[PDF] German Loanwords Adaptation in Persian: Optimality Approach

View - Download German Loanwords Adaptation in Persian: Optimality Approach

Previous PDF

Next PDF

Intl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4): (23-40)

German Loanwords Adaptation in Persian:OptimalityApproachFaezeh Farazandeh-pour1, Aliyeh KordZafaranlu Kambuziya2Received:10/11/2012Accepted:21/6/2013AbstractThis paper aims at describing the mechanism of German loanwordsadaptation with respect to constraints of Persian language and within OTframework. Consequently the adaptation of consonant clusters anddiphthongs as well as the phonemes substituted in loanwords will beexamined. Prince and Smolensky"s ( 1993) Optimality Theory with its keynotions of faithfulness and markedness constraints is suited to model thisaspect of linguistic competence. So in this research a number of 30 Germanloanwords were selected as research data of which some were collectedthrough the library method from written resources and the rest are the tradenames of German Products that are collected through a field work.Descriptive analysis of the mentioned data within Optimality Theory comesinto valuable linguistic conclusions such as:"In Persian, initial consonantclusters of German loanwords are broken up through vowel epenthesis whichis mostly identical to the vowel of the second syllable."Keywords: Loanword, Optimality Theory, Constraint, German, Persian.1.Student of doctorate degree program at Tarbiat Modares University-Iran /Email:f_farazandeh@yahoo.comAssociateProfessor in LinguisticsDepartment at Tarbiat Modares University-Iran /Emailof the correspondhng author:akord@modares.ac.ir

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 1 / 19 German Loanwords Adaptation in...Intl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

1.IntroductionAn aspect of linguistic competence is the"Adaptation of Loanwords" which is themost common type of "Languageborrowing" .Once a word is borrowed, theprocess of adaptation starts. The borrowedlexical item has to adapt itself first at thephonological level.During muchofthesecenturies, the Arabic and other Europeanlanguages have had atremendous impact onPersian language. Avery noticeable effectisthe changes that havetaken place inPersian Languageparticularly theadaptation ofthousandof foreignloanwords (mostly from Arabic, French,Turkish and Russian languages).In the past decade we have seen the studyof loanwords evolve from a minor curiosityto a phenomenon meriting serious andsustained study. The most significantmotivation has undoubtedly been theconceptual shift in our field from rules to aconstraints and repair model of soundchange. Loanword adaptation is constraintsand repairs in "real time". In adapting aloanword, the speaker tries to remainfaithful to the source word while stillmaking theloanword conform to the nativelanguage (L 1) segme ntal inventory,phonotactic constraints, and prosodic

structures (Kenstowicz andAtiwong, 2004:1) . Languag e borrowi ng ma y occ ur a s aresult of social and cultural factors. Itmeans that in the process oflanguagedevelopment, the users of one languagemay fill the lexical gaps of the languagethrough borrowing from other languages.Haugen ( 1950: 18) def ines languageborrowing as reconstruction of the patternsof one language in the other one. Arlotto(1972: 184) states that language borrowingis a process in whitch a language or dialectaccepts some elements from anotherlanguage or dialect. Further Hartman andStork ( 1972: 29 ) beli eve that languageborrowing is the use of some elements fromone language ordialect to the other onethrough social and cultural contacts orimitation.Prince and Smolensky"s (1993) Constraint-based Optimality Theory (OT) with its keynotions of faithfulness and markednessconstraints is suited to model this aspect oflinguisticcompetence. In adapting a foreignword the speaker is often faced withchoices as to which feature of the sourceword to preserve and which to sacrifice.The speaker will tend to preserve featureswhose absence would be most noticeable;and when a repairmust be made, like a

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 2 / 19 Farazandeh-pourF.and otherIntl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

good tailor he will make his alterations asunobtrusive as possible by substituting asound that most closely resembles theoriginal. In this paper we analyze theadaptation of German loanwords intoPersian Language from this perspective.2.Review of LiteratureInvestigation of the previous studiesindicated that no researches and studieshave been conducted on German loanwordsadapted in Persian language, except for oneMA thesis titled "Persian Loanwords inGerman Language "(Rahmani, 2009) inwhich the adaptation of Persian loanwordsin German language have been identified,and not only it is not in OTframework, butalso the focus of this paper is exactly viceversa. Although no researches have beenconducted on the analysis of Germanloanwords in Persian Language, there aresome studies on borrowing from German inother languages that are as follows:-Hjaltason, Porsteinn (2011) in his papertitled "Native German Loanwords inEnglish" follows two main tasks asfollows: First to find out whichGerman loanwords are truly "German".Theresearcher uses Pfeffer and

