Zabawa English Lexical and Semantic Loans PDF

Title: English lexical and semantic loans in informal spoken Polish
Author: Marcin Zabawa
Citation style: Zabawa Marcin. (2012). English lexical and semantic loans in informal
spoken Polish. Katowice : Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
1.1 The.............. ½ 1
ENGLISH LEXICAL
AND SEMANTIC LOANS
IN INFORMAL SPOKEN POLISH
2 ½ Contents
NR 2951
Contents ½ 3
Marcin Zabawa
ENGLISH LEXICAL
AND SEMANTIC LOANS
IN INFORMAL SPOKEN POLISH
Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego Katowice 2012

4 ½ Contents
Editor ot the Series: Językoznawstwo Neofilologiczne

Maria Wysocka
Referee
Elżbieta Mańczak-Wohlfeld
After this edition is out of print, the book will be available online
Śląska Biblioteka Cyfrowa
www.sbc.org.pl
Executive Editor: Krystian Wojcieszuk
Cover Design: Paulina Dubiel
Technical Editor: Małgorzata Pleśniar
Proofreader: Danuta Stencel
Computer-generated forms: Edward Wilk
Copyright © 2012 by
Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego
All rights reserved
ISSN 0208-6336
ISBN 978-83-226-2036-6
Published by
Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego
ul. Bankowa 12B, 40-007 Katowice
www.wydawnictwo.us.edu.pl
e-mail: [email protected]
First impression. Printed sheets: 13.5. Publishing sheets: 18.5.
Paper: Ecco Book 60 g/m2, vol. 1.6 Price: 24 zł (+ VAT)
Printing and binding: PPHU TOTEM s.c.
M. Rejnowski, J. Zamiara
ul. Jacewska 89, 88-100 Inowrocław
Contents ½ 5
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Chapter 1
SPOKEN LANGUAGE AS A LINGUISTIC PHENOMENON . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.2 The primacy of speech over writing and vice versa . . . . . . . . 15
1.3 Differences between speech and writing . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1.3.1 Introductory remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1.3.2 List of the differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1.4 Research done in the field of spoken Polish . . . . . . . . . . 23
Chapter 2
THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF THE CONCEPT AND THE PROCESS OF BORROWING . . . 26
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.2 The definition of borrowing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.3 Types of loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.3.1 Introductory comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.3.2 Lexical and semantic loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.3.3 Other types of loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.3.4 Concluding comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.4 Conditions and motives for borrowing . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Chapter 3
THE LINGUISTIC OUTCOME OF ENGLISH-POLISH CONTACT . . . . . . . . 42
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.2 Lexical loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.3 Semantic loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.4 Other types of borowings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.5 Research done in the field of English influence upon Polish . . . . . 49
6 ½ Contents
3.5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.5.2 Lexical loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.5.3 Semantic loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
3.5.4 Final remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Chapter 4
THE DESCRIPTION OF THE CORPUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.2 General information about corpus studies . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.3 Problems connected with spoken language corpora . . . . . . . . 56
4.4 The corpus used in the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.4.1 Introductory remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.4.2 The informants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
4.4.3 The recordings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
4.4.4 The type of language used . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
4.4.5 The transcription and the use of fonts . . . . . . . . . . 65
Chapter 5
LEXICAL LOANS FOUND IN THE CORPUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
5.2 Description of the lexical loans found in the corpus . . . . . . . 69
5.3 Statistical analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Chapter 6
SEMANTIC LOANS FOUND IN THE CORPUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
6.2 General description of the semantic loans found in the corpus . . . . 96
6.3 The process of introducing semantic loans into spoken informal Polish
(a hypothesis) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
6.4 The analysis of the semantic loans found in the corpus. . . . . . . 106
6.4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
6.4.2 Absolutnie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
6.4.3 Adres, adresat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
6.4.4 Album . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
6.4.5 Cyfrowy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
6.4.6 Dinozaur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
6.4.7 Dokładnie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
6.4.8 Globalny . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
6.4.9 Ikona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
6.4.10 Inteligentny . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
6.4.11 Karta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
6.4.12 Kasa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
6.4.13 Klawiatura . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
6.4.14 Konsola, konsolowy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
6.4.15 Konto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Contents ½ 7
6.4.16 List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

