizing to forms taken from another linguistic communication, by manner of actual morpheme & # 8211 ; for & # 8211 ; morpheme interlingual rendition, e.g. wall-newspaper & # 8211 ; & # 1076 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1074 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1081 ; & # 1075 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1079 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1072 ; .

The term & # 171 ; semantic loan & # 187 ; is used to denote the development in a word of a new significance due to the influence of a related word in another linguistic communication. The English word innovator
meant & # 171 ; adventurer & # 187 ; and & # 171 ; one who is among the first in new Fieldss of activity. & # 187 ; now under the influence of the Russian word & # 171 ; & # 1055 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1088 ;
& # 187 ; it has come to intend & # 171 ; a member of the Young Pioneers & # 8217 ; Organization & # 187 ;

Borrowings proper are words which are taken from another linguistic communication with their sound in writing signifiers and their significance.

1.3 The influence of adoptions on the vocabulary of the linguistic communication

The figure of adoptions on Old English was meager. In the Middle English period there was an inflow of loans. It is frequently contended, that since the Norman conquering adoption has been the main factor in the enrichment of the English vocabulary and as a consequence there was a crisp diminution in the productiveness and function of word-formation. Historical grounds, nevertheless, testifies to the fact that throughout its full history, even in the periods of the mightiest inflows of adoptions, other processes no less intense, were in operation & # 8211 ; word & # 8211 ; formation and semantic development, which involved both native and borrowed elements. If the appraisal of the function of adoptions is based on the survey of words recorded in the lexicon, it is easy to overrate the consequence of the foreign words, as the figure of native words is highly little compared with the figure of adoptions recorded. The lone true manner to gauge the relation of the indigen to the borrowed component is to see the two as really used in address. If one counts every word used, including repeats, in some reading affair, the proportion of native to borrowed words will be rather different. On such a count, every author uses considerable more native words than adoptions. Shakespeare, for illustration has 90 % , Milton 81 % , Tennyson 88 % . This shows how of import is the relatively little karyons of native words. Different adoption are marked by different frequence value. Those good established in the vocabulary may be as frequent in address as native words, whereas other occur really seldom. The great figure of adoptions in English left some imprint upon the linguistic communication. The first consequence of foreign influence is observed in the volume of its vocabulary. Due to its history the English linguistic communication, more than any other modern linguistic communication, has absorbed foreign elements in its vocabulary. But the acceptance of foreign words must non be understood as were measures change. Any importing into the lexical system brings about semantic and stylistic alterations in the words of this linguistic communication and alterations in its synonymic groups.

It has been mentioned that when borrowed words were indistinguishable in intending with those already in English the adoptive word really frequently displaced the native word. In most instances, nevertheless, the borrowed words and synonymous native words ( or words borrowed earlier ) remained in the linguistic communication, going more or less differentiated in significance and usage. As a consequence the figure of synonymic groups in English greatly increased. The synonymic groups became voluminous and acquired many words seldom used. This brought about a rise in the per centum of stylistic equivalent word.

As a consequence of the distinction in intending between synonymous words many native words or words borrowed earlier narrowed their significance or domain of application.

Abundant adoption intensified the difference between the word stock of the literary national linguistic communication and idioms every bit good as between British English and American English. On the one manus a figure of words were borrowed into the literary national linguistic communication which are non to be found in the idioms. In a figure of instances the idioms have preserved some Anglo-Saxon words which were replaced by adoptions in the literary linguistic communication. On the other manus, a figure of words were borrowed into idioms are non used throughout the state.

In malice of the legion outside lingual influences and the etymological heterogeneousness of its vocabulary the English linguistic communication is still, in indispensable features a Germanic linguistic communication. It has retained a land work of Germanic words and grammar. A comparative survey of the nature and function of native and borrowed words show that adoption has ne’er been the main agencies of refilling the English vocabulary. Word-formation and semantic development were throughout the full history of the English linguistic communication much more productive than borrowing. Besides most native words are marked by a higher frequence value. The great figure of adoptions conveying with them new phonon-morphological types, new phonic morphological and semantic characteristics left its imprint upon the English linguistic communication. On the other manus under the influence of the borrowed component words already bing in the English changed to some extent their semantic construction, collectability, frequence and word forming ability. Borrowing besides well enlarged the English vocabulary and brought about some alterations in English synonymic groups, in the distribution of the English vocabulary through domain of application and in the lexical divergency between the two discrepancies of the literary national linguistic communication and its idioms.

Uzbek linguistic communication is besides under changeless influence of adoptions. We are populating in the age of advancement and engineering. New discoveries new innovations, conveying about new impressions which are accepted by linguistic communications, and Uzbek linguistic communication is besides among them. The words connected with development of engineering, athletics footings, mundane words have been perforating into Uzbek linguistic communication from other linguistic communications, particularly from English, Russian and through Russian or English from many European linguistic communications.