Cannon"s work as a basis and countsall loanwords which are etymologicallyGerman or are attested at least in EarlyHigh German (1350-1650). The secondtask in this paper is to run these about1,300 words which are found throughtwo large online corpora, BritishNatural Corpus (BNC ) with 100million words and the Corpus ofContemporary American English(COCA) with over 425 million words,to find out their frequency in modernEnglish. All round 1,300 words areclassified after their semantic fieldswhich are taken from Germanloanwords.-Gentsch, Kerstin ( 2004) i n his papertitled "English Borrowings in GermanNewspaper Language: Motivations,Frequencies, and Types" examinesthreeonline German newspapers toinvestigate the frequency of Englishwords, patterns in the types ofborrowings, and motivations behindtheir use. The paper closes byproviding some limitations to the studyand suggesting possible improvements.-Gorup, RadmilaJ. (200 0) ha s a papertitled "Lexical Borrowings from

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 3 / 19 German Loanwords Adaptation in...Intl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

German and English into Serbian andCroatian" This paper tries to point outthe attitudes toward loan words in theSC speaking area. As we know, certainpolicies that language planners adaptcan eitherdecrease or increaselinguistic differences between thegroups. Non-linguistic factors caninfluence the process and perception oflexical enrichment, borrowing inparticular. The biggest differencebetween Serbian and Croatian is inlexicon, the result of different sources,different derivational suffixes, somehistorical incidence, and of course theattitude toward borrowing. Serbs arealways ready to accept loanwords thatrepresent internationalisms. Eventhough they were under Ottomandomination for along time, theirlanguage was never threatened. As aresult, they developed a morepermissive attitude toward borrowings.Croats, on the other hand, had a verydifferent experience. A part of theAustrian cultural sphere, they wentthrough periods of intense pressures.-Stanforth A.W. (1974) in his paper titled"Lexical borrowing from German since1933 as Reflected in the British Press"

has two main aims: At first, to recordand classify German words that haveinterred in British English andsecondly, to attempt some assessmentof the frequency of German loanwordsin one weekly newspaper, theObserver, over a period of threemonths. But no phonological analysishas been conducted in this paper.3.Definition of LoanwordLoanwords are words of one language,termed the source (or donor) language, thatenter, often through the mediation ofbilingual speakers, in a borrowing (orrecipient) language.The adaptation of aloanword involves the resolution of oftenconflicting demands to preserve as muchinformation fromthe source word aspossible while still satisfying the constraintsthat make the lexical item sound like aword of the recipient language (Kenstowicz& Atiwong, 2004: 1).In Other word, in theprocess of entering the borrowing language,the phonetic, phonemic, phonotactic orprosodic characteristics of these wordschange in the vast majority of cases (Haunz,2007: 3) .As an example of such changes isthe sound // and // in Germanpronunciation of the word "Henkel" [

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 4 / 19 Farazandeh-pourF.and otherIntl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

hk] (as a trademark) which is adaptedas a loanword in Persian language andbecause of the absence of the said sounds inthe sound system of Persian language, it ispronounced as [h].4.Research FrameworkOT is a theory which admits neither rulesnor derivations and assumes that outputforms are determined in the interaction ofconstraints.OT grammar can beschematically represented as in diagram (1).For every possible input, the generator(GEN) produces a candidate set. Inputs arein principle unconstrained linguistic objectssuch as lexical items in word phonology.(Prince and Smolensky, 1993: 10)Diagram (1):Input→→ Candidate Set→→OptimalCandidateThe evaluator (EVAL) evaluates candidatesets with respect to particular rankings oftheconstraint inventory.In OT tableaus thetop row gives the constraint ranking fromleft to right. In subsequent rows constraintviolations are given for each outputstructure. Each asterisk (or 'star") represents