6.4.17 Ładować . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
6.4.18 Obrazek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
6.4.19 Opcja . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
6.4.20 Operować . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
6.4.21 Pakiet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
6.4.22 Partner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
6.4.23 Piractwo, piracki, pirat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
6.4.24 Poczta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
6.4.25 Profesjonalnie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
6.4.26 Promocja . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
6.4.27 Rozpakować . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
6.4.28 Sieć . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
6.4.29 Słownik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
6.4.30 Strona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
6.4.31 Super . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
6.4.32 Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
6.4.33 Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
6.4.34 Wczytać, wczytywać . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
6.4.35 Wejść, wchodzić . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
6.4.36 Wirus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
6.4.37 Wyjść, wychodzić . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
6.4.38 Zainstalować, zainstalowany, instalacja . . . . . . . . . 160
6.4.39 Zawiesić . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
6.4.40 Other semantic neologisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
6.5 Statistical analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Chapter 7
CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
7.2 Lexical loans found in the corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
7.3 Semantic loans found in the corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
7.4 Final comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
Streszczenie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
Zusammenfassung . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
Contents ½ 9
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deep gratitude to Professor Janusz Arabski, who

was the first person to bring the topic of English influence upon Polish to my
attention and advised me to write a doctoral dissertation. Moreover, I would
like to thank him for his lively interest in my work, his invaluable aid and
kindness.
I would like to thank the referees of my doctoral dissertation, Professors
Leszek Berezowski and Rafał Molencki, for their inspiring comments and
suggestions. I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Elżbieta
Mańczak-Wohlfeld for her helpful comments on the first version of this book.
I would also like to express my gratitude to my parents, my colleagues and
my friends for their support and encouragement.
Introduction ½ 11
INTRODUCTION
It is a well-known fact that nowadays English exerts a strong influence on

many European languages, including Polish. Naturally, the changes in
the Polish language are most readily visible in the area of vocabulary, as
a number of words of English origin have entered Polish in recent years. What
is more, new meanings are frequently assigned to already existing native Polish
words or older borrowings. Furthermore, other spheres, such as syntax,
morphology or even phonology are not free from the influence of English,
either.
In general, the lexical influence of English upon written Polish, particularly
the language of the press, has been researched relatively thoroughly; however,
the influence on spoken informal Polish, both lexical and semantic, has
attracted much less attention of linguists, as gathering a sufficient amount of
spontaneous spoken language is inherently a very difficult and time-consuming
process. This tendency still continues, as much attention is devoted to new
vocabulary items appearing in written Polish, especially the one used in
the mass media. Much less has been written, however, about the newest
semantic borrowings. The aim of the present book is therefore to investigate
the lexical and semantic influence of English upon Polish on the basis of
the corpus, consisting of informal conversations, recorded, transcribed and
analysed by the present author. The main focus of the book is on semantic
borrowings.
The only previous work of this type known to the present author is the one
written by OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000). The present research, however,
differs from hers in many respects. Most importantly, the present study does
not concentrate on syntax, but instead devotes much more attention to
individual loans at the level of words; the majority of them are presented in
the context and their meaning and use is discussed in detail. In other words,
the loans, especially semantic ones, are discussed not only globally, but
individually as well; statistical analyses have also been performed. Moreover,
12 ½ Introduction
the author has also aimed at investigating the mechanisms of the emergence of
semantic loans in Polish. In addition, the present work concentrates not only on
the general informal variety of Polish, but on the Silesian dialect as well.
The book consists of seven chapters and five appendices. The first four
chapters have theoretical and introductory character, whereas the next two (fifth
and sixth) form the essential part of the book.
Chapter 1 concentrates on some theoretical points concerning the notion of
spoken language: the theories of the primacy of speech over writing and vice
versa and the differences between the two modes. The final section of
the chapter is devoted to the research done in the field of spoken Polish.
Chapter 2 focuses on theoretical aspects of the process of borrowing.
The chapter aims at defining the notion of ‘borrowing’, as it is perceived
differently by various linguists. Moreover, the chapter includes the description
of the two types of loans (lexical and semantic) as well as the discussion
concerning the conditions and motives for borrowing.
Chapter 3 concentrates on the contact between English and Polish.
The main part of the chapter focuses on the linguistic outcome of the contact in
question. In other words, concrete examples of lexical and semantic
borrowings, including less known ones, are given and briefly discussed.
Moreover, various other tendencies, i.e. not typical borrowings, which have
probably been taken over from English, are mentioned. The final section is
devoted to the research done in the field of English influence upon Polish.
The aim of the section is not only to present a list of the literature on
the subject, but also to highlight the areas which still require further
investigation.
The aim of Chapter 4 is to describe the corpus of informal spoken Polish
upon which the study is based. The first part gives some general, introductory
information on corpus studies and then focuses on various problems connected
with spoken language corpora, for example the process of designing such
a corpus and gathering of the material. The difficulty and protracted nature of
the process is stressed. What is more, many other specific problems arise when
the aim of the research is to count and analyse borrowings used in such
a corpus, the most important of which are also described in the section.
The further part of the chapter is devoted to the description of the corpus used
in the study. Various aspects, such as the individual recordings (particularly
the setting and the topics), the informants (including their age, sex, education,
occupation and knowledge of English) and the conventions used in
the transcription are discussed, among other things. Moreover, as some of
the informants used — to a lesser or greater extent — the Silesian dialect,
some information on its most important features is given.
Chapter 5 concentrates on the lexical loans found in the corpus. The first
section focuses on the methodological problems connected with such spheres as
Introduction ½ 13
differentiating between English borrowings and borrowings of other origin or

