PDF Translingual Words An East Asian Lexical Encounter With English Jieun Kiaer Ebook Full Chapter

Translingual Words An East Asian
Lexical Encounter with English Jieun

Kiaer
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/translingual-words-an-east-asian-lexical-encounter-wi
th-english-jieun-kiaer/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
English Collocations in Use Intermediate Book with

Answers How Words Work Together for Fluent and Natural
English Michael Mccarthy
https://textbookfull.com/product/english-collocations-in-use-
intermediate-book-with-answers-how-words-work-together-for-
fluent-and-natural-english-michael-mccarthy/
Perceptual Training on Lexical Stress Contrasts A Study

with Taiwanese Learners of English as a Foreign
Language Shu-Chen Ou
https://textbookfull.com/product/perceptual-training-on-lexical-
stress-contrasts-a-study-with-taiwanese-learners-of-english-as-a-
foreign-language-shu-chen-ou/
Colonial Encounter Telugu English Literary and Cultural

Interface 1st Edition C. Vijayasree (Editor)
https://textbookfull.com/product/colonial-encounter-telugu-
english-literary-and-cultural-interface-1st-edition-c-vijayasree-
editor/
4000 Essential English Words Book 1 2nd Edition Paul

Nation
https://textbookfull.com/product/4000-essential-english-words-
book-1-2nd-edition-paul-nation/
Nation

Nation

Nation

Nation

Nation
Translingual Words
Translingual Words is a detailed case study on lexical integration, or medi-

ation, occurring between East Asian languages and English(es).
In Part I, specific examples from global linguistic corpora are used to
discuss the issues involved in lexical interaction between East Asia and the
English-speaking world. Part II explores the spread of East Asian words in
English, while Part III discusses English words which can be found in East
Asian languages.
Translingual Words presents a novel approach on hybrid words by chal-
lenging the orthodox ideas on lexical borrowing and explaining the dynamic
growth of new words based on translingualism and transculturalism.
Jieun Kiaer is Associate Professor of Korean Language and Linguistics at

the University of Oxford, UK.
Routledge Studies in East Asian Translation
Series Editors:
Jieun Kiaer
University of Oxford, UK
Amy Xiofan Li
University of Kent, UK
Routledge Studies in East Asian Translation aims to discuss issues and

challenges involved in translation between Chinese, Japanese, and Korean
as well as from these languages into European languages with an eye to
comparing the cultures of translation within East Asia and tracking some
of their complex interrelationships.
Most translation theories are built on translation between European lan-
guages, with only few exceptions. However, this Eurocentric view on lan-
guage and translation can be seriously limited in explaining the translation
of non-European literature and scholarship, especially when it comes to
translating languages outside the Indo-European family that have radically
different script forms and grammatical categories, and may also be embed-
ded in very different writing traditions and cultures. This series considers
possible paradigm shifts in translation theory, arguing that translation
theory and practice need to go beyond European languages and encompass
a wider range of literature and scholarship.
Translingual Words
An East Asian Lexical Encounter with English
Jieun Kiaer
For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com/

languages/series/RSEAT
Translingual Words
An East Asian Lexical Encounter
with English
Jieun Kiaer
First published 2019
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2019 Jieun Kiaer
The right of Jieun Kiaer to be identified as author of this work has
been asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic,
mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented,
including photocopying and recording, or in any information
storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the
publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks
or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and
explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British
Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record has been requested for this book
ISBN: 978-0-8153-5762-9 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-1-351-10947-5 (ebk)
Typeset in Times New Roman
by Wearset Ltd, Boldon, Tyne and Wear
Contents
Acknowledgements vi
Part I
Birth of translingual words 1
1 Foreign words: aliens and denizens? 5
2 Hybrid words: anomalies? 16
3 Subcultural words: peripheral words? 25
4 Translingual words 33
Part II
East Asian words in English 51
5 First arrivals 53
6 Settlement 63
7 Stylistic variations 75
Part III
English words in East Asian languages 91
8 Directly-imported English words 93
9 Locally-made English words 113
10 Global words 128
Bibliography 147
Index 152
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my colleagues and students who have provided