one violation. Those structures thatminimally violate rankings are optimal, andby definition grammatical. Suppose thereare three constraints A, B and C,and theyare ranked as follows:ConstraintA » constraint B » constraint CThis constraint hierarchy suggests thatconstraint A is the most important and C isthe least. When Gen produces threecandidates and each of them violates someof the constraints,the realOutputis determined in the following way:Tableau 1-OT Tableau SampleInputConstraintAConstraintBConstraintCa.Candidate 1*!b.Candidate 2**c. Candidate 3**!Candidate 1 violates the most importantconstraint A, and thus loses ("!" means thatthis is thefatal violation. The columnsrightto the fatal violation isirrelevant and thusshaded) . As f or constrai nt B , candidat e 2violates it once and candidate 3 twice. Thesecond violation of candidate 3 is fatal, andcandidate 2 wins as the arrow indicates.Although candidate 2 violates constraint C,this violation is less important than the

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 5 / 19 German Loanwords Adaptation in...Intl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

second violation of constraint B ofcandidate 3, and thus regarded asirrelevant(Prince and Smolensky, 1993: 12).1.MethodologyThispaper aims at describing themechanism of German Loanwordsadaptation with respect to constraints ofPersian language and within OTframework. For this purpose, thetheoretical data have been collected fromthe relevant books whose particulars aregiven atthe end of this paper. RegardingGerman loanwords in Persian, some ofthem are extracted and checked out fromseveral dictionaries, especially PersianLanguage Dictionary (Moshiri, 2009) andDuden (Drosdowski, 1988) and the rest aretrademarks and brandsof German Productsin Iran that has interred into everydaylanguage.After a brief introduction andcomparison between German and Persianphonetic systems, we will analyze the

changes made to the adapted loanwords inthe face of the phonological constraints ofthe recipient language within optimalitytheory. Then we will examine theadaptation of consonant clusters,diphthongs and the substitution ofphonemes that are absent in the phoneticsystem of Persian language.It should bementioned that the pronunciation ofcollected data has been checked by twonative speakers, as well.5.Phoneme Inventory6-1-ConsonantsSince the consonants, vowels and thepossibilities of combining them in asyllable are the main focus of thisdiscussion for recognition of soundchanges in loanwords, initially theconsonant inventories and then the vowelsof the two languages will be compared, asfollows:

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 6 / 19 Farazandeh-pourF. and otherIntl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

Table 1.German Consonants (Kord Zafaranlu Kambuziya& Abdolkarimi; 2009)BilabialLabio-dentalDentalAlveolarPalate-alveolarPalatalVelarUvularGlottalPlosivek?Fricativefvsz?çxhAffricatep?ft?sNasalmnŋTrillrLaterallGlidejNote:In German,[?] is the allophone of /r/. Itmeans that at the beginning of a word orsyllable, /r/ will be pronounced as [?] and at theend of words it won"t be pronounced and thepreceding vowel/e/ will be pronounced as /?/.In other places it will be pronounced as [r].(Kambuziya & Abdolkarimi; 2009:3)Table 2.Persian Consonants (Kord Zafaranlu Kambuziya; 2006)BilabialLabio-dentalDentalAlveolarPalato-alveolarPalatalVelarUvularGlottalPlosiveFricativefvsz?hAffricateNasalmnTrillrLateralGlidej

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 7 / 19 German Loanwords Adaptation in...Intl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

Note:In Persian phoneticsystem, there aretwo palatal plosives // but beforeback vowels they are pronounced [k] and[?], respectively; such as [kur] "blind",[n?r] "grips". So[k] and [?] areallophones of // that make nomeaning distinction.Considering tables 1 and2, wecanrecognize that there are several differencesbetween these two phoneticsystems.Forexamplethe absence of German palatalfricative // and velarnasal //, affricates /p?f/ and / t?s/inthePersian phonemeinventory;and further the pronunciation of/r/ that has mostly one form in Persianwhich is [] (trill),varies in Germanaccordingto region and speaker. Whileolder prescriptive pronunciationdictionaries allowed only[r], thispronunciation is nowadays found mainly inSwitzerland, Bavaria and Austria, while inother regions the uvular pronunciationprevails with the allophones[?]and[].1(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_German)

6-2-VowelsPersian language is usually described ashaving a six phoneme vowel system as isshown in the following diagram.

