Article published in:
Diachronica
Vol. 31:1 (2014) ► pp. 74–105

Core vocabulary, borrowability and entrenchment

A usage-based onomasiological approach

| University of Leuven
It is often claimed in contact linguistics that core vocabulary is highly resistant to borrowing. If we want to test that claim in a quantitative way, we need both a quantitative measure of coreness and a method for quantifying borrowability. We suggest here a usage-based operationalization of coreness in terms of entrenchment, and of borrowability in terms of onomasiological success. Applying these measures in a corpus-based study on the use of English person reference nouns in Dutch, we show via a multivariate statistical analysis that there are indeed clear indications of an inversely proportional relationship between the success of the English nouns and the degree of coreness/entrenchment of the concept lexicalized by the loanwords.
Keywords: borrowability, entrenchment, core vocabulary, usage-based hypothesis, Cognitive Linguistics, onomasiological variation
Published online: 21 July 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.31.1.03zen
References

References

Arppe, Antti, Gaëtanelle Gilquin, Dylan Glynn, Martin Hilpert & Arne Zeschel
2010 Cognitive corpus linguistics: Five points of debate on current theory and methodology. Corpora 5(1). 1-27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, Harald
2008 Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Backus, Ad
1996 Two in one: Bilingual speech of Turkish immigrants in the Netherlands. Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar
2001 The role of semantic specificity in insertional codeswitching: Evidence from Dutch Turkish. In Rodolfo Jacobson (ed.), Codeswitching worldwide II, 125-154. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bednarek, Adam
2009 Studies in Canadian English: Lexical variation in Toronto. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Boon, Ton den & Dirk Geeraerts
(eds.) 2005 Van Dale groot woordenboek van de Nederlandse taal, 14th edn. Utrecht: Van Dale Lexicografie.Google Scholar
Borland, Colin
1982 How basic is “basic” vocabulary? Current Anthropology 23(3). 315-316. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bowern, Claire, Patience Epps, Russell Gray, Jane Hill, Keith Hunley, Patrick McConvell & Jason Zentz
2011 Does lateral transmission obscure inheritance in hunter-gatherer languages? PLoS ONE 6(9). e25195. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Dan Slobin
1982 Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English present tense. Language 58. 265-289. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Caldwell-Harris, Catherine L. & Alison L. Morris
2008 Fast pairs: A visual word recognition paradigm for measuring entrenchment, top-down effects and subjective phenomenology. Consciousness and Cognition 17. 1063-1081. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carter, Ronald
1987 Is there a core vocabulary? Some implications for language teaching. Applied Linguistics 8. 187-193. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chesley, Paula & Harald R. Baayen
2010 Predicting new words from newer words: Lexical borrowing in French. Linguistics 48(4). 1343-1374. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R.M.W.
1971 A method of semantic description. In Dany D. Steinberg & Leon A. Jakobovits (eds.), Semantics, 436-471. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Doğruöz, Seza & Ad Backus
2009 Innovative constructions in Dutch Turkish: An assessment of ongoing contact-induced change. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 12(1). 41-63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dyen, Isidore
1965 Lexicostatistics in comparative linguistics. Lingua 13. 230-239. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Edmonds, Philip & Graeme Hirst
2002 Near-synonymy and lexical choice. Computational Linguistics 28(2). 105-144. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Embleton, Sheila M.
1986 Statistics in historical linguistics. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan, Benjamin Bergen & Jörg Zinken
2007 The cognitive linguistics reader. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Everitt, Brian S. & Torsten Hothorn
2010 A handbook of statistical analyses using R. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis Group.Google Scholar
Faraway, Julian J.
2005 Linear models with R. Boca Raton, FL: CRC.Google Scholar
Fischer, John L.
1961 The retention rate of Chamorro basic vocabulary. Lingua 10. 255-266. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fuster Marquez, Miguel & Barry Pennock Speck
2008 The spoken core of British English: A diachronic analysis based on the BNC. Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies 37. 53-74.Google Scholar
Galwey, Nicholas W.
2006 Introduction to mixed modeling: Beyond regression and analysis of variance. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk
1997 Diachronic prototype semantics: A contribution to historical lexicology. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
2010 Lexical variation in space. In Peter Auer & Jürgen Erich Schmidt (eds.), Language in space: An international handbook of linguistic variation, vol. 1, Theories and methods, 821-837. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk, Stefan Grondelaers & Peter Bakema
1994 The structure of lexical variation: Meaning, naming and context. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk, Stefan Grondelaers & Dirk Speelman
1999 Convergentie en divergentie in de Nederlandse woordenschat. Een onderzoek naar kleding- en voetbaltermen. Amsterdam: Meertens Instituut.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk & Dirk Speelman
2010 Heterodox concept features and onomasiological heterogeneity in dialects. In Dirk Geeraerts, Gitte Kristiansen & Yves Peirsman (eds.), Advances in cognitive sociolinguistics, 23-40. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Greenhill, Simon J., Robert Blust & Russell D. Gray
2008 The Austronesian basic vocabulary database: From bioinformatics to lexomics. Evolutionary Bioinformatics 4. 271-283.Google Scholar
Haarmann, Harald
1990 “Basic” vocabulary and language contacts: The disillusion of glottochronology. Indogermanische Forschungen 95.7-37.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2008 Loanword typology: Steps toward a systematic cross-linguistic study of lexical borrowability. In Thomas Stolz, Dik Bakker & Rosa Salas Palomo (eds.), Aspects of language contact: New theoretical, methodological and empirical findings with special focus on Romancisation processes, 43-62. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2009 Lexical borrowing: Concepts and issues. In Martin Haspelmath & Uri Tadmor (eds.), Loanwords in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook, 35-54. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin & Uri Tadmor
2009 The loanword typology project and the world loanword database. In Martin Haspelmath & Uri Tadmor (eds.), Loanwords in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook, 1-34. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heggarty, Paul
2010 Beyond lexicostatistics: How to get more out of “word list” comparisons. Diachronica 27(2). 301-324. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hock, Hans Henrich & Brian D. Joseph
1996 Language history, language change and language relationship: An introduction to historical and comparative linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Holman, Eric W., Søren Wichmann, Cecil H. Brown, Viveka Velupillai, André Müller & Dik Bakker
2008 Explorations in automated language classification. Folia Linguistica 42(2). 331-354. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hymes, Dell
1960 Lexicostatistics so far. Current Anthropology 1(1). 3-44. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koops, Bert-Jaap, Pim Slop, Paul Uljé, Kees Vermeij & Dick van Zijderveld
2009 Funshoppen in het Nederlands: woordenlijst onnodig Engels. Amsterdam: Bakker.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald
1987 Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 1, Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1991 Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 2, Descriptive application. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lutz, Mark
2007 Learning Python. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly.Google Scholar
McMahon, April M.S.
1994 Understanding language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Onysko, Alexander
2007 Anglicisms in German: Borrowing, lexical productivity and written codeswitching. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Onysko, Alexander & Esme Winter-Froemel
2011 Necessary loans — luxury loans? Exploring the pragmatic dimension of borrowing. Journal of Pragmatics 43(6). 1550-1567. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Petroni, Filippo & Maurizio Serva
2011 Automated word stability and language phylogeny. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 18(1). 53-32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum & Geoffrey Leech
1985 A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rohde, Ada, Anatol Stefanowitsch & Suzanne Kemmer
1999 Loanwords in a usage-based model. In Sabrina Billings, John Boyle & Aaron Griffith (eds.), Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistics Society (= CLS) 35: The Main Session, 265-275. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
2007 Entrenchment, salience and basic levels. In Dirk Geeraerts & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, 117-138. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2010 Does frequency in text instantiate entrenchment in the cognitive system? In Dylan Glynn & Kerstin Fischer (eds.), Quantitative cognitive semantics: Corpus-driven approaches, 101-135. Berlin/New York: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Skybina, Valentyna & Iryna Galutskikh
2009 Historical core vocabulary: Spring and/or anchor. On tendencies and mechanisms of language evolution. In Monique Dufresne, Fernande Dupuis & Etleva Vocaj (eds.), Historical linguistics: Selected papers from the 18th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Montreal, 6–11 August 2007, 295-306. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Speelman, Dirk, Stefan Grondelaers & Dirk Geeraerts
2003 Profile-based linguistic uniformity as a generic method for comparing language varieties. Computers and the Humanities 37. 317-337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Starostin, S.A.
1995 Comments from Starostin. In William S.Y. Wang (ed.), The ancestry of the Chinese language (Journal of Chinese Linguistics 8), 393-404. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Swadesh, Morris
1952 Lexico-statistic dating of prehistoric ethnic contacts: With special reference to North American Indians and Eskimos. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 96. 452-463.
1956 Some limitations of diffusional change in vocabulary. American Anthropologist 58. 301-306. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tadmor, Uri, Martin Haspelmath & Bradley Taylor
2010 Borrowability and the notion of basic vocabulary. Diachronica 27(2). 226-246. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yeon-Ju, Lee & Laurent Sagart
2008 No limits to borrowing: The case of Bai and Chinese. Diachronica 25(3). 357-385.Google Scholar
Zenner, Eline, Dirk Speelman & Dirk Geeraerts
2012 Cognitive sociolinguistics meets loanword research: Measuring variation in the success of anglicisms in Dutch. Cognitive Linguistics 23(4). 749-792. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 9 other publications