invaluable comments for this book. Anna Bordilovskaya, Danica Salazar,
Niamh Cawley, Brittany Khedun-Burgoine and Derek Driggs helped me at
key stages of its development. I am also grateful to Johannes Abeler for
sharing his images of Japan.
I would like to dedicate this book to my late father-in-law, Stanley
Kiaer (1931–2018), who proof-read the first version of this book. I miss
him dearly.
Part I
Birth of
translingual words
Like people, words around the globe are constantly on the move, and there
are countless examples of foreign-born words or words with foreign heri-
tage in our daily lives. These words are becoming so common that most of
the time they do not feel foreign to us at all. As well as becoming more
numerous, the identities and lives of these words are becoming increas-
ingly complex and diverse – resembling our own migration demographics.
In addition, the amount of hybrid words with different lexical origins is
also increasing fast, and widespread use of social media is bringing greater
amounts of subcultural words into the main lexicon. As a result, the terms
traditionally used to describe the transfer from one language to another,
such as ‘borrowing’ or ‘loanwords’, are inadequate in describing words
with such complex and diverse stories.
In the twentieth century, the primacy of national languages meant that
debates around the protection of one’s national language were prominent
across the globe (Phillipson 1992, 2003). As a result, foreign-born words
or words with foreign heritage were often considered outsiders in their
new home languages. However, in the twenty-first century there is less of
a clear distinction between native and foreign words, owing to both the
sheer number of foreign words, and the increase of multilingual and multi-
cultural societies.
As the number of languages we encounter in our everyday lives
increases, so does the complexity of the origins of our words. In order to
capture the nature of these words with diverse origins and complex life
trajectories, I introduce the notion of translingual words in this book.
Translingual words are words that live across the borders of languages.
These words constantly travel and re-settle in different languages. As a
part of their adaptation processes, they gain local forms and meanings. The
development of social media has made this adaptation process much more
diverse than before. Individuals or groups actively participate in shaping
forms and meanings of these words. Unlike the pre-social media era where
2 Birth of translingual words
many people were limited to local forms of words produced by mainstream
linguistic authorities or media, the advent of social media has opened the
doors for ordinary people to participate actively in making, sharing, and
spreading words of their own. Words on social media can have highly
individualised forms and meanings, and the ease of access offered by
social media has boosted large-scale communication across different
languages. This large-scale communication provides crucial living
environments for translingual words.
This book shows the need to shift from a monolingual lexical model
into a multilingual, dynamic lexical model in order to accommodate the
flexible, fluid and multi-faceted nature of the translingual words in our
global lexicon.
In this book, we focus mainly on an East Asian lexical encounter with
English. We aim to look at the situation in mainland China,1 Japan and
Korea (mostly South)2 and additionally some data from Taiwan, Hong
Kong, and Macau. Large-scale lexical encounters between East Asian lan-
guages and English happened relatively late as we shall explore. However,
it is now happening in an unprecedented scope and speed. China has been
relatively slow in receiving English words compared to Japan and Korea
for a number of socio-political reasons, but in recent years the English lan-
guage has had a more substantial impact in China.
The lexical interaction between the non-Latinate, Sino-sphere world
and the Latinate world is worth mentioning because this has caused exten-
sive variation in the ways in which words are represented. These variations
have been on the rise in recent years as ordinary people interact interna-
tionally through social media. In such cases, they tend not to follow set-
ways of transcription but freely use their own means of exchange. In light
of these ever-increasing variations, in this book I will use the Romanised
forms of words which seem most suitable for the setting in which they are
being used, rather than systematically following one or two Romanisation
methods.
Unless otherwise stated, English here does not refer to a particular
variety of English (i.e. US or UK English), but to varieties of English or
global, international varieties of English (Crystal 2000). These varieties
are not necessarily those from Kachru’s inner-circle English, but also outer
and expanding circles of English. In this sense, therefore is the target of
our discussion.
Tracing words’ lives: methodology

In this book I will use the following methods to trace the lives of the trans-
lingual words that I will discuss.
Birth of translingual words 3
Using online databases
In order to justify the inclusion of a new entry or indeed, update a present
entry within the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), OED lexicographers
first aim to find evidence of widespread use of the word in its English
form. Evidence is gathered through various means such as literary and
non-literary texts, various databases, newspapers, journals, digital and
print books, regional dictionaries, contributions from members of the
public, specialist advice from various consultants, and even social media.
In this book, using the OED’s methodology of tracing words, I am going
to gather textual evidence by sieving through online databases such as Pro-
Quest, Nexis, JSTOR, and Google Books to search for evidence of wide-
spread use of words. ProQuest, JSTOR, and Google Books hold a massive
collection of journals and ebooks while Nexis holds a similar database of
(digital) newspapers from all over the world that can be cross-referenced
when searching for keywords. Filtering through the online databases for
the keywords has a twofold object – not only does it seek to find evidence
of widespread use of those words in their English forms and date the first
recorded instance that the word had been used in print, it also attempts to
recognise how the word is being used, determining where it fits in the
different parts of speech used in English (i.e. determining whether the
word is used as a noun, adjective, conjunction, interjection, etc.).
Social media
Part of the methodology for this study will examine social media in order
to trace the online lives of translingual words. This methodology will
consist of content analysis of comments featuring the selected words made
on popular social media platforms, with a particular emphasis on Twitter.
Twitter is open to the general public for academic purposes and no
identifiable information has been included in Tweets featured in this study.
As Twitter allows users to search by hashtag and features accurate time
stamping for each Tweet, we will be able to track any potential linguistic
developments over the past ten years. As relatively less data is available
pre-2008, we will be using data from social media from 2008 to the
present.
Google Trends and Google N-gram

I will also use Google Trends and Google N-gram in order to trace the
lives of translingual words in many varieties of English, not limited to the
inner-circle speakers (Kachru 1985) of English. As we shall explore, many
subcultural words born in East Asia have entered into World English
through Southeast Asian varieties of English. Making use of Google
Trends and Google N-gram can help assess these usages in varieties of
English found in the outer or expanding circle of English speakers, as they
become increasingly more important in the diversification of the English
lexicon.
Notes
1 In this book ‘China’ will refer primarily to mainland China.
2 In this book ‘Korea’ will refer primarily to South Korea, unless otherwise
indicated.
1 Foreign words
Aliens and denizens?
James Murray (1837–1915), the first editor of the Oxford English Diction-
ary (OED), referred to foreign words as ‘uncommon words’, and as ‘aliens
and denizens’ of the English language. As a lexicographer working at the
peak of the explosion of new words in the early twentieth century, he
struggled with the question of how best to classify words that had entered
English from other languages. Were they English words or not? On what
grounds? Like most of the editors of the OED after him, he held an inclu-
sive view as the following quote shows.
The English Language is the language of Englishmen! Of which Eng-

lishmen? Of all Englishmen or of some Englishmen? … Does it
include the English of Great Britain and the English of America, the
English of Australia, and of South Africa, and of those most assertive
Englishmen, the Englishmen of India, who live in bungalows, hunt in
jungles, wear terai hats or puggaries and pyjamas, write chits instead
of letters and eat kedgeree and chutni? Yes! In its most comprehensive
sense, and as an object of historical study, it includes all these; they
are all forms of English.
(Murray 1911:18)
However, the decision for each word was not so straightforward. Murray
himself proposed a model to classify the English lexicon (see Figure 1.1),
in which he assigned literary, common, and colloquial words as the prin-
cipal source of the English lexicon, and scientific, technical, dialectal,
slang, and ‘foreign’ words as peripheral.
This view, however, is somewhat problematic given that the majority of
common words in the modern English lexicon are of foreign coinage.
English is renowned for absorbing words from other languages, and would
be hard to imagine as a complete language without these words of ‘others’
(Durkin 2014). Even words we have come to associate with quintessential
Figure 1.1 Murray’s ‘circle of English’: Murray (1888: xxv).

