Pages

Friday, February 7, 2014

Does English still borrow words from other languages?


Does English still borrow words from other languages?

signs for "yoga", "peace", "city", "tax", and "sushi"
English language has "borrowed" words for centuries. But is it now lending more than it's taking, asks Philip Durkin, deputy chief editor of the Oxford English Dictionary.
English speakers may not be famous for being au fait with foreign languages, but all of us use words taken from other languages every day.
In that last sentence au fait is an obvious example, butfamousforeignlanguagesuse, and taken are also borrowed words. Knowledge of what is being borrowed, and from where, provides an invaluable insight into the international relations of the English language.
Today English borrows words from other languages with a truly global reach. Some examples that the Oxford English Dictionary suggests entered English during the past 30 years include tarka dal, a creamy Indian lentil dish (1984, from Hindi), quinzhee, a type of snow shelter (1984, from Slave or another language of the Pacific Coast of North America), popiah, a type of Singaporean or Malaysian spring roll (1986, from Malay), izakaya, a type of Japanese bar serving food (1987), affogato, an Italian dessert made of ice cream and coffee (1992).
Bagpipe playerA spot of pibroch for the Sassenachs
One obvious thing that these words have in common is that not all English speakers will know them. Probably affogato and tarka dal are likeliest to be familiar to British readers, but they do not yet belong to the vocabulary that you would expect just about every British person to know, and experiences will differ greatly in different parts of the world.
Some words slowly build up in frequency. For instance, the word sushi is first recorded in English in the 1890s, but the earliest examples in print all feel the need to explain what sushi is, and it is only in recent decades that it has become ubiquitous, as sushi has spread along the high street and into supermarket chiller cabinets in most corners of the English-speaking world. But, commonplace though sushi may be today, it hasn't made its way into the inner core of English in the same way as words likepeacewarjust, or very (from French) or legsky,take, or they (from Scandinavian languages). This isn't just because they were borrowed longer ago. It owes a great deal to the different influences that foreign languages have had on the word-stock of English over the centuries.

Start Quote

The number of new borrowed words finding their way into the shared international vocabulary is on a long downward trend”
It's very hard to be precise about the boundaries of the vocabulary of any language, especially a global one like modern English. Every speaker of a language has a slightly different vocabulary. English speakers living in New Zealand are likely to be familiar with a wider range of words of Maori origin, like Pakeha, a New Zealander of European descent, aroha (sympathy, understanding), kia ora - a greeting or farewell. English speakers in Scotland may know more words of Scottish Gaelic origin, likecranachan, a type of dessert, pibroch, bagpipe music,Sassenach, Englishman. Dictionaries, even very big ones like the OED, monitor those words that have some traction in English across the world. This sort of monitoring reveals some surprising trends. Although English is now borrowing from other languages with a worldwide range, the number of new borrowed words finding their way into the shared international vocabulary is on a long downward trend.
One big reason for this is the success of English as an international language of science, scholarship, business, and many other fields. If we think about words coming into English from foreign languages in the 18th and 19th Centuries, we may think first of the impact of colonialism and expanding trade. Words like jungle (1776), bangle(1787), yoga (1818), khaki (1863) came into English from languages of South Asia. But in many other cases new words slipped into English as a result of scientific coinages in other European languages. For example,oxygen reflects the French name oxygène that the scientists Lavoisier and Guyton de Morveau gave to the recently discovered element in the 1780s. The word is formed from elements that ultimately come from Greek, but it was coined in French and then borrowed into English.
YogaYoga made its first English appearance in 1818
A similar story applies to paraffin, formed in German in 1830 (from Latin elements), and then borrowed into English in 1835. Other borrowings like semester (1826) or seminar (1889) reflect German innovations in higher education. Such borrowings are still sometimes found today, but have become much less common, as English has become the lingua franca of the world of learning (and of so many other fields). Today, the balance is tipping much more towards English as a donor of new words (eginternetcomputercell phonemeetingbusiness) rather than a borrower. By contrast, new borrowings into English today tend to cluster much more closely in a few subject areas, especially names of food and drink.
If we look back further, it was in the Middle Ages that the everyday vocabulary of English was affected most deeply by borrowing from other languages. In the wake of the Norman Conquest, French and Latin put English in the shade for centuries as the language of learning. The church, law, and officialdom. Even everyday business records were typically written in Latin or French down to the late 1300s. This has left an indelible mark on the English language today. Words like ageaircausecity,ideajoinmaterialpoorsuffertax have become part of the fabric of modern English. Not far short of half of the 1,000 most frequently occurring words in modern written English have come into the language from French or Latin, mostly in the period from 1066 to 1500.