distinguishing between borrowings and instances of single-word code
switching. The main part of the chapter concentrates on the description of
the loanwords found in the corpus. The final section is devoted to statistical
analysis of the loanwords.
Chapter 6, the longest and most important, focuses on the semantic
borrowings found in the corpus. The first part of the chapter is concerned with
the general description of the semantic loans in question as well as with a brief
description of the methodological problems. The further part of the chapter
aims at explaining the process of introducing semantic loans into spoken Polish
by using ARABSKI’S theory of primary counterparts. The main part of
the chapter focuses on detailed description of the semantic loans found in
the corpus. The final section is devoted to statistical analysis of these semantic
borrowings.
Chapter 7 focuses on the conclusions of the study.
14 ½ Introduction
1.2 The primacy of speech over writing and vice versa ½ 15
Chapter 1
SPOKEN LANGUAGE AS A LINGUISTIC PHENOMENON
1.1 Introduction
The present chapter concentrates on some theoretical points concerning

the notion of spoken language: the theories about the primacy of speech over
writing (and vice versa) and the differences between the two modes. The last
section of the chapter is devoted to the research done in the field of spoken
Polish. Moreover, it tries to show the place of colloquial language in
the tradition of Polish linguistic studies.
In general, the aim of the chapter is to describe some of the features of
the language used in the corpus (cf. Chapter 4).
1.2 The primacy of speech over writing and vice versa
It is a well-known fact (cf. e.g. BIBER, 1988: 5) that historically, writing was
regarded as the primary, ‘true’, form of language whereas speech was thought
to be of secondary nature and therefore not worth researching. According to
AKINNASO (1982: 98) and BIBER (1988: 5), the situation changed in the 19th
century, when speech began to be perceived as something deserving separate
study. Furthermore, as they point out, the development of phonetics in Britain
(especially through the work of H. SWEET and D. JONES), the process of
recording the speech of illiterate peasants conducted by the Brothers Grimm
and the studies on American Indian languages (mostly only spoken) carried out
by American structuralists contributed to the growing interest in speech as
a linguistic phenomenon as well. As a consequence, as BIBER (1988: 6) notes,
at the beginning of the 20th century speech was almost unanimously regarded
16 ½ Chapter 1: Spoken language as a linguistic phenomenon
as primary whereas writing ceased to be perceived as worthy of serious

linguistic study. Such a view can be found in numerous linguistic works
written in the 20th century. It was for example stated that ‘writing is not
language, but merely a way of recording language by visible marks’
(BLOOMFIELD, 1933: 21; cf. also BIBER, 1988: 6), ‘speech is fundamental and
writing [...] only a secondary derivative’ (HALL, 1964; cited in BIBER, 1988: 6)
or ‘[writing is] completely and irremediably artificial’ (ONG, 1980; cited in
AKINNASO, 1982: 113).
The above views can be summarized using GLEASON’S words: ‘Many
linguists consider all forms of writing outside the domain of linguistics and
would restrict the discipline to the consideration of spoken language only’
(GLEASON, 1961; cited in BLASS and SIEGMAN, 1975: 20). Some linguists,
however, present the opposite view, cf. the argument given by VACHEK:
‘The development of a community’s higher culture and civilization is
unquestionably conditioned by the existence in its language of a written norm,
the vehicle of higher needs and wants of the community. It would, then, be
completely out-of-place to brand the written norm as an inferior kind of
structure’ (VACHEK, 1976; cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 119; original emphasis).
In terms of cultural development, speech is clearly primary over writing.
Historically, human beings were able to speak long before they were able to
write. Furthermore, speech, as against writing, can be found in virtually all
cultures. The former is acquired informally in early childhood whereas
the latter is learned by fewer people, usually in a formal way, with emphasis on
prescriptivism. Writing is thus by no means a universal phenomenon. Moreover,
it has been described as a ‘mechanical process’, as opposed to speech, seen as
‘a natural process’ (AKINNASO, 1982: 113).
The primacy of speech over writing is not, however, generally accepted
outside the area of linguistics. The so-called ‘social priority’ is still given, at
least in Western cultures, to writing:
In fact, the historical view that written, literary language is true language
continues as the dominant lay perception to the present time. Our children
need to study English at school, which includes written composition and
the prescriptive rules of writing, not speech. We criticize immigrant children
for not knowing ‘English’ when they are relatively fluent in a conversation;
the problem is that they are not literate in English. We expect our grammars
and dictionaries to present the correct forms of written language; when
dictionaries present both literate and colloquial vocabulary, they are severely
criticized for destroying the standards of English, as happened to Webster’s
Third, which has been described as a ‘disappointment’, ‘a scandal and
a disaster’ (see discussion in Finegan 1980). In our business, legal, and
political systems, written commitments are binding and ‘real’ while spoken
commitments are often ignored. As teachers, we explain to children that
1.2 The primacy of speech over writing and vice versa ½ 17
words like know have a silent [k], and words like doubt have a silent [b].
Sometimes we even change our pronunciation to reflect an unusual spelling;
for example, often is now frequently pronounced with a [t], and palm with
an [l], although these segments were not pronounced at some earlier stages of
English. Thus, although speech is claimed to have linguistic primacy, writing
is given social priority by most adults in Western cultures. (BIBER, 1988:
6—7)
As AKINNASO (1982: 98) and BIBER (1988: 7) observe, even within