Source: credit: OUP.
Englishness, such as tea, marmalade, and cottage, were originally the

words of others. This is particularly true of everyday culinary words –
banana, bacon, coffee, potato, tomato, chutney, noodles, chocolate,
yoghurt, ketchup, broccoli, celery, carrot, kiwi, and avocado are all
examples of foreign words that have become native to the English
language.
Foreign-origin words in the OED: really English?

In their 2013 book, Jones and Ogilvie depict how attitudes towards the entry
of words of foreign origin into the OED changed from editor to editor, and
how, contrary to popular belief, the early editors tended to favour the inclu-
sion of foreign words in the dictionary. This was especially true of Murray,
who was the chief editor from 1879–1915. Murray received suggestions
from many contributors worldwide and he deemed words of foreign origin
and world Englishes as ‘legitimate members of the English language’ (1888:
xiv). Henry Bradley (1915–1923), Murray’s successor as chief editor of the
OED, continued the inclusion of foreign words, but did not consider them
‘really English’. His opinion on Chinese words was particularly illustrative
of this, with Bradley saying that ‘China has given us tea and the names of
various kinds of tea; and a good many other Chinese words figure in our
Foreign words: aliens and denizens? 7
larger dictionaries, though they cannot be said to have become really
English’ (Jones and Ogilvie 2013: 39). Murray, on the other hand, felt that
the definition of ‘Englishman’ should include all speakers of English around
the world, regardless of variety, claiming that ‘they are all forms of English’
(ibid.: 60). This open attitude was an exception in Victorian academia, and
Murray’s dictionary was criticised as ‘barbarous’, ‘outlandish’, and ‘pecu-
liar’ (ibid.: 54). However, this openness towards foreign-origin words did
not mean that Murray saw them as equivalent to native English words, and
every word in the dictionary that was considered to be foreign was marked
with so-called tramlines (| |).
However, the problem of how to define a word as foreign remains.
Durkin (2014) shows that even pronouns like he and she have Scandina-
vian heritage, and that of the 1,000 most frequently used English words,
just over half (529 words) are indeed loans. And of these, the vast majority
(487 words) have their roots in French, Latin, or a combination of both.
What this shows is that the foreignness of a word is more about perception
and usage than actual origin, and that this makes classifying foreign vs.
native words difficult or even futile. More than where a vocabulary word
comes from, the level of familiarity of that word in daily life matters in
defining its foreignness. Food words like banana or clothing words like
pyjamas don’t seem foreign because they are so familiar, but this does not
change the fact that they originated in different languages.
When words that are perceived as foreign represent a small minority, it
is easy to think of them as the words of strangers or outsiders. Yet, as we
shall come to explain in this book, this is a view that is hard to sustain in a
super-diverse, multilingual era, as foreign-born words or hybrid words
with foreign heritage increasingly become a major source of words in all
world languages.
Foreign words are now common

Foreign-born words or words with foreign heritage are increasingly
common in languages around the world, and this trend is expected to con-
tinue and grow globally as our lives become more closely interwoven than
ever before. Far from being outsiders, they are ubiquitous in our daily
lexicon. Think of what we eat, drink, watch, or buy. These words may be
mediated or represented through the local orthography and pronunciation
of a community, disguising their foreign origin, but one may also be able
to infer their foreign linkages from the semantic meanings of the words.
Nevertheless, the spread of these words through the internet and social
media, as well as their sheer number, means that it is sometimes hard to
notice their foreign origin. For British or American nationals, for instance,
many words with Asian connections are as familiar as native English
words. They do not feel words like Sudoku, Pokémon, or chop chop are
particularly foreign – many would not even be aware of their foreign links.
Take, for instance, words like chicken tikka masala. According to the
OED, tikka comes from Hindi, and masala comes from Urdu, but the com-
pounding of the word was born in UK English. Because of the common
nature of this food in the UK, British nationals may know the Indian heri-
tage of this word, but they do not feel that the word is foreign or distant.
Someone from the US, on the other hand, may feel a greater sense of for-
eignness about this word, simply because it is not as commonly eaten
there.1 Similarly, in Korean and Japanese, most IT- or computer-related
words are at least partially made up of English elements, but Korean and
Japanese people nevertheless use them freely without any feeling of for-
eignness. Terms such as web, online, e-, bio-, or eco- are hard to label as
simply English-origin words – the users of these words, regardless of
which language they speak, will consider these words as their native words
more than as foreign words.
The inspiration for this book came from a project I carried out in Oxford
in the summer of 2014,2 which aimed to explore commonalities and diversi-
ties among contemporary words through newspaper analysis. Looking at
eight newspapers from around the world – five from Europe (English,
French, German, Spanish, and Portuguese), and three from East Asia
(Chinese, Japanese, and Korean) – we were astonished by the frequency of
shared words across the globe, regardless of the languages spoken and geo-
graphic distance. The ‘migration’ of words is not new in human history, yet
since the beginning of the twentieth century this migration has happened on
an unprecedented scale and scope – transcending regional, cultural, and lin-
guistic distance. Often, these words now live globally online through the
medium of English, instead of moving from one place to another.
Colonialism in lexical interaction

Before the twentieth century, lexical interaction between East Asia and the
Western world was relatively rare. But twentieth-century colonialism
played an important role in lexical interactions between Asian languages
and the English language. Through colonialism, people had language
usage imposed upon them. In such circumstances, most people did not
simply switch to the new language; they may have been educated in the
colonial language, but often they continued to speak their original language
in the home and other settings. This provided an ideal environment for
languages to begin interacting and sharing vocabulary. After World War II
and the end of colonialism, language usage was no longer imposed, but the
vocabularies of the languages themselves remained intertwined in lasting
and irreversible ways (Schneider 2007).
Lexical interaction in the digital age