Diagram-2-Persian Vowels (Kord ZafaranluKambuziya; 2006)Note:It should be mentioned that inPersian vowels [, [, For German language, vowel systems differwidely between varieties, which is difficultto describe them in detail but they are givenin the following table:

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 8 / 19 [ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 9 / 19 Farazandeh-pourF. and otherIntl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4) [ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 10 / 19 German Loanwords Adaptation in...Intl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

Nazi/t?s/naziÖsterreich/aiç/AustriaPause//BreakProtokoll//protocolPudding//PuddingPürre//MashRegal//ShelvesSauna//SaunaSchal//ScarfSchema//PatternSchilling//SchillingSolingen//Solingen ( trade name)Umlaut//UmlautWanne//bathtub1.Data AnalysisIn this research, after collecting the Germanloanwords (som e o f whi ch ar e givenhereunder) , the y hav e bee n categorizedbased on the phonological changes inPersian language and from each group oneword has been chosen as the input of therelevant tableau. The data corpusisasfollows:7-1-Phonemic Changes in OptimalityTheoryWhen the phonotactic of the borrowinglanguage does not allow soundcombinations or sounds in certain contextsas they occur in the borrowed word,phonemes are altered, inserted or deleted tosatisfy the requirements of the recipientlanguage. Phonemic changes occur forexample when the borrowing language"sinventory lacks a phoneme in the loanword,for examplein German word "Österreich " ,Persian speakers substitute // and // for

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 11 / 19 Farazandeh-pourF. and otherIntl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

In tableau 2, the first candidate, bearing aback lax vowel[]and also a diphthongvowel // is rejected.Also the third candidate is rejected becauseof bearing the same diphthong vowel //,as a fatal violation. On the other hand, thesecond candidate begins with a vowel notconsonant, so it violatesONSET constraintwhich is a fatal violation. The forthcandidate is selected as the optimal output,althoughit violates DEP.IO constraint, thisviolation is less serious than those of twoother constraints.

/aiç/ONSET*FRONT-ROUND*DIPHTHONGVOWEL*ALLOPHONE[]* PALATALFRICATIVEIDENT[F]DEP-IOMAX-IOaiç*!****rai*!***!***********Now considering tableau 3, we see thatsince Persian phonetic system has no frontround vowel (s uch as//) , diphthongvowel /ai/, allophone [] and palatalfricative //, the following six constrainswill be formed (o f whichONSET,*DIPHTHONG VOWELandDEP-IOconstraints have been explained formerly.)

CON 2: * FRONT ROUND = No FrontRound Vowel (here means //)CON 3: *ALLOPHONE [] =NoALLOPHONE[]CON4: *PALATAL FRICATIVE= NoPALATAL FRICATIVE[ç]

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 12 / 19 German Loanwords Adaptation in...Intl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

We assume that the constraints hierarchy is:ONSET>> *FRONT ROUND >>*DIPHTHONG VOWEL>>*ALLOPHONE []>>*PALATALFRICATIVE >>IDENT[F]>>DEP-IO>>MAX-IOTableau 4

Tableau 4 shows that the first and secondcandidates are rejected because of the fatalviolation inroundfront constraint.Therefore,the third candidate with the leastviolation is the optimal output. It ismentionable that not only the front roundvowel // changed into theroundbackvowel //, but also a lax vowel //changed into the tense vowel //.In tableau 5, there are5constraints ofwhich thelastone (i.e.DEP-IO)has beeninterpreted and the other constraints are asfollows:

Tableau 5CON 1:* VELAR NASAL= No VelarNasal (i.e. //)CON 2: * VELAR STOP= No Velar Stop(i.e. //)The assumed ranking of constraints is asfollows:*VELAR-NASAL >>* VELAR STOP>> DEP-IO (V)//*HIGH LAXVOWEL*VELAR-NASAL* VELAR STOPIDENT[F]DEP-IO*!*i*!**i***Tableau 5 indicates that the first candidatewill be rejected because of fatal violation ofbearinghigh lax vowel [] andvelar nasal[]. The second candidate that bears a velarstop[]andviolatesthethirdconstraint isrejected too. Therefore, the third candidateis the optimal output although it has acomplex coda but this violation doesn"t

