Loan Words Adaptation: Perceptual-Phonological Approach

Authors
F. Khalifehloo 1
Z. Mozaffari 2
F. koushki 3
1 Assistant Professor of English Literature, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Sistan and Baluchestan, Iran
2 PhD student in General linguistics , University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Sistan and Baluchestan, Iran
3 PhD student in General linguistics , University of Al-Zahra, Tehran, Iran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
This paper examines English loan words adaptation in Persian within the framework of Silverman (1992)́s phonological-perceptual approach. This article explores whether vowel epenthesis as a repair strategy in loan word adaptation is phonological or a perceptual illusion and based on what kind of loan word adaptation approaches, English loanword adaptation in Persian can be examined. In an answer to the first question, two experiments were conducted with twelve participants who had very little knowledge of English language. The results indicated that vowel epenthesis in consonant clusters of English loanwords is a perceptual illusion and happens at the perceptual level. In an answer to the second question, the results indicated that loan words adaptation is better to be examined based on phonological-perceptual approaches in that Silverman (1992)́s two level model of loanword adaptation can be an appropriate choice.

Keywords

  • آرلاتو، آنتونی. (1384). درآمدی بر زبان‌شناسی تاریخی. ترجمه یحیی مدرسی. تهران: پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی.

  • علی‌نژاد، بتول و ملیحه رحیمی. (1390). «ماهیت واکه درج‌شده در وام‌واژه‌های انگلیسی در زبان فارسی، برمبنای نظریه بهینگی». مجله زبان‌شناخت: پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی. س 2. ش 1. صص 69‌ـ97 تاریخ مراجعه به سایت: 15/5/94.

  • کرد زعفرانلو کامبوزیا، عالیه و افتخارسادات هاشمی. (1393). «انطباق واجی واکه‌های وام‌واژه‌های زبان عربی در زبان فارسی: نظریه بهینگی». جستارهای زبانی. د 5. ش 1 (پیاپی 17). صص 191‌ـ222. تاریخ مراجعه به سایت: 15/5/94.



  • Bringston, R. (1997). “Cost and benefit in loanword adaptation". Working Papers in Linguistics. Vol.3. Department of Linguistic Science, Reading, UK.

  • Dehghan, M. & A. Kambuziya K.Z .(2012). “A Short analysis of insertion In Persian”. Theory and Practice in Language Studies. Vol.2. No.1: ACADEMY PUBLISHER Manufactured in Finland.

  • Demuth, K. & R. Yvan (2005). “Vowel Epenthesis in loanword adaptation: Representational and Phonetic Considerations”. Lingua116. www.elsevier.com

  • Gibson, Mark (2012). “Perception-based vowel insertion by native Spanish-speaking learners of English”. Linguistique Experimentale 28. http//tipa .revues.org

  • Hyman, L. (1970). “The role of borrowing in justification of phonological grammars”. Studies in African Linguistics1.

  • Jacobs & Gussenhoven (2000). Loan phonology: Perception, Salience, the Lexical and OT. Oxford university press.

  • Kambuziya K.Z., A.  (2006). “Criticism and correction of Mohammad Reza Majidi and ElmarTerner paper”. Language and Linguistics. Vol. 2. No.1.

  • Kambuziya K.Z., A.  A. Zafaranlo & N. Mirzai Hosseinzadeh (2014). “English loanwords In Persian: Vowel Adaptation”. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences. Vol 4. No.5. Pp.60-61.

  • Kambuziya K.Z., A.  & H. Eftekhar Sadat (2011). “Russian loan words adaptation In Persian: Optimal Approach”. Italian Journal of Applied studies. Vol.3. No.1.

  • Karimi, S. (1987) “Farsi speakers and initial consonant cluster in English”. Ioup and Weinberger.

  • Kenstowicz, M.(2003). “Salience and similarity in loanword adaptation: A case study from Thai”. Lingua 116.

  • Kertesz, Z. (2006). “Approaches to phonological analysis of loanword adaptation”. The Even Yearbook 7. Pp 8-6 .

  • Lacharite, D. & C. Paradis (2005). “Category preservation and proximity versus phonetic approximation in loanword adaptation“. Linguistic Inquiry.36.

  • Paradis, C. & D. Lacharite (1996). “Preservation and minimality in loanword adaptation”. Journal of Linguistics 33.Pp.384-387.

  • Paradis, C. (2006). “The unnatural /Cju/ sequence in Russian loanwords: A problem for the perceptual view". Lingua 116.

  • Peperkamp, S. & E. Dupoux (2002). “A typological study of stress ‘deafness.”In: C. Gussenhoven & N. Warner (eds.) Laboratory Phonology 7. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Peperkamp, S. & E. Dupoux (2003). “Reinterpreting loanword Adaptation: the Role of Perception”. Proceedings of the 15th international congress of phonetic Sciences. Barcelona. Pp.367-369.

  • Peperkamp, Sh. (2005). “A linguistic theory of loanword adaptation” Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society

  • Peperkamp, Sh.; I. Vendelin & Kimihiro Nakamara (2008). “On the perceptual origion of loanword adaptations: Experimental evidence from Japanese”. Phonology 25. Pp. 154-131.

  • Silverman, D. (1992). “Multiple sanctions in loanword phonology: Evidence from contonese”. Phonology 9. Pp.61-62-289.

  • Smith, Jennifer L. (2005). “Loan phonology is not all perception: Evidence from Japanese loan doublets”. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 14.

  • Smith, Jennifer L. (2006). “Correspondence theory vs. Cyclic OT: Beyond morphologiical derivation”. Proceedings of NELS36.

  • Steriade, D. (2001). “Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: A perceptual account”. The Role of Speech perception in Phonology.

  • Yip, M. (1993). “Cantonese loanword phonology and optimality theory”. Journal of East Asian Linguistics2.

  • Yip, M. (2002). “Necessary but not sufficient: Perceptual influences in loanword phonology”. The Journal of the Phonetic Society of Japan. 6 (1).Pp. 4-21.

  • Yip, M. (2006). “The symbiosis between perception and grammar in loanword phonology”. Lingua. 116.Pp. 950-975. doi:10.1016/j.lingua. 2005.05.007


 


 

Language Related Research
Volume 7, Issue 7
March and April 2016
Pages 97-123