Phraseology: lexical borrowings in Russian language

The process of borrowing words is an integral part of the development of any language. Lexical borrowing expands the vocabulary of the language and generally does not cause any harm to its originality, because if borrowing the basic vocabulary of the language remains unchanged, the grammatical structure of the language is also preserved, and the language system rules are not violated.

Nowadays, some scientists believe that borrowing is the source of language development, while others believe that this can lead to its death. The lexical composition of any language is replenished due to the construction of words according to its own rules and the process of borrowing lexical units from other languages. Such methods of word formation are present themselves in the Russian language grammar. In this work, the second method is of greatest interest.

In linguistics, there are different definitions of the concept of “borrowing” . In the dictionary of S.I. Ozhegov this process is described as “ borrowing some phenomenon, word, expression ” [1, р. 494]. S.I. Kartsevsky expands the definition of the concept of “borrowing”. The linguist speaks not only about the transition of lexical units of one language into the vocabulary of another, but also about the borrowing of words from any special language (legal, technical, youth slang, etc.) into the general language lexical fund [2, р. 38]. L.P. Krysin offers another definition of this concept. In his opinion, borrowing is “the process of moving various elements from one language to another” [3, р. 24]. Moreover, these elements

Фразеология: лексические заимствования в русском языке

Поляков Илья Анатольевич

can refer to different levels of the language system: phonological, morphological, lexical, syntactic and semantic. In this case, not only words, but also phonemes, morphemes, etc. can be borrowed.

N.M. Shansky, without separating the concept of “foreign word” and “borrowed word” , calls borrowing “any word that came into the Russian language from outside, even if it does not differ in any way from the original Russian words in its morphemes” [4, р. 86]. Having considered and analyzed several interpretations of this concept, we dwell on the definition of N.M. Shansky and will use it in the process of research.

In the entire lexical system of our language, only a small part of borrowings plays the role of commonly used, neutral vocabulary. Most of the borrowed lexical units are of a stylistic nature fixed in book speech and take place in narrow areas of application (as xenisms, special book words, professionalisms, terms, etc.).

Reasons and ways of borrowings coming into the Russian language

The process of borrowing from one language to another can occur in two ways: written (with the help of literature) and verbal . The process of written borrowing slightly changes the borrowed element itself. Verbal borrowing often subjects the word to a higher degree of change: potato (from tartufolo), pretzel (from Kringel).

Borrowings are indirect and direct. The first group passes into the host language through intermediary languages. The second category is borrowed directly from one language to another.

The borrowing of words is a process that is always accompanied by a number of internal and external ( linguistic and extralinguistic ) reasons. According to U. Weinreich, the main reason for the process of borrowing is the need to name new objects or phenomena that have recently appeared in the culture of native speakers, but still do not have a name [5, р. 92].

For a more accurate description of this process, we will use the classification of L.P. Krysin, which includes the following linguistic reasons for borrowing:

• 1)    the need for a nomination;

• 2)    the need to separate similar in meaning, but different concepts;

• 3)    elimination of the polysemy of the original word, simplification of semantics;

• 4)    the need for specialization of terms;

• 5)    the desire for the similarity of the inseparability of the signifier and the signified;

• 6)    an idea of the prestige of the borrowed element;

• 7)    the relevance of the signified in the communication aspect.

Extralinguistic reasons:

• 1)    the presence of cultural, political, economic contacts;

• 2)    the development of various areas within the state of the receiving language;

• 3)    the role of the state and the donor language in any area on a global scale;

• 4)    borrowing realia and nominative units [3, p. 140].

86 Вестник Российского нового университета86 Серия «Человек в современном мире», выпуск 1 за 2023 год

In addition to the reasons mentioned above, L.P. Krysin in his work “The Word in Modern Texts and Dictionaries: Essays on Russian Vocabulary and Lexicography” described the most significant reasons why the process of borrowing and rooting these borrowings in the receiving language occurs at an accelerated pace:

• 1)    semantic and functional separation of native and borrowed words that are close in meaning. This means that in the process of rooting in the borrowing language, some lexical elements may receive additional semantic components. A foreign name is often much shorter than in Russian, where it is usually descriptive and consists of several words. For example, a performance is a performance in a theater without specifically defined roles;

• 2)    general psychological reasons: many Russian speakers believe that a foreign word is considered more attractive than a word from their native language, despite the fact that both words have the same meanings [6, р. 112].