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 13 / 19 German Loanwords Adaptation in...Intl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

result in its removal. So we can concludethat velar nasal consonant // of German issubstituted with the consonant cluster [in Persian.It should be mentioned that //is a long vowel in Persian, as default.7-2-Onset Clusters in Persian andGermanA segmental representation for the syllablestructure in Persian can be formulated as(C) V (C) (C)in underlying form(wheresegments betweenparenthesesareoptional). This means thatPersiansyllablescannot contain more than four segments,which naturally restrains the number ofsegments permitted in onset (i.e., syllable-initial) a nd cod a ( i.e., syllable-final)positions. Singleton (i.e., 1-segment) onsetscan essentially contain any consonantalsegment (i.e ., thos e wi th t he feature[+consonantal]) in the phoneme inventory.While Farsi permits singleton onsets-words such as [b] 'with" (i.e., CV); [sir]'garlic", [xr] 'thorn", [lb] 'lip", and [r]'companion" (i.e., CVC); and [rst] 'right"(i.e ., CVCC)-it does not allow onset

clusters of any type. Therefore, thisconstraint can be stated as:* COMPLEXONSET=No ComplexOnsetThis constraint forbids two ( and thre e ormore) onsetconsonants. Candidate formswhich violate this constraint will be weededout in favor of candidates which have, forinstance, an epenthetic vowel between theconsonants and other constraints (e.g . aconstraint forbidding deletion fromunderlying forms) will take care of furtherselection.Let us examine a case in point to illustratethe interaction of this constraint with otherones. In Persian, loanwords from Germanwith onset cluster are broken up byepenthesis. Considering tableau 6, there are5 constraints that all have been explained informer cases and theconstraints ranking asfollows:* COMPLEX ONSET >>*SCHWA>>*VELAR STOP>>IDENT [F]>> DEP-IO(V)Tableau 6//* COMPLEXONSET*SCHWA* VELARSTOPIDENT[F]DEP-IO (V)*!*!**!*****Since the first candidate has a complexonset / bl/ and a schwa as well as a velarstop //that are fatal violations, it isrejected. Further the second candidate inwhich there is a schwa and also violates theconstraintDEP-IO (V)is not accepted.Although the third candidate violates DEP-IO, this violation is not fatal because thecandidate respects the three higher-rankedconstraints,(i.e.* COMPLEX ONSET,*SCHWA ,* VELAR STOP). So we canconclude that in Persian, initial consonant

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 14 / 19 Farazandeh-pourF. and otherIntl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

clusters of German loanwords are brokenup through vowelepenthesis whichismostly identical to the vowel of the secondsyllable.Now considering the loanword "Hamster",as tableau 7 shows there are 6 constraints ofwhich *SCHWA,MAX-IO, DEP-IO(V) and IO-CONTIGUITY constraints havebeen explained in the former cases. Butsince in Persian the order of threeconsonants ( 3-consonant cluster) in asimple word in forbidden, so we can definethe following constraint:CON2:*SIMPLEWORD (C1C2C3) =ASimple Word Can Not Contain a 3-Consonant ClusterTableau 7Also the syllable [ham-] as a prefix inPersian may occur in compound words notsimple words and since German loanwords

are considered as simple words in Persian,so thefollowing constraint can be defined:CON 3:*SIMPLE WORD(ham-) = ASimple Word Can Not Contain theSyllable [ham.-]Now we assume that the constraintshierarchy is as follows:*SCHWA>>*SIMPLE WORD (-C1C2C3-) >> *SIMPLE WORD (#ham.-)>>IDENT [F]>> DEP-IO (V)