In its bend many Uzbek words entered the word stock of universe linguistic communications, such as of athletics footings: Kurash, halol, chala, the names of quinine: plov, manti, somsa, the names of apparels: chapan and etc.

When in two linguistic communications we find no hint of he exchange of loan words one manner or the other. We are safe to deduce that the two states have had nil to make with each other, but if they have been in contact, the figure of the loan-words, and still more the quality of the loan-words, if justly interpreted, will inform us of their mutual dealingss, they will demo us which of them has been the more fertile in thoughts and on what spheres of human activity each has been superior of the other. If all other beginnings of information were closed to us except such loan-words in our modern North-European linguistic communications as & # 171 ; piano & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; soprano & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; opera & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; libretto & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; pacing & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; adagio & # 187 ; etc. we should still hold no vacillation in pulling the decision that Italian music has played a great function all over Europe.

There are many words, one a native word, the other a Romance loan, originally of lissome indistinguishable or similar significance with some differentiation made today, such as & # 171 ; freedom & # 187 ; , and & # 171 ; autonomy & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; felicity & # 187 ; , and & # 171 ; felicitousness & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; aid & # 187 ; , and & # 171 ; assistance & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; love & # 187 ; , and & # 171 ; charity & # 187 ; , and we should happen that the native word has a more emotional sense is homely and retiring whereas the loan word is colder, aloof more dignified more formal.

1.4 Recent Translation Theoryand Linguistic Borrowing in theModern Sino-Chinese

Intriguing developments in the new field of interlingual rendition surveies may assist us progress our apprehension of the germinating vocabulary of the Chinese Revolution in the 20th century. Indeed, there has been an unconscious theoretical convergence between interlingual rendition surveies outside the China field and modern Chinese cultural history. The cardinal construct is & # 171 ; civilization & # 187 ; writ big in both instances.

Translation theory has been virtually unknown in China until recent times. It is non that the Chinese historically have ne’er been forced to face the issue ; on the whole, nevertheless, until the ulterior decennaries of the 19th century, most of those who came to China were prepared to pass on in Chinese. The of import exclusions were the nativization of the Buddhist canon and the doubtless extended usage of Manchu during the early decennaries of the Qing dynasty. Since the Western states merely tagged on to the long parade of states coming to China over the centuries, we need to look foremost at the other states of East Asia for hints about interlingual rendition theory in an ideographic context. Literary Chinese was the lingua franca of the East Asiatic universe for two millenary. Although the Japanese invented a native book every bit early as the 10th century, the Vietnamese in the thirteenth, and the Koreans merely in the fifteenth, in all of these instances Chinese remained the primary domestic linguistic communication for political relations and high rational civilization until the morning of the 20th century. We shall return to this issue below.

There have been several traditions of interlingual rendition theory in the West. The oldest and most durable of them & # 8211 ; the transmittal of holy Bible into lands in which its linguistic communication was impenetrable & # 8211 ; interestingly parallels developments in East Asia. The narrative of the Septuagint diagrammatically typifies a whole construct of interlingual rendition. When the community of Greek rabbis was called upon, apparently, to interpret the Hebrew Bible into Greek, 70 rabbis individually assumed the undertaking. They reconvened to detect that all 70 Grecian interlingual renditions were indistinguishable. The deduction is that merely one true and right & # 8211 ; and implicitly divinely divine & # 8211 ; interlingual rendition existed of this text and consequently any text. The veracity is therefore guaranteed if the transcriber is decently trained and equipped for the undertaking. In the instance of Bible interlingual rendition, the transcriber performs a semi & # 8211 ; Godhead map & # 8211 ; working with God & # 8211 ; to distribute the sanctum word to those unable to get the hang the original, for via interlingual rendition they will now be assured of the tantamount experience. God may hold spoken in Hebrew, but He besides guided the Grecian transcribers to the 1 and merely possible interlingual rendition of His word. By the same item, interlingual rendition mistakes were, on juncture, regarded as blasphemy and punished consequently.

This construct of interlingual rendition bespeaks a word-by-word transmittal of a text from one context into another. It was non of import that the Greek rabbis simply conveyed the general significance of the Hebrew Bible nor that they merely had the sentences more or less in the same order. The stating points were two: foremost, that every word was the same in all 70 interlingual renditions, and 2nd, that the alone interlingual rendition was the equivalent ( though non the equal ) of the original [ 2 ]
.