Before the current digital age, words entered into foreign lexicons much
more predictably and gradually than they do now. Inter-state trade and war
were the main sources of linguistic contact and borrowing (McMahon
1994), meaning that these interactions often involved no more than two
parties at a time. Now, however, word migration often involves multiple
parties around the globe.
Anthony Giddens famously defined globalisation as ‘the intensification
of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way
that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and
vice versa’ (1991: 64). His statement could not hold more true today, be it
from a political, economic, cultural, or linguistic standpoint. Our increas-
ingly global interests and outlook, as collectives and as individuals, have
been in large part facilitated by the advent of the internet and the sub-
sequent proliferation of technologies and platforms for sharing and dis-
seminating information. Nowadays, all it takes is a click of a button or a
tap of a screen to be able to access and contribute to transnational flows of
knowledge, goods, and capital. If we also take into account the continuing
rise of global migration and tourism, the sheer volume and variety of inter-
actions taking place across national, regional, and cultural boundaries at
any given moment would be impossible to quantify. In such a context, the
birth of a global lexicon, shared by global citizens, is unsurprising.
Spreading words through social media

The opening of the digital era and the growth of social media play a crucial
role in producing a common vocabulary of global words with diverse
origins that is freely shared by people across the world. Whereas in the
past the majority of people were simply unaware of words from other cul-
tures, now words of interest quickly spread through the internet and social
media from one region to the whole world. Lexical migration and settle-
ment have never before taken place so quickly and across such large dis-
tances. For example, consider the term #MeToo. The term #MeToo was
coined as part of a movement by women who had undergone sexual abuse
and were choosing to be more vocal about their experiences. As an
important social movement with a wide impact, the new term – which at
face value has no particular meaning – spread around the world in a matter
of hours. In some linguistic environments the term was translated, and in
others it was transliterated. In Korea, for example, the transliteration mit’u
(미투) was used; there was no inherent meaning to the sounds used, but
context quickly supplied a definition for the new term. In a mere 12 hours
after it began to be used on social media, people in countries all over the
world were found using it – the term had effectively entered the global
lexicon in less than a day’s time.3
It is interesting to note that the term #MeToo as coined in the #MeToo
movement included a hashtag, and was written as one word with no space.
Now, many news platforms do not even use the word ‘movement’ or any
hashtag when discussing the term ‘Me Too’, but people tend to understand
the meaning of the term even without any context.
Native words vs. foreign words in a multilingual era

We are used to the idea of having one mother tongue made up of native
words belonging to that one language. Blommaert (2009), however, chal-
lenges this monolingual viewpoint on our native language and lexicon. He
shows how Rwandan refugee Joseph Mutingira’s application for asylum
was denied by the British Home Office because of faulty assumptions
about language. Mutingira spoke poor Kinyarwanda, the language spoken
in Rwanda, because his family had spoken English when he was young.
This was not unusual in Rwanda, but the interpreter did not identify him as
a native speaker of Kinyarwanda during the application process, leading to
doubts about his country of origin. This case was a tragic example of
incorrect assumptions of monolingualism and the failure to appreciate the
complexity of words and language in a multilingual setting.
The linguistic, cultural, and ethnic landscape is changing across the
globe. Multilingual, multicultural, and multi-ethnic realities are found not
just in cosmopolitan centres or traditionally multilingual countries like
Belgium or Switzerland, but indeed everywhere. For instance, the 2011
UK Census showed that the Asian/Asian British ethnic group category had
one of the largest increases of any ethnic group since 2001, with a third of
the foreign-born population of the UK (2.4 million) now identifying them-
selves as Asian British.4 It is not surprising to see many Asian-born
English words in the English language given this demographic situation.
People do not feel that these Asian-born English words are any more
foreign than Asian British people. Most people do not seem to see a black-
and-white distinction between native words and foreign words, and are in
general open to foreign-born words.
As we shall return in Chapter 6, according to a survey I conducted of
100 students at the University of Central Lancashire, most young British
English speakers not only recognised several words of East Asian origin –
sushi, karaoke, origami, kimchi, ramen, anime, kimono, sake, and karate,
for example – but also considered them to be part of the English language
(Kiaer and You 2016).
A pilot study of native Japanese speakers’ perceptions of English-
derived words produced similar findings, in that the respondents tended to
think of words like apuri (short for ‘application’) as belonging to the Japa-
nese language.5 Figure 1.2 shows the perceived nativeness of selected
words, based on how many respondents said ‘yes’ to the question ‘Do you
think this is a Japanese word?’ This case is particularly interesting because
of the use of different scripts to render foreign words and native words in
Japanese, and suggests that an orthographical indication of foreignness
was not the determining factor in a native speaker’s perception of a given
word. In Japanese, all foreign words are written in Katakana.
Figure 1.2 Do you think these words are Japanese words?

