hellog〜英語史ブログ / 2014-03

■ #1780. 言語接触と借用の尺度 [contact][borrowing][sociolinguistics][loan_word][typology][japanese]

　2言語間の言語接触においては，一方向あるいは双方向に言語項の借用が生じる．その言語接触と借用の強度は，少数の語彙が借用される程度の小さいなものから，文法範疇などの構造的な要素が借用される程度の大きいものまで様々ありうるが，古今東西の言語接触の事例から，その尺度を類型化することは可能だろうか．
　この問題については，「#902. 借用されやすい言語項目」 ([2011-10-16-1])，「#903. 借用の多い言語と少ない言語」 ([2011-10-17-1])，「#934. 借用の多い言語と少ない言語 (2)」 ([2011-11-17-1]) ほかで部分的に言及してきたが，昨日の記事「#1779. 言語接触の程度と種類を予測する指標」 ([2014-03-11-1]) で引用した Thomason and Kaufman (74--76) による借用尺度 ("BORROWING SCALE") が，現在のところ最も本格的なものだろう．著者たちは言語接触を大きく borrowing と shift-induced interference に分けているが，ここでの尺度はあくまで前者に関するものである．5段階に区別されたレベルの説明を引用する．

(1) Casual contact: lexical borrowing only
    Lexicon:
        Content words. For cultural and functional (rather than typological) reasons, non-basic vocabulary will be borrowed before basic vocabulary.

(2) Slightly more intense contact: slight structural borrowing
    Lexicon:
        Function words: conjunctions and various adverbial particles.
    Structure:
        Minor phonological, syntactic, and lexical semantic features. Phonological borrowing here is likely to be confined to the appearance of new phonemes with new phones, but only in loanwords. Syntactic features borrowed at this stage will probably be restricted to new functions (or functional restrictions) and new orderings that cause little or no typological disruption.

(3) More intense contact: slightly more structural borrowing
    Lexicon:
        Function words: adpositions (prepositions and postpositions). At this stage derivational affixes may be abstracted from borrowed words and added to native vocabulary; inflectional affixes may enter the borrowing language attached to, and will remain confined to, borrowed vocabulary items. Personal and demonstrative pronouns and low numerals, which belong to the basic vocabulary, are more likely to be borrowed at this stage than in more casual contact situations.
    Structure:
        Slightly less minor structural features than in category (2). In phonology, borrowing will probably include the phonemicization, even in native vocabulary, of previously allophonic alternations. This is especially true of those that exploit distinctive features already present in the borrowing language, and also easily borrowed prosodic and syllable-structure features, such as stress rules and the addition of syllable-final consonants (in loanwords only). In syntax, a complete change from, say, SOV to SVO syntax will not occur here, but a few aspects of such a switch may be found, as, for example, borrowed postpositions in an otherwise prepositional language (or vice versa).

(4) Strong cultural pressure: moderate structural borrowing
    Structure:
        Major structural features that cause relatively little typological change. Phonological borrowing at this stage includes introduction of new distinctive features in contrastive sets that are represented in native vocabulary, and perhaps loss of some contrasts; new syllable structure constraints, also in native vocabulary; and a few natural allophonic and automatic morphophonemic rules, such as palatalization or final obstruent devoicing. Fairly extensive word order changes will occur at this stage, as will other syntactic changes that cause little categorial alteration. In morphology, borrowed inflectional affixes and categories (e.g., new cases) will be added to native words, especially if there is a good typological fit in both category and ordering.

(5) Very strong cultural pressure: heavy structural borrowing
    Structure:
        Major structural features that cause significant typological disruption: added morphophonemic rules; phonetic changes (i.e., subphonemic changes in habits of articulation, including allophonic alternations); loss of phonemic contrasts and of morphophonemic rules; changes in word structure rules (e.g., adding prefixes in a language that was exclusively suf-fixing or a change from flexional toward agglutinative morphology); categorial as well as more extensive ordering changes in morphosyntax (e.g., development of ergative morphosyntax); and added concord rules, including bound pronominal elements.

　英語史上の主要な言語接触の事例に当てはめると，古英語以前におけるケルト語，古英語以降のラテン語との接触はレベル1程度，中英語以降のフランス語との接触はレベル2程度，古英語末期からの古ノルド語との接触はせいぜいレベル3程度である．英語は歴史的に言語接触が多く，借用された言語項にあふれているという一般的な英語（史）観は，それ自体として誤っているわけではないが，Thomason and Kaufman のスケールでいえば，たいしたことはない，世界にはもっと激しい接触を経てきた言語が多く存在するのだ，ということになる．通言語的な類型論が，個別言語をみる見方をがらんと変えてみせてくれる好例ではないだろうか．
　日本語についても，歴史時代に限定すれば中国語（漢字）からの重要な影響があったものの，BORROWING SCALE でいえば，やはり軽度だろう．しかし，先史時代を含めれば諸言語からの重度の接触があったかもしれないし，場合によっては borrowing とは別次元の言語接触であり，上記のスケールの管轄外にあるとみなされる shift-induced interference が関与していた可能性もある．

　・ Thomason, Sarah Grey and Terrence Kaufman. Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley: U of California P, 1988.

[ 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]