English-sourced ordinal superlatives in contemporary Polish: An argument for the usefulness of syntactic loans
Mirosław Bańko
Uniwersytet Warszawskihttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-5396-4327
Alicja Witalisz
Uniwersytet Pedagogiczny im. KEN w Krakowiehttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2256-1269
Аннотация
This article raises the question whether syntactic loans can be useful in the recipient language, i.e. whether they can exhibit advantages over their native counterparts. Polish ordinal superlatives (OSs), such as drugi najwyższy budynek (w mieście) ‘the second tallest (building in town)’, serve as the main source of examples, but two other syntactic loans are also briefly discussed in order to strengthen our position. It is not our aim to trace the history of OSs in Polish nor to provide their comprehensive description, but since they have been much underresearched, we have made preliminary queries in corpora and digital libraries to examine their structure, meaning, and origin. These queries suggest that Polish OSs were borrowed from German in the second half of the 19th century, yet their current abundance in Polish is due to the influence of English. We have put our research in the context of language contact studies and analysed the pros and cons of Polish OSs compared with their native counterparts. We have found contact-induced Polish OSs to show some advantage over their native equivalents, but to occasionally interfere with formally identical native contructions, and make the message potentially ambiguous. A further conclusion is that syntactic loans can be useful in the recipient language.
Ключевые слова:
ordinal superlatives, syntactic borrowing, language contact, English, PolishБиблиографические ссылки
Berruto G. (2017): What is changing in Italian today? Phenomena of restandardization in syntax and morphology: an overview. [In:] Towards a New Standard: Theoretical and Empirical Studies on the Restandardization of Italian. M. Cerruti, C. Crocco, S. Marzo
Crossref
Google Scholar
(eds). Boston–Berlin, pp. 31–60. Google Scholar
Biber D., Johansson S., Leech G., Conrad S., Finegan E. (1999): Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow. Google Scholar
Bylinina L., Ivlieva N., Podobryaev A., Sudo Y. (2014): A non-superlative semantics for ordinals and the syntax and semantics of comparison classes, , accessed: 29.11.2022. Google Scholar
COCA [Corpus of Contemporary American English], , accessed: 29.11.2022. Google Scholar
Davies M. (2009): The 385+ million word Corpus of Contemporary American English (1990–2008+): Design, architecture, and linguistic insights. “International Journal of Corpus Linguistics” 14, pp. 159–190.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Davies M., Jong-Bok K. (2019): The advantages and challenges of ‘big data’: Insights from the 14 billion word iWeb corpus. “Linguistic Research” 36(1), pp. 1–34.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Downing A., Locke P. (1992): A University Course in English Grammar. New York–London–Toronto. Google Scholar
GLAD [Global Anglicism Database Network], , accessed: 29.11.2022. Google Scholar
Grant A.P. (ed.) (2019): The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact. Oxford.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Haspelmath M. (2008): Loanword typology: Steps toward a systematic cross-linguistic study of lexical borrowability. [In:] Aspects of Language Contact: New Theoretical, Methodological and Empirical Findings with Special Focus on Romancisation Processes. T. Stolz,
Crossref
Google Scholar
D. Bakker, R. Salas Palomo (eds). Berlin, pp. 43–62. Google Scholar
Haugen E. (1950): The analysis of linguistic borrowing. “Language” 26(2), pp. 210–231.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Hickey R. (ed.) (2013): The Handbook of Language Contact. Oxford. Google Scholar
Huddleston R., Pullum G.K. (2002): The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge.
Crossref
Google Scholar
iWeb [iWeb: The 14 Billion Web Corpus], , accessed: 29.11.2022. Google Scholar
Jespersen O. (1924): The Philosophy of Grammar. London. Google Scholar
Jespersen O. (1933): Essentials of English Grammar. London. Google Scholar
Kallas K. (1998): Przymiotnik. [In:] Morfologia. Vol. 2. R. Grzegorczykowa, R. Laskowski, H. Wróbel (eds). Warszawa, pp. 469–523. Google Scholar
King R. (2000): The Lexical Basis of Grammatical Borrowing: A Prince Edward Island French Case Study. Amsterdam.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Klemensiewicz Z., Lehr-Spławiński T., Urbańczyk S. (1955): Gramatyka historyczna języka polskiego. Warszawa. Google Scholar
KorBa [The Electronic Corpus of 17th- and 18th-century Polish Texts (up to 1772)], , accessed: 29.11.2022. Google Scholar
Kozioł-Chrzanowska E. (2012): Kryterium narodowe. [In:] Nowe spojrzenie na kryteria poprawności językowej. A. Markowski (ed.). Warszawa, pp. 68–79. Google Scholar
Krasnowolski A. (1903): Najpospolitsze błędy językowe zdarzające się w mowie i piśmie polskiem. Warszawa. Google Scholar
Laskowski R. (1977): Od czego lepszy jest lepszy? „Język Polski” LVII(5), pp. 323–324. Google Scholar
Matras Y. (2009): Language Contact. Cambridge.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Monco PL, Monitoring Corpus of Polish, , accessed: 29.11.2022. Google Scholar
NKJP [The National Corpus of Polish], , accessed: 29.11.2022. Google Scholar
Paralela [Parallel corpus search], , accessed: 29.11.2022. Google Scholar
Pęzik P. (2016): Exploring phraseological equivalence with Paralela. [In:] Polskojęzyczne korpusy równolegle. Polish-Language Parallel Corpora. E. Gruszczyńska, A. Leńko-Szymańska (eds). Warszawa, pp. 67–81. Google Scholar
Pęzik P. (2020): Budowa i zastosowania korpusu monitorującego MoncoPL. „Forum Lingwistyczne” 7, s. 132– 150.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Polona [digital library], , accessed: 29.11.2022. Google Scholar
Przepiórkowski A., Bańko M., Górski R., Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk B. (eds) (2012): Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego. Warszawa. Google Scholar
Quirk R., Greenbaum S., Leech G., Svartvik J. (1991): A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London–New York. Google Scholar
Renner V. (2018): Structural borrowing in word-formation: An exploratory overview. “SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics” 15(2), pp. 2–12. Google Scholar
Ross M. (2019): Syntax and contact-Induced language change. [In:] The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact. A.P. Grant (ed.). Oxford, pp. 123–154.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Schendl H. (2017): Language contact: Multilingualism. [In:] Vol. 3: Middle English. L. Brinton, A. Bergs (eds). Berlin–Boston, pp. 165–183.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Sinclair J. (1995): Collins Cobuild English Usage. London. Google Scholar
Thomason S.G. (2001): Language Contact. An Introduction. Washington D.C.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Thomason S.G., Kaufman T. (1988): Language Contact, Creolization and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Weinreich U. (1953): Languages in Contact. Findings and Problems. The Hague. Google Scholar
Winford D. (2003): An Introduction to Contact Linguistics. Oxford. Google Scholar
Winford D. (2013): Contact and borrowing. [In:] The Handbook of Language Contact. R. Hickey (ed.). Oxford, pp. 170–187.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Yee Ch. (2010): Building DRT Lexical Entries for Superlatives and Ordinal Numbers. University of Stuttgart, , accessed: 29.11.2022. Google Scholar
Zenner E., Kristiansen G. (eds) (2014): New Perspectives on Lexical Borrowing: Onomasiological, Methodological and Phraseological Innovations. Boston–Berlin.
Crossref
Google Scholar