Similar patterns have been observed in native speakers of Mandarin
Chinese, Korean, German, French, and Spanish.6 Such findings indicate
that even native speakers do not necessarily all have the same perceptions
of their native language and lexicon, and that the boundaries between
native and foreign words are often blurred. The surveys show that some
words may be naturalised more quickly and easily than others. For
instance, words related to everyday items, services and IT/technology
words (e.g. app, net, web) tend to be fully integrated into local languages
in a relatively short period of time.
Complex identity of words: beyond borrowing and

loanwords
The identity of foreign-born words in our time is complex, and difficult to
explain in terms of ‘borrowing’ and ‘loans’. Is sushi an English word or a
Japanese word – or perhaps both? The word sushi lives in most of the lan-
guages in the world. Is this Japanese, English, or a word that belongs to all
languages? How can we explain the identity and status of these apparently
foreign, yet so prevalently used words like sushi in our lexicons? In addi-
tion to words such as sushi, which have had a relatively straightforward
linguistic journey, there are second-generation words and hybrid words,
which are all locally made yet with foreign elements (Kiaer and Bor-
dilovskaya 2017). For instance, the majority of infrastructure words in
Korea and Japan are locally-made English words. It is hard to simply label
them as borrowings or loanwords (see Chapter 9).
Whose words? Mediations in translingual journeys

The journey of a word from its language of origin to new ‘home’ languages is
often far from straightforward. It often involves (a layer of) mediations by
another language in spelling, pronunciation, and meanings too. Take the word
coffee, for instance. According to the OED, the word coffee is believed to
have entered the English language around 1600 from the Arabic term qahwah,
mediated by the Turkish pronunciation kahveh. The majority of plant names
that entered the English language around this time followed a similar trajec-
tory. Potato entered English from Spanish around the 1560s, but was origin-
ally derived from the Haitian word batata. It is interesting to note that in East
Asia this route is not commonly known, and the word potato is considered
solely as an English word. This perception may be different in the US or UK,
where many will realise potatoes were a direct import from South America.
Clearly, even in earlier periods, English words had a global identity,
rather than belonging to a particular variety of English alone. Similarly,
English is used as a language for labelling words in other contexts that
have a globally recognised identity, rather than a culture-specific one. As a
result of the current prominence of English as a global lingua franca,
words with diverse origins are constantly mediated through English.
Words are often Romanised and hence become known according to spell-
ing and pronunciation that follow English conventions. The source
language(s), medium language(s), and target language(s) of these words
have different identities. These words also constantly take on additional
meanings as they settle in different languages and cultures.
Let us consider some examples from culinary terms. In Korea and
Japan, the transliterated word chicken is used exclusively in reference to
Western-style, mainly fried chicken. Likewise in English the word sake
refers to Japanese rice wine, but in Japanese refers to alcohol in general.
The word salada in Korean is originally derived from the English word
salad, but has arrived into Korean via Japanese and refers to salad with
mayonnaise dressing. For the other types of salad, the word salad (without
an ‘a’) is used instead. Chicken has English heritage and sake Japanese
heritage, but the meanings of these words in their new target languages are
quite different from the meanings in their source languages. These seman-
tic changes mean that the prevalence of words with English coinage, which
initially seems helpful to the English-speaking learner, in reality becomes
more a source of confusion than an aid to learning.
Threats or assets
Fling our door wide! All, all, not one, but all, must enter.
(Frederick Furnivall 1862, Editor of the OED from 1861–1879)
The presence of foreign words can be a great asset in every language to

build a fuller lexicon. Foreign-born words and their second-generation
derivative words, however, have historically been met with mixed reac-
tions. There have been times when particular foreign-born words were
praised and welcomed – French words have often been used by English
speakers in order to sound more sophisticated and intellectual, and the
dawn of the twentieth century saw widespread use of English words
among East Asian intellectuals keen to show off their education and intel-
lect (see Chapter 8).
Nevertheless, linguistic purists and national language movements have
often viewed foreign words as threats rather than assets, and policy makers
may sometimes believe that keeping one’s lexicon free of foreign influ-
ence is a way to protect one’s language and culture. The French Academy
(Académie Française) attempts to limit the influx of foreign, especially
English, words. North Korea long had a strong linguistic policy designed
to protect its language from foreign – particularly Western – influences.
English words of any kind were in principle translated and replaced strictly
with native Korean words. Interestingly, Russian words were excepted and
allowed to be transliterated. The word tractor in North Korean is tran-
scribed as ttŭrakttorŭ, which is based on the Russian pronunciation of the
word. Interestingly, the Russian word for tractor comes from the Latin-
origin English word, which refers to the name of a device invented by
Elisha Perkins, an American physician, and was first used in 1798, accord-
ing to the OED. However, teaching English is becoming increasingly
crucial even in North Korea, and the situation is thus changing. In North
Korea’s official TV news or sports broadcasting, a few English words can
now be spotted fairly easily. One North Korean defector now living in the
United States explained that even English words like ice cream and com-
puter are now commonly used in North Korea.
In the case of the UK, most OED editors have welcomed new words of
foreign origin as long as they provide evidence of the words’ lives in
written English. Furnivall’s words quoted above give an idea of this spirit
of inclusivity. However, as Ogilvie (2012) argues, this all-welcoming
agenda has not been free from controversy. She shows that about 17 per
cent of the 1933 Supplement entries were deleted by Robert Burchfield
(1923–2004), the fifth chief editor of the OED (Ogilvie 2012: Appendix
7). Some resistance, on the part of dictionary makers, towards the wide-
spread adoption of foreign words is perhaps to be expected. Although the
growth of outside words contributes to the growth of the lexicon of the
home language, editors may also wish to limit the threat of foreign words
becoming too dominant. So, editors may want to be vigilant and put some
control over their growth. In particular, the OED is unique in that, once
entered, a word’s place in the OED is secured for all time, even if usage of
the word dies out. Nevertheless, the truth is that language policy cannot
regulate the actual growth of foreign words. The amount of foreign words
used will continue to grow as our lives become more globally interwoven.
Why do foreign words keep increasing?