The concept of phraseology and phraseologism

The problems of phraseology , the definition of its basic concepts remain relevant for modern linguistics. There are many opinions of various researchers about the definition of phraseology and the scope of phraseology. The phraseological theory of Vlas Platonovich Zhukov is taken as the basis of this study. Thus, the theoretical provisions underlying his concept – basic definitions and classifications – are priority and most significant for the achievement of the goals and objectives of the paper.

Phraseology is a special branch of linguistics, which studies the semantic, morphological, syntactic and stylistic features of phraseologisms (phraseological units) [7, р. 6]. Phraseologism , according to the definition of

• V.P. Zhukov, is a figure of speech, built on the model of coordinating or subordinating phrases, having a holistic meaning and combined with the word [7, р. 6].

To distinguish a class of phraseological units among other units of the language and parts of speech, two typological criteria must be used: semantic and morphological (formal). The semantic criterion involves a single reference to a broad conceptual category. The morphological criterion is used to singularly refer to a particular category based on its morphological properties. In addition, there is a compatibility criterion that determines the ability of units of a given class to combine with each other and with other units.

Features of phraseological units

According to the theory of V.P. Zhukov, phraseology is endowed with a number of essential, defining characteristics, which include: reproducibility, idiomaticity, stability, semantic integrity of the meaning, segmented composition (separate arrangement of the structure).

• V.P. Zhukov calls reproducibility regular recurrence, renewability in speech of language units of varying degrees of complexity, i. e. heterogeneous, heterogeneous formations [7, р. 6].

Th e idiomaticity of a phraseological unit is the semantic indecomposability of phraseological units, the internal semantic unity of a phraseological unit, which ultimately leads to the complete or partial loss of its own lexical meaning by its verbal components [7, р. 6]. The idiomatic meaning of a phraseological unit is the result of a complete or partial rethinking, deactualization of its components, thus, the more complete the rethinking of the meanings of the components of a phraseological unit, the higher the degree of semantic integrity it has.

Фразеология: лексические заимствования в русском языке

V.P. Zhukov defines stability as a measure, degree of fusion and indecomposability of components. At the same time, stability is inextricably linked with idiomaticity: the higher the measure of the semantic discrepancy between the words of free use and the corresponding components of a phraseological unit, the higher the stability, and the more idiomatic such a turn.

Under the semantic integrity of V.P. Zhukov understands such an internal semantic unity of a phraseological unit, which ultimately leads to a complete or partial loss of their own lexical meaning by the components. In other words, semantic integrity is a manifestation of idiomaticity in relation to a specific phraseological unit [7, р. 8]. The integrity of the meaning of a phraseological unit is achieved by complete or partial rethinking, de-actualization of the components. Deactualization is the semantic transformation of a word into an integral part of a phraseological unit, its component [7, р. 8].

An important feature of a phraseological unit is its segmented composition. Thus, the phraseological unit “shooting sparrow” and the free phrase “blue sky” are built according to the same pattern and are separate units that do not differ from each other in their external features [7, р. 10]. The terms “separately formed” phraseologism and “entirely formed” words were first proposed by A.I. Smirnitsky [8, р. 202]. The integral design of a word consists in the presence of a common grammatical design for all its constituent elements.

Method of phraseological application V.P. Zhukov

The method of phraseological application is based on the method of “overlaying” (application) of a phraseological unit on a free phrase of the same composition, if it is present, as well as correlating the general (expanded) meaning of the phraseological unit with the system of meanings of words of free use, if it is impossible to form the corresponding free phrase.

Using the application method, it is possible to establish that the components of, for example, applied (imposed) phraseological units are incommensurable with the words of free use in the semantic, word-forming, morphological and syntactic respect, as well as the phraseological unit is not equivalent to the word. The method of phraseological application comes into contact with component analysis, with the method of dictionary interpretations, since when comparing a phraseological unit component with a word, one has to rely on the verbal composition of a detailed definition, the corresponding phraseological unit [9, р. 46–48].

It is known that none of the methods considered by us can be perfect and then is not decisive for us. In our work, we adhere to an integrated approach that will allow us to avoid excessive subjectivism and one-sided analysis.