//*SCHWA*SIMPLEWORD(-C1C2C3-)*SIMPLEWORD(#ham.-)IDENT[F]DEP-IO (V)*!*..*!****!***..***Tableau 7 shows that the first candidate isrejected because of fatal violation in*SCHWAand *SIMPLE WORD (C1C2C3)with three consonants in the middle of thewordconstraints. Further, the secondcandidate that is a simple word withthreesyllables of which one syllable is [ham-], isrejected too. The third candidate in whichthere is a 3-consonant cluster has a fatal

violation, as well. Therefore, the forthcandidate with the least violation is theoptimal output, although it violatesIDENT[F]and DEP-IO (V)constraintsbut it does not result in its removal. So wecan conclude that since in Persian simplewordscannotcontainsequences of threeconsonantsin the middle of the word;therefore,we have a vowel epenthesis after

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 15 / 19 German Loanwords Adaptation in...Intl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

the first or second consonant in Germanloanwords.6.ConclusionsThe study oftheloanword phonology is oftheoretical interest because speakers arerequired to make choices that do not violatethe constraints of the sound system of targetlanguage. Clearly German loanwords, aswell as English, Arabic, French, Turkishand some other languages have had a majoreffect on Persian language, but little hasbeen researchedand published inthisregard. In this paper we have reviewedvarious aspects of loanwords adaptationfrom German into Persian within OTframework. It was found that variousadjustments are made in German loanwordsin order to accommodate them in Persianlanguage. Some of these adjustments whichare the findings of this research are asfollows:8-1-Regarding Vowels:1)German diphthongs in loanwords arechanged into simple vowels inPersian language(Tableaus2 & 3).

2)Back lax vowel [] in Germanloanwords will be changed into backtense vowel/o/ in Persian language(Tableau 2).3)Front round vowels such as/and//are changed to backround vowels; that is /u/, /o/(Tableaus 3 & 4) . So we canconclude that roundness featureovercomes the fronting feature.4)Since there is no schwa // inPersian, it changes into /e/; thereforewe can say that acentral laxvowelchanges into a front tense one(Tableaus 3 & 4 & 6 & 7).8-2-Regarding consonants:5)The velar fricative consonant /x/ inGerman will be substituted withtheuvularfricative [] in Persianlanguage; such as /x/→.6)In Persian there is not allophone []fortrill consonant /r/ and it will bepronounced as [r] (Tableaus 3).7)In German , consonant/r/ in finalposition is not pronounced while it ispronounced in Persian; such as :German loanwordGerman PronunciationPersian Pronounciation"Beurer"//[]"Hamster"//[]"Müller"//[]1)Palatal fricative consonant // inGerman changes into palato-alveolar fricative [] in PersianLanguage. (Tableaus 3)2)Velar nasal consonant // in German,is substituted with the consonantcluster [n] in Persian.(Tableaus 5)3)In Persian, initial consonant clustersof German loanwords are broken upthrough vowelepenthesis whichis

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 16 / 19 German Loanwords Adaptation in...Intl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

mostly identical to the vowel of thesecondsyllable. (Tableaus 6)4)Since Persian simple wordscannotcontain a 3-consonant cluster , sothere is an epenthetic vowelbetween the first and second or thesecond and the third consonants.This vowel is mostly identical with

the vowel of the next syllable. (Tableau 7)5)In Persian, the pronunciation ofGerman loanwords is highly underthe influence of their spelling ; suchas:German loanwordPersian Pronounciation"Henkel"[hn]"Nazi"[nazi]"Pudding"[Therefore we can conclude that when thereare some sounds in inputs which have noidentical one in the recipient language, theywould be changed in such a way that do notviolate any constraints of the recipientlanguage.References[1]Arlotto, A (1972).Introduction to HistoricalLinguistics.Boston : Haughton Mifflin.[2]-Drosdowski Gunther und die Anderen(1988).Duden; Deutshes UnivarsalWorterbuch, 2. Auflage, Mannheim, Wienund Zurich, Dudenredanktion.[3]Gentsch, K. (2004).English Borrowing inGerman Newspaper Language: Motivations,Frequencies & Types. Available athttp://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/Linguistics/Papers/2005/gentsch_kerstin.pdf(Accessed Oct.23, 2010)

[4]Gorup. R. J. (2000)."Lexi cal Borrowingfrom German and English into Serbian andCroatian"Journal of the North AmericanSociety for Serbian Studies. Vol. 14 , No. 2 ,PP 273-283. Available athttp://www.serbianstudies.org/publications/pdf/Vol14_2_Gorup.pdf Accessed [5]Hartman R. & Stork. F. (1972).Dictionaryof Language and Linguistics. London:Applied Science Publishers.[6]Haugen.,E ( 1950). "The AnalysisofLinguistic Borrowing".The Ecology ofLanguage, Essays by E.Haugen ed A Dil.[7]Haunz, Ch. ( 2007), "Fac tor s in On-lineLoanword Adaptation", InKenstowicz,Michael. 2003.Silance and Similarity inLoanword Adaptation: A Case Study fromFijian. MIT: Edinburg.