Lexical migration and interaction keep increasing. Inevitably, we see many
words from all over the world. However, one may wonder why people keep
adopting new foreign words when they already have words of their own. For
instance, why do English people adopt the word calamari when they have
the word squid ? Why do Korean and Japanese people adopt the word
chicken when they also have their own terms for it? There are two kinds of
lexical borrowing: cultural borrowing and core borrowing (Myers-Scotton
1993, 2006). Cultural borrowing is borrowing to fill a gap in one’s lexicon.
In the early twentieth century, huge numbers of Western, mainly English-
origin words entered into the East Asian lexicon along with Western techno-
logy and ideas. Now, however, this is no longer the case. Perhaps there is
little need for foreign words in one’s lexicon because any gaps have already
been filled by translated words. Despite this reduced need for cultural bor-
rowing, the amount of foreign words continues to increase because of core
borrowing, in which foreign words enter another language not to fill a lexical
gap, but in order to build a richer lexicon with which to communicate with
the outside world. As we shall discuss, Japan and Korea in particular main-
tain multiple lexical strata: native words, words of Chinese origin, and words
that are either entirely or partially made up of foreign – mostly English –
elements. At first glance, the persistence of such a complex lexical structure
may seem puzzling, but as we shall discuss later, this is a consequence of
systematic efforts to build a lexicon that is expressive in nuance while main-
taining communicability with the wider world.
Wherever we look, the general public is far more open to using foreign-
born words and to coining new words with foreign elements than policy
makers or dictionary compilers are, and they do not tend to have a clear
distinction between their native and foreign words. Simply put, people do
not care whether a word is of foreign coinage or not, and may even feel
motivated to use more foreign words in different registers and contexts in
order to better express themselves.
Notes
1 Many cultural vocabularies show great difference in terms of UK and US
English. People assume that only spelling and pronunciation are different in the
two countries, but migrants between the two countries discover that in fact their
cultural vocabularies tend to differ greatly as well (Algeo 2009).
2 I am grateful to all the participants of the seminar, in particular those from
different language backgrounds.
3 www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world/metoo-shockwave/.
4 The census can be accessed online at www.ons.gov.uk.
5 Twenty-eight Japanese speakers aged 20–30 participated in the survey. It was a
sample survey. The result, however, is backed up by large-scale survey con-
ducted by National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics (NINJAL)
which we will look at in Chapters 8 and 9.
6 I conducted a sample questionnaire study in these languages. The number of
participants varied but at least 30–40 people participated in the survey per
language.
2 Hybrid words
Anomalies?
In this book I define hybrid words as the words which are composed of
words with different origins. These words are more easily accessible by
locals, probably because they contain native, familiar elements as well as
foreign elements. In Korean and Japanese, these kinds of English words
are more common than words with English components only. In the fol-
lowing, I will show that hybrid words are extremely common, but, espe-
cially when used in English contexts, that they are still faced with
prejudice as ‘impure’ or ‘incorrect’ words. Perhaps this can be traced to
misunderstandings of Kachru’s circles as a hierarchy of the English lan-
guage. I will show how, in fact, hybrid words are an indispensable part of
a multilingual society and may even be the greatest asset of our future
lexicon.
Hybrid words are now common

Linguistic and cultural interactions between diverse groups of people
across the world, and subsequent cultural hybridisation, makes the creation
of etymologically or structurally hybrid words inevitable. We come across
hybrid terms daily, and many of these have complex layers of meaning
that pay testimony to the words’ translingual journeys taken across their
lifespans.
For instance, the Mandarin and Cantonese term for egg tarts, Roman-
ised as daahn taat in Cantonese and dàn tǎ or dan tat in Mandarin, is most
commonly believed to have developed in Hong Kong in the 1940s as an
adaptation of the Portuguese pastel de nata. The term dan tat is a hybrid of
the Chinese word for egg (‘dan’ or 蛋1) and the English word tart.
The Japanese word katsu, which is a shortened form of the longer kat-
suretsu is transliterated from English cutlet, which is again derived from
the French côtelette meaning ‘meat chop’. Katsu is now used to refer to a
specifically Japanese-style cutlet dish, especially in the context of ton
Hybrid words: anomalies? 17
katsu as a hybrid word with the Chinese character 豚, meaning pork, that
is pronounced in Japanese as [ton].
Kare (カレー) is an interesting word as well. Curry was introduced to
Japan during the Meiji era (1868–1912) by the British, who already had a
history of colonial dealings with India, where curry originated as a Tamil
loanword, according to the OED. Thus, the term kare is a Japanese trans-
literation of the English curry, which is originally from Tamil. Now,
however, the word is used in English in its Japanese form, kare, when
referring to the type of curry from Japan. This term is often combined with
other terms as well as in kare ton or kare katsu. Similarly, the word baby-
cino, a hybrid of baby and -cino from the Italian cappuccino, refers to a
hot drink of frothed milk, intended as a mimic cappuccino for children.
Fusion culinary terms such as these are growing all over the world, not
only in Asia.2
Not many would recognise that words like karaoke have English com-
ponents. The word karaoke (カラオケ, meaning ‘empty orchestra’) is
made up of the Japanese kara meaning empty and oke from the English
orchestra. This word entered the English lexicon in the 1970s and later on
was introduced into a number of European languages via English. Like-
wise, the word anime, which most English speakers recognise as a
Japanese-origin word, is in fact made through back clipping or shortening
from the English word animation, which of course has roots in Latin and
has undergone significant semantic shift up until the present day. There are
many instances of words which are recognised as simply being Japanese
or Korean, but in fact have complex, translingual identities that have been
made through contact with English words of various pedigrees, as the
examples of karaoke and animation demonstrate. As discussed previously,
it is often difficult or meaningless to make judgements regarding the origin
of words. Just as our lives become increasingly diverse and globalised, our
lexicons become increasingly dynamic and fluid. Words end up as hybrid,
translingual words. Indeed, many newly-made cultural or commercial
terms are hybrid words with blurred identities.
A good place to start is brand and product names (see Chapter 10).
Brand names such as Samsung, Sony, and Uniqlo may have some regional
language connection in their naming, but no matter their original meaning,
their ubiquity has earned them an international identity. They are fre-
quently mentioned as names in languages around the world. Product names
like Pokémon also have the same identity problem. The Japanese-origin
Pokémon, a blend of the English words ‘pocket’ and ‘monster’, is now a
truly global word, and is difficult to describe as either wholly Japanese or
English. Much like foreign words, the hybrid words that are so prevalent
in every language are hard to label as simple borrowings or loans. It is
interesting to see the French acute accent symbol over the e in Pokémon.
This was inserted to avoid any possible ambiguity in the pronunciation of
the e sound and to make sure the ke is pronounced as [kɛ], as in Japanese.
More examples of this can be found in foreign branding (Chapter 10).
Prejudices against hybrid words