the domain of structural linguistics there is no consistency concerning
the primacy of speech. On one hand, writing is perceived as derivative of
speech. On the other hand, however, speech is also disregarded on the basis of
being unsystematic and thus not representative of the structure of a language.
To sum up, as BIBER (1988) notes, the problem of the primacy of speech
over writing (and vice versa) can be discussed from three perspectives:
linguistic (where writing was first seen as primary; the view changed, however,
at the beginning of the twentieth century), cultural/historical/developmental
(where speech is clearly primary) and social (where the priority is given to
written language, at least in Western cultures). BIBER (1988: 7) rightly observes
that all of the aforementioned perspectives grant priority to one of the modes,
be it speech or writing. He suggests that it may well be possible that neither
speech nor writing should be given primacy over the other. Rather, the two
modes, coexisting side by side, are used for different communicative purposes,
as GRAMLEY and PÄTZOLD note:
Speech is typically used to create, maintain and enhance social bonds (which
Brown and Yule call ‘interactional’ uses; see Brown and Yule 1983: 11),
while writing is mostly concerned with the transfer of information
(‘transactional’ uses; ibid.). Speech meets basic human needs, while writing
satisfies less immediate ones. (GRAMLEY and PÄTZOLD, 1992: 42)
Thus the two modes in question are not used completely interchangeably
but can be said to be employed in complementary situations, as BIBER and
AKINNASO point out, among others:
Usually this choice [i.e. between speech and writing] is unconscious, since
only one of the modes is suitable or practical. For example, we have no
trouble choosing between leaving a note for someone or speaking to
the person face-to-face; the situation dictates the mode of communication.
Similarly, we have no problem deciding between writing an academic
exposition for an audience and addressing the audience by means of a spoken
lecture. We could in fact write a lecture or a note to a physically present
audience, but this would take more effort and time than required, and it would
fail to take advantage of the opportunities for interaction. Conversely,
speaking a lecture or note to an addressee who is separated by time or place

is usually not possible at all; apart from the use of telephones and tape
recorders, the written mode is required in situations of this type. (BIBER,
1988: 8—9)
For example, natural conversations are always carried out in spoken language,
whereas, in modern industrial societies, speech is inappropriate for much
bureaucratic communication such as applying for a job, requesting social
services, filling out tax and credit application forms, and so on. (AKINNASO,
1982: 113)
A similar view was also expressed by numerous other linguists, including

VYGOTSKY (1962; cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 118—119) and SMITH (1978; cited in
AKINNASO, 1982: 118—119).
As a consequence, one has to agree with BIBER (1988) that neither mode
should be given priority. Rather, each of them deserves careful attention.
Thus the reasons for choosing spoken Polish, rather than written, as a base for
the present book, are not connected with the priority of one mode over
the other. The author has decided to concentrate on oral language as loans in
spoken Polish have so far been researched much less thoroughly than in
the written mode, particularly in the language of the press (see section 3.5 and
section 4.3 for more information). From this perspective, it seems desirable to
briefly present the theories concerning the differences between speech and
writing, as they are important with respect to the choice of the corpus material
which should resemble as closely as possible the so-called ‘typical speech’.
1.3 Differences between speech and writing
1.3.1 Introductory remarks
According to POOLE and FIELD (1976: 305), studies on various aspects of