Mind your language with the Magazine

"Francais" in dictionary
Fewer in number, but even more striking in their impact on the language of everyday life, are those words that came into English from Scandinavian languages. When communities of Scandinavian settlers in late Anglo-Saxon England began to switch to using English, they brought with them some words that have become part of the most basic layer of the vocabulary of English, such asgivetakehitlegskinsky, and even the pronoun they. This was greatly helped by the close similarities between the early Scandinavian languages and medieval English.
Close contact does not inevitably lead to borrowing. For example, although English has been rubbing shoulders with Welsh and other Celtic languages in the British Isles for many centuries, relatively few words have come into everyday English from this source. There are some examples, like trousersgull,clan, or (maybe) baby, but they are tiny in number compared with the vast numbers borrowed from French and Latin, and they have had less impact on the everyday language than words from Scandinavian sources.
Ultimately, patterns of borrowed words reflect complex patterns of cultural contacts across the centuries. Names of foods, plants, animals, and other features of the natural world are borrowed as part of the basic traffic between peoples in different parts of the world. Borrowings affecting other areas of the vocabulary typically follow the pathways of power and prestige between languages. English today may, for once, be more of a lender than a borrower. If we try to look decades or centuries into the future, who knows?
Philip Durkin is the author of Borrowed Words: A History of Loanwords in English
Follow @BBCNewsMagazine on Twitter and onFacebook
Comments are now closed. A selection will be published later.

Thursday, February 6, 2014

The struggle under the Persian carpet


The struggle under the Persian carpet: infighting in Iran

Winston Churchill once famously described watching Soviet politics from abroad as “like watching two dogs fighting under a carpet”. It feels slightly similar today, watching Iranian politics from the West. There is clearly a struggle going on, underneath the Persian carpet, but exactly who is doing what to whom remains opaque.
Take last night’s television interview with President Hassan Rouhani. The president’s appearance was delayed, prompting his staff to tweet that he had been “prevented live discussion w/people…which was scheduled for an hour ago.”
Eventually, the interview with Mr Rouhani proceeded and the president refused to elaborate about who or what had caused the hold-up. However, he did make some fairly incendiary points – complaining about “shocking corruption”, pointing to the intimidation of those who support his nuclear negotiations and remarking pointedly that it is a shame that Iran, with the world’s largest reserves of gas, is unable to meet domestic demand.
So what should outsiders conclude from all this? The obvious point is that there really is a political struggle going on, inside Iran, between reformists and hardliners. This will hardly come as news to those who follow Iranian politics. But it is an idea that is still disputed by some in the West, who argue that it is a mistake to regard President Rouhani as a reformist, in any real sense. So, for example, when the president appeared at Davos last month and indirectly confirmed the idea that he is facing significant domestic opposition to his efforts to secure a nuclear deal, some of his audience were sceptical. They reasoned that the Iranian leader might simply be talking up his domestic problems, to avoid making concessions.
The apparent confirmation that the domestic opposition to Rouhani is real and bitter should affect the way that the US and its allies approach the next round of the nuclear negotiations. Put simply, they really have to recognise that for President Rouhani, as for President Obama, there are domestic constraints on how far he can go – at least initially. It is also important to the Iranian president’s domestic position that he is seen to deliver on his promise to start loosening the choke-hold of economic sanctions.
Last night’s delayed television interview was just the most dramatic sign of the political struggles taking place under the Persian carpet. Najmeh Bozorgmehr’s fascinating dispatch from Tehran this morning details the case of a university professor, hauled in for interrogation, simply for questioning the utility of Iran’s nuclear programme. And indeed, in last night’s interview, President Rouhani said that people who supported his negotiations were sometimes too intimidated to express their support in public.
It all makes President Obama’s problems with Congress over Iran look relatively straightforward.