Despite the multilingual nature of literate civilization in Europe through the bend of the 19th century, no specific theory of interlingual rendition was forthcoming. Many would compose in Latin or interpret their thoughts mentally from the slang into Latin instead than compose them down in the female parent lingua. Few needed interlingual rendition. George Steiner has suggested one possible ground for the deficiency of interlingual rendition theory: & # 171 ; The epistemic and formal evidences for the intervention of `meaning ‘ as separable from and augmentative to `word ‘ are rickety at best. & # 187 ; In malice of the absence of theory, interlingual rendition non merely continued, but was profoundly intertwined with the development of modern linguistic communications: & # 171 ; The development of modern German is inseparable from the Luther Bible, from Voss ‘s Homer, from the consecutive versions of Shakespeare by Wieland, Schlegel, and Tieck. & # 187 ;

Translation theory began to undergo a extremist transmutation in the 19th century, as interlingual rendition began to affect a witting use to & # 171 ; travel the writer toward the reader, & # 187 ; to do literary texts as toothsome in the mark linguistic communication and civilization as they were in the beginning linguistic communication and civilization. This development marks the effectual realisation that precise interlingual rendition, particularly in the instance of literary plants, was impossible without respect for norms of the mark linguistic communication and civilization. It is besides cotemporal with the widespread outgrowth of slangs as literary mediums, where in the past Latin would hold been more often employed. As people became less and less multilingual and as Latin declined in generic usage, the multilingual cognition necessary for staying abreast of & # 171 ; universe & # 187 ; literature made interlingual rendition all the more important.

We have here the outgrowth of a new apprehension of the relationship between beginning text ( and possibly writer ) and mark text ( and transcriber ) . No thirster was a work worthy of interlingual rendition approached as a long twine of words, but as an full text. The transcriber now performed the all important map of conveying into one existence a text from another which frequently might hold remained unknown. Without English or Gallic interlingual renditions of their work, it is extremely improbable, for illustration, that the Hagiographas of Ibsen or Strindberg or Kierkegaard or Tolstoy or, in more recent times, I.B. Singer would hold been known outside the kingdom of native talkers of their female parent linguas ; it is impossible, every bit good, that Singer would hold won the Nobel Prize.

This development has now reached the point that readers outside the native linguistic communications of such writers have ceased thought of their Hagiographas as foreign. The same is true of the King James Bible. Translation has really energized the mark languages with new subjects and genres deducing from the beginning languages. The phrase, & # 171 ; Yea, that I walk through the vale of the shadow of decease & # 187 ; & # 8211 ; despite the fact that it is non an wholly right interlingual rendition & # 8211 ; has so to the full entered our discourse as to do ordinary persons believe King David spoke English.

Progresss over the past two decennaries in interlingual rendition surveies have evolved from this tendency. We are now in the thick of a & # 171 ; cultural turn. & # 187 ; The of import unit for interlingual rendition is now seen non as a series of words or sentences between linguistic communications nor even as a text traveling from one puting to another. Rather they themselves are now seen as symbolic of their contexts, as cultural entities that emerge from one typical cultural existence. Without an grasp of that enfolding context, interlingual rendition into the mark linguistic communication loses much. But traditional bemoaning of what is & # 171 ; lost in the interlingual rendition & # 187 ; should besides non devour our attempts overly, for there are infinite cases in which interlingual rendition can clear up or clarify a deep master, in which the mark linguistic communication rises above the beginning linguistic communication. Coevalss of Germans have turned to the English interlingual renditions of Kant ‘s reviews to understand them, and you have non lived until you have read Tsubouchi Shy ‘s interlingual renditions of Shakespeare: & # 171 ; Yo ni aru, yo ni aran. Sore ga gimon jya! & # 187 ;

Translators now speak non of beginning and mark linguistic communications entirely, but of beginning and mark civilizations as good, and the mark civilization is now get downing to loom about every bit big as the beginning. There is every bit good less talk of good versus bad interlingual renditions or faithful versus unfaithful 1s. This peculiar extension of the development of interlingual rendition surveies has a deeply unsafe facet to it. In the custodies of theoreticians influenced by postmodernist literary unfavorable judgment, everything becomes relativized. All texts, interlingual renditions every bit good as masters, emerge on an even field. While it strikes me that there surely is much room for nicety and uncertainness in interlingual rendition, there are besides certain definable standards, if non absolutes, that must stay in drama. War is non peace, and love is non hate.

Responsible members of the community of interlingual rendition surveies, nevertheless, are to the full cognizant of such possible booby traps while staying sensitive to the new waies in their field. As Jir & # 237 ; Lev & # 253 ; had noted: & # 171 ; A interlingual rendition is non a monistic composing, but an reading and pudding stone of two constructions. On the one manus there are the semantic content and the formal contour of the original, on the other manus the full system of aesthetic characteristics bound up with the linguistic communication of the translation. & # 187 ;

The new realisation, so, is that interlingual rendition is non merely the transference of intending from one linguistic communication system into another with the able usage of dictionary and grammar. Language is at the bosom of civilization ; it gives voice to civilization, and transcribers must see the beginning text within its environing cultural context. Texts have images in civilizations and these are non ever the same in the beginning and the mark. Images in bend have power through linguistic communication.