the differences between spoken and written language have a very long history.
However, it is possible to formulate a general statement that, while a number of
studies concerning the differences between spoken1 and written language were
1 As FOX (1987: 161) rightly observes, the term ‘spoken’ may seem to be too broad since it
includes all texts produced by mouth (such as e.g. academic lectures). Consequently, she prefers
to use the term ‘conversational’, which refers to non-monologic and spontaneous spoken
1.3 Differences between speech and writing ½ 19
carried out (cf. e.g. AKINNASO, 1982; BIBER, 1988; BLASS and SIEGMAN, 1975;
FOX, 1987; GRAMLEY and PÄTZOLD, 1992; POOLE and FIELD, 1976; TANNEN,
1982), there is not much agreement on the most important features of the two
modes. As BIBER (1988: 5) asserts, the general, yet not universally accepted
view is that written language is formal, abstract, complex and structurally
elaborated whereas spoken language is context-dependent, concrete and
structurally simple. Some studies, however, show little linguistic difference
between speech and writing or even point out that spoken language is in fact
more structurally complex than written (cf. e.g. the results of the study carried
out by POOLE and FIELD, 1976: 309; cf. also TANNEN, 1982: 5, who presents
fairly critical assessment of their research).
What is more, there is sometimes as much variation among texts within
the domain of speech or writing as between the two modes. For example, some
spoken genres can be quite different from one another, as in the case of
academic lectures and spontaneous conversations between close friends;
a similar difference can be detected within written genres, e.g. between
academic theses and personal letters. In much the same way, some spoken and
written genres can share a number of similarities, as in the case of spontaneous
conversations and personal letters or academic theses and academic lectures
(BIBER, 1988: 36—37). Furthermore, as TANNEN (1982: 3, 11) observes,
the differences between spoken and written variety result not only, or even not
mainly, from the two modes as such, but rather from the genre and the degree
of formality. A similar view was expressed by AKINNASO (1982: 103), who
states that such differences may result from various factors, such as the purpose
of the act of communication, the topic, the setting, the nature of
the communicative task and many others. Additionally, KRAMSCH (1998: 40)
asserts that most of the features (as listed below) are not inherent in the spoken
or written mode. Rather, they are connected with the continuum of more or less
literate uses of both modes. As a consequence, there is no single feature that
would enable us to differentiate between all spoken genres and all written
genres.
Nevertheless, BIBER (1988: 37) proposes using the notion of typical speech
and typical writing that would refer to the most common and/or frequent type
of speech and writing. In addition, such a genre (called ‘unmarked’) should
possess the typical features of its mode: typical speech, for example, is (a)
dependent on shared space, time and background knowledge, (b) interactive, (c)
structurally simple, (d) concrete and (e) fragmented. Consequently, according to
language. In the present book, nevertheless, the term ‘spoken language’ will be retained, as it is
firmly established and convenient (cf. the title of the study). It will be used primarily in the sense
of oral, non-monologic, spontaneous language.
BIBER (1988: 37), face-to-face conversation should be perceived as typical

speech and informational exposition as typical writing.
1.3.2 List of the differences
In general, the differences between written and spoken language can be