Saturday, February 1, 2014

A statistically modelled wedding


A statistically modelled wedding

Damjan Vukcevic and Joan Ko on their wedding day
It's the classic dilemma for anyone planning a wedding. The list of friends and family you'd like to invite is seemingly endless. Your budget is not, and neither is the venue's floor space. Could one couple have found a solution via statistical modelling?
Damjan Vukcevic and Joan Ko, planning their wedding in Melbourne, Australia, were struggling to draw up an invitation list of family and friends in places as far-flung as Serbia, Tawain, the UK and the US.
"We're both from immigrant families, so the guest list had people from all around the world and, while it's easy to work out whether people in Melbourne - our home town - could come to the wedding, it was a much more difficult task to work out what proportion or how many of the overseas guests would show up," Joan says.
"So the challenge is to pick the right number of invitees so that we could get all our friends there, but to not overshoot the mark - and to stop my parents from inviting their friends willy-nilly, as well."
The venue they had chosen could fit 110 comfortably. Damjan and Joan calculated that having fewer than 100 guests meant they would be wasting the opportunity to celebrate with more friends, while having more than 110 guests would be too much of a tight squeeze.
They could have done what many people do - post the first batch of invitations, wait for replies and then send out a second round and, maybe, a third - but this wasn't an option the couple were keen on.

More or Less: Behind the stats

Listen to More or Less on BBC Radio 4 and the World Service, or download the free podcast
"Some people might get an invitation in the second round and if they're comparing notes they might wonder, 'Oh, what's going on here? Are we not in the best tier of friends, so to speak?'" Damjan says.
So one morning, Joan awoke to the find that Damjan had been up late building a solution - a statistical model.
The couple started to list all the people they might want to invite to their wedding. They divided them into four categories, depending on how far away they were and how firm the friendship was, and then estimated the probability that a guest in each category would show up.

Start Quote

You should always have a buffer for people with new partners that you didn't know about, or friends and family that your parents have accidently invited”
Joan Ko
They made some other assumptions, too - for instance, that couples would either both come, or both stay away, and that there were no other influences, such as FA cup finals, high airline prices, or rival weddings which might simultaneously influence lots of guests to stay away.
Damjan and Joan plugged the numbers into the spreadsheet, and then sent out 139 invitations in the expectation they would receive between 100 and 110 acceptances.
As they waited for the replies to drop through the letter box, they were confident that, statistically speaking, success was almost certain.
Their model gave a 95% prediction interval of 102-113 acceptances. It suggested the most likely result would be 106 attendees.
Church aisle
So how many people finally did show up?
Exactly 105 - a triumph for statistical modelling!
Or maybe not. Because of the 105 people went to the wedding, only 97 had been on the original guest list and in the spreadsheet.
"We had that problem that weddings often have - people showing up who probably didn't get their invitation in the first round," Joan says.

Up the aisle with the Magazine

wedding couple
"So I think you should always have a buffer for people with new partners that you didn't know about, or friends and family that your parents have accidently invited."
Damjan and Joan had made two sizeable statistical errors.
Firstly, they were too optimistic about how many people would accept their invitation. They assumed a 100% acceptance rate among the people living in their home town, which didn't turn out to be the case, and they were also surprised by how few of their overseas guests could make it.
Secondly, they didn't take account of the fact that there will always be people who weren't on the original list, who will come anyway.
But although the model was wrong, they still had just the right number of guests celebrate their marriage with them.
"All the errors cancel out," Joan laughs.
Car with "Just married" and tin cans on bumper
And undeterred, they've been further honing the model on their friends' weddings and hope they could have it developed into an app one day.
Meanwhile, the key message for all you statistical modellers out there remains - if you can't be right, then be lucky.
Follow @BBCNewsMagazine on Twitter and on Facebook