In this conection, Susan Bassnett-McGuire has argued: To try to enforce the value system of the SL [ beginning linguistic communication ] civilization onto the TL [ mark linguistic communication ] civilization is unsafe land, and the transcriber should non be tempted by the school that pretends to find the original purposes
of an writer on the footing of a self-contained text. The transcriber can non be
the writer of the SL text, but as the writer of the TL text has a clear moral duty to the TL readers.

Mary Snell-Hornby goes this one half-step further. She notes that, as we move toward an apprehension of interlingual rendition that sees it as more a cultural ( instead than a lingual ) transportation, the act of interlingual rendition is no longer a & # 171 ; transcoding & # 187 ; from one context into another, but an & # 171 ; act of communication. & # 187 ; Texts are portion of the universes they inhabit and can non be neatly ripped from their milieus. The new orientation in interlingual rendition surveies is toward the & # 171 ; map of the mark text & # 187 ; instead than the & # 171 ; prescriptions of the beginning text. & # 187 ; Hans J. Vermeer has argued that interlingual rendition is first and foremost a & # 171 ; crosscultural transfer. & # 187 ; Thus, the transcriber must non merely be bilingual & # 8211 ; that ‘s a given & # 8211 ; but efficaciously bicultural every bit good. & # 171 ; Translation is non the transcoding of words or sentences from one linguistic communication to another, but a complex signifier of action, whereby person provides information on a text ( beginning linguistic communication stuff ) in a new state of affairs and under changed functional, cultural, and lingual conditions, continuing formal facets every bit closely as possible. & # 187 ;

With the scruples expressed above, I believe that the cultural bend in interlingual rendition surveies marks a major pace frontward, and it can be particularly utile to those of us seeking to understand the development of the new vocabulary of the Chinese Revolution. We should observe in go throughing that the designation of linguistic communication with civilization is elemental in East Asia where the two words portion the same root. This is, of class, non to state that Chinese and Nipponese civilizations are the same. Especially ( though non entirely ) at the elect degree, nevertheless, Neo-Confucian civilization & # 8211 ; a nucleus canon of texts, a shared tradition of commentaries on them, specific household and social values deducing from them, and the similar & # 8211 ; had become strikingly similar in both states from at least the 17th century frontward. Significant differences in societal organisation and peculiarly in the processs by which work forces were chosen for political decision-making occupations remained, doing the Nipponese and Chinese cultural contexts similar as opposed to indistinguishable, different strings on the same guitar, different fluctuations on the same subject [ 3 ]
.

The Nipponese descendants of these elect work forces of the Edo period, work forces from the bakumatsu ( late Edo ) and Meiji epochs who were trained ab initio in the Confucian classics, would subsequently in their callings learn Western linguistic communications and take upon themselves the formidable undertakings of conveying Western constructs into Nipponese. Had it been the mid & # 8211 ; to late 20th century, they would certainly hold conveyed & # 8211 ; as their ain descendants have & # 8211 ; the new thoughts from the West into katakana looks taken mostly from English. There are two grounds for this displacement: English now enjoys the repute of an international linguistic communication, and the new & # 171 ; coiners & # 187 ; lack the preparation in Kanbun ( literary Chinese ) of their sires. A brief trip to any electronics shop in Japan will uncover merely how dependent on English the new Nipponese nomenclature is. Because these new footings are non written in Chinese characters, they can non easy be imported ( allow entirely reimported ) into China now, as was the instance with the Chinese-character compounds coined by Nipponese earlier.

In the Meiji period, nevertheless, the lone appropriate linguistic communication for conveying new philosophical, literary, and scientific footings was Chinese. Many of these Godheads of new footings were celebrated in their ain right for composing plants in literary Chinese. One of the most celebrated instance is doubtless the great broad mind, Nakae Chmin ( 1847 & # 8211 ; 1901 ) , who translated Rousseau ‘s Social Contract
into Kanbun in the 1880s. Via such paths, legion new words were coined in Chinese for the literate Nipponese reading public. Because the footings so existed in Chinese ideogram, they were ready made for conveyance into Chinese. The 2nd phase began approximately from the bend of the century, and, although non all footings were renativized into Chinese, the bearers were normally Chinese analyzing in Japan or those who had taken safety at that place.

To do affairs even more complicated, the Nipponese coiners often derived their neologies from traditional Chinese texts. The research of Sanet Keish and its farther development in the research of Tam Yue-him has now documented over 1000 such footings, normally two & # 8211 ; or four-character looks. Many of these same footings besides entered the Korean and Vietnamese linguistic communications in the early decennaries of the 20th century.

Although it is non wholly exceeding, an ideographic linguistic communication like Chinese & # 8211 ; and the other East Asiatic linguistic communications that used Chinese and developed their ain slangs subsequently & # 8211 ; may necessitate a assortment of makings in discoursing interlingual rendition, either to or from. Achilles Fang overstated the instance, though he raised some of import considerations.