described from three perspectives: linguistic (which can be further subdivided
into quantitative and non-quantitative approaches), situational and functional
(BIBER, 1988). However, they will not be discussed in detail, since the primary
aim of the chapter is to serve as a description of the language used in
the corpus (see Chapter 4). Thus, only a summary of the differences between
the two modes will be presented.2
As was noted at the beginning of section 1.3.1, a number of studies, whose
primary goal was to discuss features that could be used for differentiating
between the two modes, were carried out. While a number of different
approaches were adopted and, consequently, the results differ from one another,
some general conclusions can nevertheless be inferred. In particular, it is
generally claimed that spoken language:3
• is less structurally complex and elaborate than writing (BIBER, 1988: 47; see
also POOLE and FIELD, 1976: 309 for the opposite view), which is indicated
by such features as a greater use of finite verbs and lesser of abstract nouns
(DEVITO, 1967; cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 101), the use of shorter words
(i.e. less frequent use of polysyllabic words than in writing), less frequent
use of attributive adjectives and the use of a less varied vocabulary
(AKINNASO, 1982: 100; BLASS and SIEGMAN, 1975: 20; KRAMSCH, 1998: 39),
less frequent use of complex nominal structures, complex verb constructions,
subordinate constructions and the passive voice (DEVITO, 1967; OCHS, 1979;
CHAFE, 1982; all cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 104; GOLUB, 1969; cited in POOLE
and FIELD, 1976: 310; TANNEN, 1982: 7; BLASS and SIEGMAN, 1975: 21; FOX,
1987: 137), less frequent use of participles functioning as nouns and verb
nominalizations, less frequent use of genitive subjects and objects, conjoined
phrases and sequences of prepositional phrases, lesser use of relative and
2 Obvious differences, such as phonetic/graphic manifestation (perception by ears/eyes) will
not be mentioned.
3 Most of the description here relates to spoken and written English, but a great deal of
such differences seem to be universal and thus characteristic of many languages, including Polish.
Therefore it can be said that most of such features characterize the informal spoken Polish used in
the corpus.
1.3 Differences between speech and writing ½ 21
complement clauses (CHAFE, 1982; cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 102), the use of
shorter sentences (GIBSON et al., 1966; cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 101).
• depends on morphosyntactic structures which were learned early in life
(OCHS, 1979; cited in TANNEN, 1982: 7).
• is characterized by the repetition of lexical items and similar syntactic
constructions (OCHS, 1979; cited in TANNEN, 1982: 7).
• is characterized by a longer text (but see TANNEN, 1982: 11—17 for
the opposite case).
• has a lower concentration of new information than writing (STUBBS, 1980;
BROWN, and YULE, 1983; both cited in BIBER, 1988: 47); as was asserted,
writing is characterized by ‘greater density of ideas’ (DEVITO, 1967; cf. also
CHAFE, 1982; both cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 101) and economy (POOLE and
FIELD, 1976: 306).
• is more personally involved than writing (BIBER, 1988: 47), which is
indicated by such features as a greater use of personal pronouns and
self-reference words (DEVITO, 1966; cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 102; POOLE
and FIELD, 1976: 310). The personal involvement may also be indirectly
indicated by less frequent use of Latinate and technical words (AKINNASO,
1982: 103), a preferential usage of deictic terms and demonstrative pronouns
instead of the definite article (e.g. this man rather than the man) or a greater
use of imperatives, interrogatives and exclamations (OCHS, 1979; RUBIN,
1980; both cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 104; TANNEN, 1982: 7).
• is less abstract and less detached than writing (CHAFE, 1982; cited in BIBER,
1988: 47).
• less organized and planned than writing (BIBER, 1988: 47), which is
is
indirectly indicated by such features as the existence of repetitions,
digressions, pauses, false starts, hesitations, unfinished sentences and other
redundancies (BROWN and YULE, 1983; KRAMSCH, 1998: 38—39; POOLE and
FIELD, 1976: 306, 309; see also AKINNASO, 1982: 115 for a more critical
approach). Written language, on the other hand, relies on ‘a more deliberate
method of organizing ideas, using such expository concepts as “thesis”,
“topic sentence” and “supporting evidence”’ (AKKINASO, 1982: 104; RUBIN,
1980; cited in AKINNASO, 1982) and ‘consciousness of style’ (POOLE and
FIELD, 1976: 306).
• is more contextualized (context dependent) and more dependent on
background situation and shared knowledge (KAY, 1977; OLSON, 1977; both
cited in BIBER, 1988: 47; KRAMSCH, 1998: 40; TANNEN, 1982: 3, 7; but see
PRINCE, 1981; cited in BIBER, 1988: 48, for a more critical view), which
results from the physical properties of speech and the necessity of
the proximity of the sender and receiver. As AKINNASO puts it, ‘speech
presupposes a common context and point of view for both speaker and
listener, whereas writing is relatively independent of context, being addressed
to no one in particular, or, at best, to a distant interlocutor’ (AKINNASO, 1982:

112; GOODY and WATT, 1963; cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 112).
• is less explicit than writing. As BIBER puts it, written language ‘has complete
idea units with all assumptions and logical relations encoded in the text’
(BIBER, 1988: 47). A similar view was expressed by AKINNASO (1982: 104),
who states than writing promotes ‘the need to produce complete information
or idea units and make all assumptions explicit.’
• is multi-modal, i.e. it makes use not only of linguistic cues, but of kinesic,
prosodic and contextual as well (AKINNASO, 1982: 112). For example,
the meaning of a spoken message may be altered by a pitch or intonation
change. Moreover, paralinguistic and non-verbal channels (such as e.g. facial
expressions, gestures, the tone of voice) are frequently used for establishing
cohesion in speech (TANNEN, 1982: 3).
• is a less ‘deliberate activity’ than writing (AKINNASO, 1982: 111).
• is not permanent or reproducible (unless recorded) (AKINNASO, 1982: 114;
KRAMSCH, 1998: 37).
• is unplanned and unplannable (in the form of spontaneous conversation)
(OCHS, 1979; cited in AKINNASO, 1982: 114).
• produces a less varied and more redundant output, indicated by lower
type-token ratios. It is thus characterized by less diversification and greater
repetition (DRIEMAN, 1962; cited in BLASS and SIEGMAN, 1975: 21).
• is believed to be generally a less formal mode than writing (BLASS and
SIEGMAN, 1975: 24).
• is characterized by ‘little or no opportunity for corrective self-feedback’
(POOLE and FIELD, 1976: 309).
• carries less weight and prestige (KRAMSCH, 1998: 38).
• is characterized by the existence of conversational cooperation (KRAMSCH,
1998: 38).
• tends to be people-centered, as opposed to writing, which tends to be
topic-centered (KRAMSCH, 1998: 39—40).
• is characterized by fragmentation (as opposed to writing, which is
characterized by integration, indicated by its greater structural complexity),
resulting from ‘the spurt-like nature of speech which probably reflects
the jerky nature of thought’ (CHAFE, 1980; cited in TANNEN, 1982: 7; cf. also
BIBER, 1988: 43). For example, spoken language is characterized by
the tendency to present propositions with simple conjunctions, mostly and (in
contrast to writing, which frequently uses subordinating conjunctions) or
even without marking explicitly the relation of one proposition to another
(CHAFE, 1980; cited in TANNEN, 1982: 7).
• shows a high degree of involvement, as opposed to writing, which is
characterized by detachment (TANNEN, 1982: 7). The involvement of speech
is indicated by various features, including imageability, fuzziness, the use of
1.4 Research done in the field of spoken Polish ½ 23
direct quotations and emphatic particles (e.g. really), the emphasis on actions
and people, direct reference to a listener (e.g. by using questions or second
person pronouns) (CHAFE, 1980; cited in TANNEN, 1982: 8; BIBER, 1988: 43).
In addition, BIBER (1988: 46) lists ten situational characteristics of oral
language: multichannel, home acquisition, low social value, high interaction,
shared personal knowledge, a negotiable goal, the maintenance of relationship,
shared space and time, low interaction with text and low informational focus.
To sum the discussion up, it can be claimed that, using AKINNASO’S words,
‘spoken and written language derive from the same semantic base, making use
of the same lexico-syntactic system, and varying mainly in the choice and
distribution of vocabulary and syntactic patterns in response to
modality-specific pragmatic constraints’ (AKKINASO, 1982: 119).
Most of the features listed above can be detected in the language used in
the corpus of informal spoken Polish upon which the present book is based.
Other features of the language used in the corpus, e.g. words and syntactic
structures specific to the Silesian dialect, as well as a general description of
the corpus, can be found in Chapter 4.
1.4 Research done in the field of spoken Polish4
As DUNAJ notes (1989; cited in OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 58; cf. also

OŻÓG, 2001: 48), the traditional linguistic studies in Poland were based solely
on written Polish. As a consequence, there was hardly any research on spoken
Polish before the 1960s (or even early 1970s), with the exception of
dialectological studies. A similar view was expressed by ŻYDEK-BEDNARCZUK
(1994: 27), who states that the studies on spoken language were intensified
only during the last 25 years, dealing mainly with phonetic realization,
vocabulary, syntax and semantics.
At first, the studies on spoken language were connected with the research
on dialects. It was only in the 1970s that the spoken variety of Polish in general
started to be considered as worthy of serious linguistic investigation. One
could mention here such works as e.g. PISARKOWA’S study on the syntax of
telephone conversation (1975), LUBAŚ’S and KURZOWA’S research on the spoken
language of the mass media (LUBAŚ, 1981; KURZOWA, 1985; both cited in
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 63), DUNAJ’S study on formal spoken Polish
used by the speakers on the radio (1983), or ŻYDEK-BEDNARCZUK’S work on text
structure of informal conversation (1994). What is more, methodologies used
4 Some parts of this section have been used in ZABAWA (2009a).