Calude, Andreea Simona, Steven Miller & Mark Pagel
2020. Modelling loanword success – a sociolinguistic quantitative study of Māori loanwords in New Zealand English. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 16:1 ► pp. 29 ff. Crossref logo
Franco, Karlien, Eline Zenner & Dirk Speelman
2018. Let's Agree to Disagree. (Variation in) the Assignment of Gender to Nominal Anglicisms in Dutch. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 30:1 ► pp. 43 ff. Crossref logo
Geller, Ewa & Michał Gajek
2021. Loanwords vs relics. Diachronica Crossref logo
Geller, Ewa, Michał Gajek, Agata Reibach & Zuzanna Łapa
2021. Applicability of Wordnet Architecture in Lexical Borrowing Studies. International Journal of Lexicography 34:1 ► pp. 92 ff. Crossref logo
Ho-Cheong Leung, Alex & Wim van der Wurff
2018.  In The Noun Phrase in English [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 246], ► pp. 143 ff. Crossref logo
List, Johann‐Mattis
2019. Automated methods for the investigation of language contact, with a focus on lexical borrowing. Language and Linguistics Compass 13:10 Crossref logo
Morin, Regina & Damián Robles
2020.  In Hispanic Linguistics [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 26], ► pp. 266 ff. Crossref logo
Trye, David, Andreea S. Calude, Felipe Bravo-Marquez & Te Taka Keegan
2020. Hybrid Hashtags: #YouKnowYoureAKiwiWhen Your Tweet Contains Māori and English. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 3 Crossref logo
van Tilborg, Arjan & Stijn R. J. M. Deckers
2016. Vocabulary Selection in AAC: Application of Core Vocabulary in Atypical Populations. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups 1:12 ► pp. 125 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 august 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.