Hybrid words have long been perceived as anomalies – illegitimate words,
accidentally created. Linguistic authorities have constantly tried to expel
them, or have ridiculed the use of such words, based on ideas of linguistic
purism. Like foreign words, hybrid words have often had trouble being
registered in dictionaries due to their mixed, seemingly impure identity.
Ideology of the English language

This is reflected in the ideology of English languages too. Kachru (1985)
famously summarised the situation of English in different regions of the
world in his World Englishes (see Figure 2.1) model, dividing them into
Expanding circle:
Outer circle:
China
Bangladesh
Egypt
Ghana
Inner circle: Indonesia
India
Australia Israel
Kenya
Canada Japan
Malaysia
New Zealand Korea
Nigeria
UK Nepal
Pakistan
USA Saudi Arabia
Philippines
Taiwan
Singapore
USSR
Sri Lanka
Zimbabwe
Figure 2.1 The three circles of English: Kachru (1985).

‘inner’ – spoken in places where English is a native language (i.e. UK, USA,
Australia, Canada, and New Zealand); ‘outer’ – where English is a second
language (e.g. India, Singapore, Ghana, etc.); and ‘expanding’ – where
English is a foreign language (e.g. Korea, Japan, China, Israel, Indonesia
etc.). For Kachru, countries in the inner circle represented the canonically
privileged users, who comprised ‘the traditional cultural and linguistic bases
of English’, and countries in the outer circle represented ‘institutionalised
non-native varieties’ of English, having ‘passed through extended periods of
colonialisation’. Countries in the expanding circle represented regions ‘where
the performance of language are used in essentially English as a Foreign
Language (EFL) contexts’ (Ogilvie 2012: 59). However, as English becomes
a global lingua franca and numbers of speakers are constantly increasing,
such a hierarchical and prejudiced view of English must be challenged.
Whose English?
The number of English speakers in the world has been in continuous
growth for many years, and that growth is set to continue into the future as
well. Even so, the primary makeup of the English-speaking population
may be changing drastically. This is because, although the number of
English speakers is increasing, the proportion of speakers for whom
English is their first language is actually decreasing. In the mid-twentieth
century, nearly 9 per cent of the world’s population grew up speaking
English as their first language. By 2050, however, that number is expected
to decrease to about 5 per cent. The mechanism behind the increase in
numbers of the English speakers is not simple population growth of people
who speak English as their first language but rather the explosion of
English as a second language. The number of people who learn English as
a second language is huge and ever growing. Graddol (2006) remarks that
‘Population growth amongst speakers of languages other than English’
has been growing, and many of those are learning English as a second lan-
guage. The British Council in 2013 estimated that English was spoken ‘at
a useful level’ by 1.75 billion people worldwide, and that two billion
people would be using or learning English by 2020.3
As more and more people learn English as a second language, the exist-
ence of so many diverse English-speaking communities will continue to
challenge the idea of who owns the English language. Just as divergence fol-
lowing population movements has resulted in differences between the Eng-
lishes of native speaking groups such as British and American speakers, so
too should we expect differences between the Englishes of communities for
whom English is a second language. It is difficult to predict the effect that
technology will have, as interaction between speakers of different varieties
of English is easier and more frequent than ever. Crystal (2000) recognises
the possibility of an ‘International Standard English’ developing which is
‘not recognisably British, American, or anything else’ for communication
between communities, which speakers will have at their disposal in addition
to a ‘variety of Standard English’ which they learn in school.
Even in countries where English is traditionally seen as the main spoken
language, such as the UK and the US, more diversity is becoming common.
In the US, the 2016 American Community Survey revealed that native
speakers of languages other than English make up about 20 per cent of the
population. In the UK, other languages are also common; as early as the
1970s, the Inner London Education Authority found that over 100 languages
were being spoken at the homes of children attending school in the city.
Such children in both the UK and the US may speak English at school, but
they speak foreign languages in the home. Many of today’s assumptions
about language, which emerged in the modern era with monolingual speak-
ers grouped into distinct communities by the borders of nation states are
likely to be challenged by ‘a new world order in languages’ that Graddol
(2006) predicts will accompany the next stage of global development.4
The growing number of bilingual speakers and speakers of English as a
second language inevitably leads to questions about what it means to be an
English speaker in the twenty-first century. Indeed, Jenkins (2007) notes
that speakers of English as a second language are often able to com-
municate better in English with other speakers of English as a second lan-
guage than with ‘native’ English speakers, and in that context, she
questions the primacy of any single variant of English and the place of
native speakers. Further, whilst English is being established as a lingua
franca, this doesn’t mean the world languages gradually become unified
into English. English as a lingua franca (ELF ) sits alongside, rather than
replaces, the local languages. Large-scale globalisation has contributed to
an increase in multilingualism and the increased visibility of more lan-
guages. One result of the wider use of ELF is the more frequent adoption
of translingual words as multilingual speakers from different cultural
backgrounds incorporate words from other languages into English. The
more frequent interactions between speech communities allowed by
modern communications technologies also means that these translingual
words spread readily from one group to another.
An anomaly? An incorrect word?

In the past, the varieties of English spoken in the expanding circle of Kachru’s
model have often been condemned as incorrect uses of English. They have
even been given their own derogatory portmanteau names: ‘Chinglish’ for
Figure 2.2 Konglish is the enemy of Korean?