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 17 / 19 Farazandeh-pourF. and otherIntl. J.Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4)

[8]Hjaltason. P. (2011).Native GermanLoanwordsin English. Available athttp://skemman.is/en/stream/get/1946/9996/24994/1/BA_Hjaltason_German_Loanwords.pdf(AccessedSept. 11, 2010)[9]Karimi, S. (1987). "Farsi Speakers and the InitialConsonant Clusters in English". In G. Ioup[10]& S. H. Weinberger (Eds.),Interlanguagephonology: The acquisition of a secondlanguage[11]sound system.Cambridge, MA: NewburyHouse[12]Kenstowicz, M. &Atiwong.S. (2004).Issues in Loanword Adaptation: a CaseStudy from Thai.Phonology Conference :Manchester[13]Kord Zafaranlu Kambuziya, A. (2006)."Criticism and Correction of MohammadReza Majidi & Elmar Terner"s Paper",Language and Linguistics (Journal of theLinguistic Society of Iran),Vol.2,No.1, PP109-118.[14]Kord Zafaranlu Kambuziya, A. &Abdolkarimi.S. (200 9). " Most FrequentPhonological Processes in GermanLanguage",Pazhuhesh-e Zabanha-yeKhareji ( Scientifi c Publication of theFaculty of Foreign Languages &Literatures, University of Tehran-Iran,No. 54, PP 89-106.

[15]Moshiri, M. (2009).Persian Dictionary(Alphabetical-Analogical),Iran-Tehran:Soroush Press.[16]Prince, A. and Smolensky.P. ( 1993).Optimality Theory:Constrain Interactionin Generative Grammar. Ms. RutgersUniversity and University of Colorado atBoulder . Available at Rutgers OptimalityTheory Archive (Access ed Augus t 3,2010)[17]Rahmani. S. (2009), " Persian Loanwordsin Persian Language", MA Thesis,Tehran University, Iran.[18]Stanforth, A.W. (19 74). "LexicalBorrowing from German since 1933 asReflected in British Press."The ModernLanguageReview, Vol. 69, No. 2, PP 325-336. (Availabl e onhttp://www.jstor.org/pss/3724579)[19]Yarmohammadi, L. (1995).A contrastivephonological analysis of English andPersian: ACourse book in AppliedPhonological Studies.Shiraz: ShirazUniversity Press[20]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_German(Accessed August 15, 2010)

[ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ] [ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] 18 / 19 Farazandeh-pourF. and otherIntl. J. Humanities (2013) Vol.20(4) [ DOR: 20.1001.1.25382640.2013.20.4.1.4 ]

[ Downloaded from eijh.modares.ac.ir on 2023-05-18 ] Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) 19 / 19

quotesdbs_dbs3.pdfusesText_6

[PDF] 2000 solved problems in numerical analysis pdf

[PDF] 2002 pdf

[PDF] 2004 ap computer science free response answers

[PDF] 2005 ap computer science free response answers

[PDF] 2007 honda accord maintenance schedule pdf

[PDF] 2008 chevy silverado 1500 4 door

[PDF] 2008 chevy silverado 1500 manual transmission

[PDF] 2008 chevy silverado 1500 payload capacity

[PDF] 2008 chevy silverado 2500hd duramax

[PDF] 2008 chevy silverado 3/5 drop

[PDF] 2008 chevy silverado dash lights flickering

[PDF] 2008 chevy silverado extended cab blue book value

[PDF] 2008 chevy silverado front bumper replacement

[PDF] 2008 chevy silverado headlights and taillights

[PDF] 2008 chevy silverado power window fuse