Another fetish of a group of Sinologists who still think Chinese ( classical Chinese ) is a & # 171 ; linguistic communication & # 187 ; in the conventional sense is their house strong belief that a perfect lexicon will smooth their manner. Alas, they are whoring after false Gods. First, such a lexicon is impossible to do ; following, what earthly usage is a two-hundred-volume lexicon to anyone? After all is said and done, the significance is determined from the context in the largest sense of the word, and at that place no lexicon will avail him. Furthermore, a lexicon is no aid if the incorrect entry is chosen.

A great trade of research has been done on the entryway into Chinese and Nipponese of the Meiji-period Nipponese neologies, though it remains scattered. An full coevals of intellectuals in China tried to read Yan Fu ‘s Chinese renditions of Western constructs in his interlingual renditions of Mill, Smith, Spencer, and Huxley, though most of his neologies merely did non lodge. For illustration, possibly his most celebrated term, tianyanlun as a interlingual rendition for the & # 171 ; theory of development, & # 187 ; was shortly replaced in the new Chinese vocabulary by the Nipponese created term, shinkaron ( Ch. , jinhualun ) . Why such footings did non & # 171 ; take & # 187 ; in China can non merely be stuffed off on the fact that they were excessively literary or assumed excessively profound a cognition of classical Chinese traditional knowledge. When Yan Fu was composing, there was no widespread slang Chinese linguistic communication in usage, and most of those who were able to read his interlingual renditions doubtless understood his allusions ( even if the Western thoughts behind them remained partly obscured ) . Was Yan Fu aware of the Nipponese interlingual renditions by Nakamura Keiu of the same texts he labored over? Has anyone of all time compared the vocabularies devised by Nakamura and Yan to render Western philosophical, political, and economic constructs?

There is a widespread, but highly thin apprehension of the procedure by which the abovementioned 1000 or so Nipponese mintages were formed and entered Chinese. In fact, there are any figure of existent, far more complex paths by which these footings were created and adopted into modern, common Chinese. Sait Tsuyoshi has examined a figure of intriguing instances in great item in his major work, Meiji no kotoba ( Meiji words ) . He is concerned chiefly with how a distinct set of looks was forged in Meiji Japanese and how it came to be portion of the modern spoken and written Nipponese linguistic communication. Although most of the footings studied & # 8211 ; such as Seiy ( Ch. Xiyang, the West ) , shakai

( Ch. shehui, society ) , kywakoku ( Ch. gongheguo, democracy ) , hoken ( Ch. baoxian, insurance ) , and other philosophical and academic terms–also found their manner into Chinese, Sait does non analyze that stage of the procedure. He does, though, discuss many of the footings that were suggested and later dropped for assorted Western political establishments and systems.

In a series of intriguing surveies that approaches a similar subject, though mostly from the Chinese side of the image, Mizoguchi Yz looks as the legion Chinese footings that surround the composite of issues involved in puting out the modern differentiations drawn between the populace ( gong ) and the private ( Si ) . He begins his analysis in Chinese antiquity and demonstrates the singular alterations that transpired in the utilizations to which these footings were put over clip. From the late 19th century, nevertheless, these footings became caught up in demands by Chinese intellectuals for Western-style political establishments. China ‘s preparedness for such establishments, such as representative authorities or democracy, were often justified on putative long traditions in which, for illustration, the & # 171 ; people were the footing & # 187 ; of the province.

Let me reason with one little instance which should show compactly merely how exhaustively complicated this transmittal procedure was: the atom de ( J. teki ) , used in general to organize adjectives from nouns, adverbs from adjectives, or to make the possessive instance. In his unexcelled survey of the transmittal of Western larning to China and Japan, Masuda Wataru ( 1903 & # 8211 ; 77 ) has described portion of the narrative in discoursing the of import work of Yanagawa Shunsan ( 1832 & # 8211 ; 70 ) . Yanagawa was a bookman of Western larning at the terminal of the Edo period and caput of the Kaiseijo, the chief centre for Western surveies at the clip in Japan ; he besides reputedly knew Dutch, French, English, and German. A few biographical inside informations about the life and work of the coiners of these neologies may assist us anthropomorphise this procedure ; it puts flesh on the castanetss.

Yanagawa was besides, though, a punctuator of Kanbun texts, written by Chinese or interlingual renditions by Chinese of Western plants. His repute as a bookman was sufficiently formidable and good cognize that he appeared as a character at the really beginning of Nagori no yume ( Lingering Dreams ) by Imaizumi Mine ( 1858 & # 8211 ; 1937 ) , the girl of Katsuragawa Hosh ( 1822 & # 8211 ; 81 ) , a doctor to the household of the shogun and a bookman of Dutch acquisition. Clearly, the community of Kangaku bookmans and that of Western larning bookmans had important overlap. Among his many plants, Yanagawa wrote Furansu bunten
( A Grammar of French ) , Igirisu nichiy tsgo
[ Everyday conversational English ] , and Ygaku benran
[ A manual of Western Learning ] ; and his accomplishments at Kanbun can be found in the literary Chinese versions of popular Nipponese vocals he prepared, his punctuation work on the Nipponese version of the Zhihuan qimeng ( The circle of cognition ) , a work consisting lessons on English, Christianity, and natural scientific discipline, based on James Legge ‘s Chinese interlingual rendition. Yanagawa was besides involved in a undertaking to fix a complete Nipponese interlingual rendition in 20 string-bound volumes of the Gewu first stomachs ( Introduction to science ) by W.A.P. Martin.