Source: Chosunilbo.
China-born English, ‘Japlish’ or ‘Jenglish’ for Japan-born English and

‘Konglish’ for Korea-born English are just a few such examples. The key
words associated with the word Konglish in Korean newspapers from
1920–1999, according to the Naver newspaper archive, were wrong, incor-
rect, painful, stupid, and frowned upon.5 Hybrid English words, which are
often made outside the typical English-speaking world, are often perceived as
errors or incorrect words, regardless of their daily use. Koreans consistently
use these hybrid English words across registers, but still feel and think that
this is a bad practice that needs to be purified or rectified. There are numerous
articles in newspapers where people talk about Koreans’ wrong usage of
English words. Figure 2.2 from Chosunilbo 20086 manifests this view. In the
article, it says that the biggest enemy of the Korean people is not North
Korea’s nuclear threat or the cheap labour force from China, but Konglish
words. This sounds like a huge exaggeration, but it also shows the prejudice
towards the Konglish words that is prevalent in Korean society.
Hybrid words are the best linguistic currency in a

multilingual and cultural society
Hybrid words are not subsidiary or temporary words but are a crucial
linguistic currency for those who are constantly exposed to multiple
languages. Often the language that a diaspora community finds most useful
and comfortable is not their original home language, nor the new home
language, but a hybrid language made from elements of both. For people
living on the border of two regions with different languages, it is often
hybrid words that are most expressive and communicative. Spanglish
words are a daily reality for those living in the Mexican–US border area,
while Filipinos in Canada communicate not in Tagalog, Canadian English,
or standard Filipino English, but a combination of all three. As a result,
hybrid languages become the new home languages for such communities.
Creative uses of English fragments: Korean English words with

-tel, -ting, -toon, and men-
Let’s consider some examples of English-Korean hybrids words made
through blending. Koreans use t’el (텔, -tel from hotel) to explain various
accommodation types. So koshi-t’el (고시텔), where koshi means a bar
exam and t’el an accommodation, altogether means a type of accommoda-
tion where people who are preparing for the bar exam often study and live.
This has now become quite a popular type of accommodation among stu-
dents in the city due to the low rent. Other accommodation-related words
with -t’el (텔, -tel from hotel) include the word wŏnlumt’el (one room +
-tel). Wŏnlum ‘one room’ is already a Korean-made English word,
meaning a studio flat. The added suffix -tel adds additional meaning such
as luxury and comfort to the existing accommodation category.
-ting (팅, -ting from meeting) in Korean is another productive mor-
pheme that is used in blending. Sogaet’ing (소개팅) in Korean was first
introduced in 1994. This word is now even in the NIKL dictionary, which
defines it as: ‘for a man and woman to be introduced to each other by
someone’. Sogaet’ing is a typical example of blending, where the Sino-
Korean sogae is mixed with the somewhat unidentified English morpheme
-ting, which is from the English word meeting. In particular, the meeting
which -ting represents is a meeting between a man and woman – espe-
cially among students – often for a date. With the increase in internet chat-
ting, -ting also sometimes means a meeting via the internet or in an online
space.
-t’un (툰 -toon from ‘cartoon’) is also productive exclusively among
Anglo Korean words. It means cartoon. Examples include wept’un
(web+cartoon ‘web-toon’) serial cartoons on internet portal websites,
sŭmat’ŭt’un (smart+cartoon ‘smart-toon’) cartoons among webtoons that
are edited to be easily viewed on smartphones.
Another interesting recent example is the Korean word menbung
(멘붕), which is a shortened form of ment’al punggoe (멘탈 붕괴;
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed

editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

PDF Translingual Words An East Asian Lexical Encounter With English Jieun Kiaer Ebook Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PDF Translingual Words An East Asian Lexical Encounter With English Jieun Kiaer Ebook Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Translingual Words An East Asian

Lexical Encounter with English Jieun

English Collocations in Use Intermediate Book with

Perceptual Training on Lexical Stress Contrasts A Study

Colonial Encounter Telugu English Literary and Cultural

4000 Essential English Words Book 1 2nd Edition Paul

4000 Essential English Words Book 3 2nd Edition Paul

4000 Essential English Words Book 4 2nd Edition Paul

4000 Essential English Words Book 5 2nd Edition Paul

4000 Essential English Words Book 6 2nd Edition Paul

Translingual Words is a detailed case study on lexical integration, or medi-

Jieun Kiaer is Associate Professor of Korean Language and Linguistics at

Routledge Studies in East Asian Translation aims to discuss issues and

For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com/

ISBN: 978-0-8153-5762-9 (hbk)

I would like to thank my colleagues and students who have provided

Tracing words’ lives: methodology

Google Trends and Google N-­gram

The English Language is the language of Englishmen! Of which Eng-

Figure 1.1 Murray’s ‘circle of English’: Murray (1888: xxv).

Englishness, such as tea, marmalade, and cottage, were originally the

Foreign-­origin words in the OED: really English?

Foreign words are now common

Colonialism in lexical interaction

Lexical interaction in the digital age

Spreading words through social media

Native words vs. foreign words in a multilingual era

Figure 1.2 Do you think these words are Japanese words?

Complex identity of words: beyond borrowing and

Whose words? Mediations in translingual journeys

The presence of foreign words can be a great asset in every language to

Why do foreign words keep increasing?

Hybrid words are now common

Prejudices against hybrid words

Ideology of the English language

Figure 2.1 The three circles of English: Kachru (1985).

An anomaly? An incorrect word?

Figure 2.2 Konglish is the enemy of Korean?

China-­born English, ‘Japlish’ or ‘Jenglish’ for Japan-­born English and

Hybrid words are the best linguistic currency in a

Creative uses of English fragments: Korean English words with

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

Section 3. Information about the Project

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Section 4. Information about Donations to

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

Section 5. General Information About Project

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

You might also like

Google Trends and Google N-gram

Foreign-origin words in the OED: really English?

China-born English, ‘Japlish’ or ‘Jenglish’ for Japan-born English and