Among the many footings nativized into Japan by Yanagawa and his associates was the aforesaid atom teki ( Ch. Delaware ) . In his personal remembrances, tsuki Fumihiko ( 1847 & # 8211 ; 1928 ) one time described the group of work forces who worked together interpreting so many of these Chinese and Western texts. The group included: Yanagawa Shunsan, Katsuragawa Hosh, Kurosawa Magoshir, Mitsukuri Keigo [ d. 1871 ] , Kumazawa Zen’an [ 1845 & # 8211 ; 1906 ] , and even myself. Odd as it might look, this group in general [ besides ] enjoyed reading Chinese novels, such as Shuihu zhuan [ Water border ] and Jinpingmei [ Golden Nelumbo nucifera ] . One twenty-four hours we got together and began chew the fating, and person mentioned unwittingly the followers. It was all right to interpret & # 171 ; system & # 187 ; as soshiki ( Ch. zuzhi ) , but it was hard to interpret the term & # 171 ; systematic. & # 187 ; The postfix & # 171 ; tic & # 187 ; sounded similar to the character teki ( de ) as used in [ Chinese ] fiction ; so why non render & # 171 ; systematic & # 187 ; as soshiki teki ( Ch. zuzhi de ) . Everyone thought it was a superb thought and agreed to give it a attempt. Finally, we paid person to compose out the look soshiki teki clearly and convey it to the governments. & # 171 ; Have you set this into usage? & # 187 ; & # 171 ; Yes. & # 187 ; & # 171 ; This is instead extraordinary, is n’t it? & # 187 ; & # 171 ; Not that I am cognizant, no. & # 187 ; We joked with these kinds of amusing play-acting, but really frequently we were merely able to get away hard [ interlingual rendition ] points with this character teki. Ultimately, it moved from pure innovation to fact, and it was used subsequently without a 2nd idea, as people picked up on this use.

Again, though, this is merely half of our narrative. We need to cognize if this new conversational use in Japanese of teki was the beginning for Delaware as a comparable atom in conversational Chinese, or whether de entered modern baihua straight from its much earlier use in conversational Chinese literary texts of the Yuan and Ming periods. While twentieth-century spoken Chinese utilizations de about entirely, written common texts frequently use de alongside the other genitive-forming atoms zhi and di. Nipponese has its ain mode of organizing the possessive, with the atom no, non the precise opposite number of teki but the two perform something more on the order of complementary, and on occasion overlapping, functions.

Most serious bookmans of the modern Chinese historical experience, even those most closely wedded to statistical informations, see civilization & # 8211 ; really, cultural differences & # 8211 ; elemental to their considerations in research and authorship. It would be about impossible to conceive of person doing the claim that survey of China could be pursued without taking civilization into history. Therefore, the recent bend in interlingual rendition surveies toward a broader, more cultural grasp of both beginning and mark contexts segues neatly with this widespread scholarly standard, and concerted attending toward the lingual Sino-Japanese inventions over the past century could non hold come at a better clip.

Before cover word pictures can be put forth about the nature of this adoption & # 8211 ; and long before we can generalise or speculate about it & # 8211 ; we need closer scrutiny of as many of the different paths by which the nomenclature of the Chinese Revolution entered the modern Chinese vocabulary from Nipponese as possible. We need to analyze the really texts in which these footings were foremost used, what Western constructs they were meant to interpret, what they conjured up in the Nipponese scene, the procedure by which they entered Chinese, and the images ( nevertheless different or similar from Nipponese ) these footings gave rise to in China. I do non intend to propose that we conduct 1000 separate surveies, but we do need many separate surveies for different bunchs of footings.

2. The job of assimilation of borrowed words

2.1 Phonetic assimilation of borrowed words

It is now our undertaking to see what alterations adoptions have undergone in the English linguistic communication and how they have adapted themselves to its distinctive features.

All the alterations that borrowed elements undergo may be divided into two big groups.

On the one manus there are alterations specific of borrowed words merely. These alterations aim at accommodating words of foreign beginning to the norms of the adoption linguistic communication, e. g. the changeless combinations [ p n ] , [ p s ] , [ t p T ] in the words & # 171 ; pneumatics & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; psychological science & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; ptolomey & # 187 ; of Greek beginning were simplified into [ n ] , [ s ] , [ T ] , since the harmonic combinations [ p s ] , [ platinum ] , [ p n ] really frequent at the terminal of English words ( as in & # 171 ; slumbers & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; stopped & # 187 ; ) were ne’er used in the initial place.

It is really of import to know apart between the two processes the version of borrowed stuff to the norms of the linguistic communication and the development of these words harmonizing to the Torahs of the linguistic communication. This distinction is non ever easy discernable. In most instances we must fall back to historical analysis before we can pull any definite decisions. There is nil in the signifier of the words & # 171 ; emanation & # 187 ; and & # 171 ; patterned advance & # 187 ; to demo that the former was already used in England in the 11th
century, the latter non till the 15th
century. The history of these words reveals that the word emanation has undergone a figure of alterations along side with other English words alteration in declension, accentuation, construction, sounds, whereas the word & # 171 ; patterned advance & # 187 ; underwent some alterations by analogy with the word & # 171 ; emanation & # 187 ; and other similar words already at the clip of its visual aspect in the linguistic communication.

Since the procedure of assimilation of adoptions includes alterations in sound-form, morphological construction, grammar features, significance and usage linguists distinguish phonic, grammatical and lexical assimilation of adoptions.

Phonetic assimilation, consisting alterations in sound-form and emphasis, is possibly the most conspicuous. Sounds that were foreign to the English linguistic communication were fitted into its strategy of sounds. For case, the long [ vitamin E ] and [ E ] in recent Gallic adoptions, rather unusual to English address, are rendered with the aid of [ vitamin E I ] ( as in the words & # 171 ; communiqu & # 233 ; & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; chaussee & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; caf & # 233 ; & # 187 ; ) Familiar sounds or sound combinations the place of which was unusual to the English linguistic communication, were replaced by other sounds or sound combinations to do the words conform to the norms of the linguistic communication, e.g. German tongues [ tongues ] was turned into English [ spits ] .

Substitution of native sounds for foreign 1s normally takes topographic point in the really act of borrowing. But some words retain their foreign pronunciation for a long clip before the unfamiliar sounds are replaced by similar native sounds.

In words that were added to English from foreign beginnings, particularly from Gallic or Latin, the speech pattern was bit by bit transferred to the first syllable. Therefore words like & # 171 ; honour & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; ground & # 187 ; were accented on the same rule as the native & # 171 ; father & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; mother & # 187 ; .

2.2 Grammatical assimilation of borrowed words

Normally every bit shortly as words from other linguistic communications were introduced into English they lost their former grammatical classs and inflections and acquired new grammatical classs and paradigms by analogy with other English words.

If a borrowed word loses its former grammatical classs and inflections and gets new grammatical classs and paradigms by analogy with other English words we say the word is undergone grammatical assimilation. Sometimes the foreign inflections are fallen off.

E. g. sputnik, sputniks, sputnik & # 8217 ; s

Lat. consutare ( V ) English consult.

However there are some words in Modern English that have for centuries retained their foreign inflections. Thus a considerable group of borrowed nouns, all of them footings or literary words adopted in the 16th
century or subsequently, have preserved their original plural inflection to this twenty-four hours, e.g.

Phenomenon-phonomena

Addendum-addenda

Other adoptions of the same period have two plural signifiers the indigen and the foreign, e. g. vacuum-vacua, vacuities, virtuoso-virtuosi, ace.

All adoptions that were composite in construction in their native linguistic communication appeared in English as indivisible roat-words, unless there were already words with the same morphemes in it, e. g. in the word & # 171 ; saunter & # 187 ; the Gallic infinitive inflexion-er is retained, but it has changed its quality, it is preserved in all the other grammatical signifiers of the word. ( saunters, suntered, strolling ) , which means that it has become portion of the root in English.

It must be borne in head that when there appears in a linguistic communication a group of borrowed words built on the same form or incorporating the same morphemes, the morphological construction of the words becomes evident and in class of clip their word-building elements can be employed to organize new words [ 4 ]
.

Sometimes in borrowed words foreign affixes are replaced by those available in the English linguistic communication, e. g. the inflection & # 8211 ; us in Latin adjectives was replaced in English with the postfixs & # 8211 ; ous or & # 8211 ; Al

Barbarus-barbarous

Botanicus-botanical

Balneus-balneal

2.3 Lexical assimilation of borrowed
words

Lending words from another linguistic communication causes some alterations in significance of the word borrowed.

When a word is taken over into another linguistic communication its semantic construction as a regulation undergoes great alterations.

Polysemous words are normally adopted merely in one or two of their significances.

Therefore the word & # 171 ; timber & # 187 ; that had a figure of significances in French was borrowed into English as a musical term merely. The words lading
and cask
, extremely polysemous in Spanish were adopted merely in one of their significances & # 8211 ; & # 171 ; the goods carried in a ship & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; a barrel for keeping liquids & # 187 ; severally.

In some instances we can detect specialisation of significance, as in the word airdock
, denoting a edifice in which aero planes are kept and revive,
which had the significance of & # 171 ; reappraisal & # 187 ; in French and came to denote a sort of theatrical amusement in English.

In the procedure of its historical development a adoption sometimes acquired new significances that were non to be found in its former semantic construction. For case, the word move
in Modern English has developed the significances of & # 8216 ; suggest & # 8217 ; , & # 8216 ; alter one & # 8217 ; s level & # 8217 ; , & # 8216 ; mix with people & # 8217 ; and others that the Gallic movoir
does non possess. The word range,
whichoriginally had the significance of & # 8216 ; aim aim & # 8217 ; , now means & # 8216 ; ability to understand & # 8216 ; , & # 8216 ; the field within which an activity takes topographic point, sphere & # 8217 ; , & # 8216 ; chance, freedom of action & # 8217 ; . As a regulation the development of new significances takes topographic point 50 & # 8211 ; 100 old ages after the word is borrowed.

The semantic construction of adoptions alterations in other ways as good. Some significances become more general, others more specialised, etc. For case, the word & # 171 ; terrorist & # 187 ; that was taken over from Gallic in the significance of & # 171 ; Jacobin & # 187 ; widened its significance to & # 8216 ; one who governs, or opposes a authorities, by violent agencies. The word umbrella
, borrowed in the significance of a awning or pares came to denote similar protection from the rain every bit good.

Normally the primary significance of a borrowed word was a retained throughout its history, but sometimes it becomes a secondary significance. Thus the Norse adoptions flying
, root
, take
and many others have retained their primary significances to the present twenty-four hours.

Sometimes alteration of significance is the consequence of tie ining borrowed words with familiar words which slightly resemble them in sound but which are non at all related. This procedure, which is termed folk etymology
, frequently changes the signifier of the word in whole or in portion, so as to convey it nearer to the word or words with which it is thought to be connected, e. g. the Gallic Sur ( o ) under
had the significance of & # 171 ; overflow & # 187 ; . In English R ( o ) under
was associated by error with unit of ammunition
& # 8211 ; & # 1076 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1084 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1082 ; and the verb was interpreted as significance & # 8216 ; encclose on all sides, encircle & # 8217 ; Folle & # 8211 ; etimologization is a slow procedure ; people foremost try to give the foreign adoption its foreign foreboding, but bit by bit popular usage involves a new pronunciation and spelling.

Another phenomenon which must besides have particular attending is the formation of derived functions
from borrowed words. New derived functions are normally formed with the aid of productive affixes, frequently of Anglo-Saxon beginning.

2.4 The grades of assimilation

The function of loan words in the formation and development of English vocabulary is dealt with in the history of the linguistic communication. It is at that place that the historical fortunes are discussed under which words borrowed from Latin, from Norse idioms, from Norman and Parisian, French and many other linguistic communications, including Russian, were introduced into English. Lexicology, on the other manus, has in this connexion undertakings of its ain, being chiefly concerned with the stuff and the consequences of assimilation.

The chief jobs of etymology and borrowed words as they concern the English linguistic communication are comprehensively and systematically treated in Professor A.I. Smirnitskiy trades with these issues chiefly in footings of word. Sameness reflecting his methodological attack to word theory.

Here we are traveling to concentrated our attending on the assimilation of borrowed words as a manner of their interrelatedness with the system of the linguistic communication as a whole. The term assimilation
of a loan word is used to denote a partial or entire conformation to the phonetically, graphical and morphological criterions of the receiving linguistic communication and its semantic system.

Even a superficial scrutiny of borrowed words in the English word-stock shows that there are words among them that are easy recognized as foreign and there are others that have become so steadfastly rooted in the linguistic communication, so exhaustively assimilated that it is sometimes highly hard to separate them from words of Anglo-Saxon beginning.

Let & # 8217 ; s take some illustrations: & # 171 ; we can easy find that the words & # 171 ; vitamin D & # 233 ; ferrule & # 233 ; & # 187 ; , graffito & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; chemical science & # 187 ; are loaned words.

But the words like & # 171 ; student & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; maestro & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; metropolis & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; river & # 187 ; which became portion of words used at least one time a twenty-four hours are besides borrowed words. In Uzbek linguistic communication this sort of state of affairs can be besides observed. For illustration: & # 171 ; Kolxoz & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; sputnik & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; demokratiya & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; efir & # 187 ; , etc words can be easy recognized as loan words. But the words like & # 171 ; maktab & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; kitob & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; muhabbat & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; ilm & # 187 ; , & # 171 ; badavlat & # 187 ; and etc are non considered to be loan words by ordinary people, because these words are profoundly rooted in native vocabulary and are normally used by people. But harmonizing to the etymology of these words they are non native words, they were borrowed from Arabic and Persian linguistic communications.

Unassimilated words differ from assimilated words in their pronunciation, spelling, frequence, semantic construction and domain of application. However, there is no distinguishable boundary line between the two groups.

So far no linguist has been able to propose more or less comprehensive standards for finding the grade of assimilation