for researching written and spoken language began to be clearly differentiated

(ŻYDEK-BEDNARCZUK, 1994: 28).
Before extensive recordings of spontaneous spoken Polish were carried out,
some theoretical preliminaries were discussed:
• the typology of spoken Polish varieties (BUTTLER, 1982; WILKOŃ, 1987; both
cited in ŻYDEK-BEDNARCZUK, 1994: 28)
• various types of language contact and language varieties (LUBAŚ, 1976, 1979;
cf. also OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 60)
• components of speech act in a text (PISARKOWA, 1976, 1978; cited in
ŻYDEK-BEDNARCZUK, 1994: 28).
Following those introductory works, studies on urban Polish were carried
out, notably in Katowice, Kraków, Łódź and Poznań (cf. ŻYDEK-BEDNARCZUK,
1994: 9; OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 60—61). As a consequence,
the following corpora of spoken Polish, among others, were published:
• in the region of Katowice: Teksty języka mówionego mieszkańców miast
Górnego Śląska i Zagłębia (LUBAŚ, 1978, 1980)
• in Kraków: Wybór tekstów języka mówionego mieszkańców Krakowa (DUNAJ,
1979)
• in the region of Łódź: Wybór tekstów języka mówionego mieszkańców Łodzi
i regionu łódzkiego. Generacja najstarsza (KAMIŃSKA, 1989), Wybór tekstów
języka mówionego mieszkańców Łodzi. Generacja starsza, średnia
i najmłodsza (KAMIŃSKA, 1992).
Nowadays informal spoken Polish (polszczyzna potoczna) attracts more and
more attention of linguists. For example, there have been a number of studies
dealing with characteristic features of the informal variety of Polish in
the sphere of phonology, morphology, syntax and vocabulary (for details see
e.g. ADAMISZYN, 1995: 195—197; DUNAJ et al., 1999: 229—247; LUBAŚ, 2000:
62—64; LUBAŚ, 2001: 221—231; LUBAŚ, 2003: 249—259). Other studies deal
with the expansion in the use of the informal variety of Polish, particularly its
characteristic vocabulary and idiomatic expressions: the words and
constructions belonging typically to the informal style (potocyzmy) are now
quite widely used in the press and television, in the language of politicians and
other widely-known persons or even in academic and official styles (for details
see e.g. LUBAŚ, 2000: 59—68; LUBAŚ, 2001: 235—240; OŻÓG, 2001: 48—55).
It must be added, however, that the term potoczny (‘colloquial’) itself is not
completely unambiguous and can be, and in fact often is, understood differently
by the specialists working in the field (cf. LUBAŚ, 2003: 29—32; LUBAŚ, 1999:
145—151; DUNAJ et al., 1999: 227—228). Moreover, the informal variety of
Polish (odmiana potoczna) is situated differently in various typologies of
contemporary Polish. A summary of such typologies (with respect to
the position of the informal variety) is given in LUBAŚ (2003: 53—66), who
deals quite extensively with six main typologies: by GAJDA (1982: 49, 52;
1.4 Research done in the field of spoken Polish ½ 25
2001b: 207—219), BUTTLER (1982), BUTTLER and MARKOWSKI (1991:

107—121), MARKOWSKI (NSPP, 2002: 1658—1662), SKUBALANKA (1978) and
BARTMIŃSKI (1991). Moreover, LUBAŚ (2003) mentions several minor
typologies.
What is more, the informal variety of Polish is not only perceived, but also
evaluated differently by various specialists working in the field. As LUBAŚ
(2003: 66) notes, BARTMIŃSKI, for example, treats it as ‘the first language of
a human being’, ergo, the most important (‘pierwszy język człowieka’) and
‘the centre of the system of language styles’ (‘centrum systemu stylowego
języka’) (BARTMIŃSKI, 2001: 115—117), a similar view being then expressed by
other linguists (e.g. ADAMISZYN, 1995: 183—217). As LUBAŚ (2003: 66) notices,
other researchers, on the other hand, treat it as a style playing a marginal role
in the system of language varieties, either connecting it with unfavourably
assessed ‘popular thinking’ (potoczne myślenie) (ANUSIEWICZ, 1992: 9—20) or
even with an ‘interdialect’ (interdialekt) (SKAWIŃSKI, 1992: 81—86).
Normally, however, the informal variety of language (język potoczny) is
associated with such adjectival expressions as ‘spoken,’ ‘oral’,5 ‘colloquial,’
‘everyday,’ ‘widespread,’ ‘unofficial’ (mówiony, ustny, oralny, codzienny,
obiegowy, nieoficjalny) (cf. WARCHALA, 2003: 7, 11), cf. also the definition of
język potoczny given by Encyklopedia języka polskiego (ed. by URBAŃCZYK and
KUCAŁA, 1999):
[...] język ogólny, mówiony, jakim się ludzie posługują na co dzień,

w swobodnych rozmowach, a więc język mniej staranny od literackiego,
z pewnymi cechami regionalnymi (URBAŃCZYK and KUCAŁA, 1999: 159)
[...] general, spoken language, used by people on everyday basis, in casual

conversations; thus a language less careful than its literary variety, with some
regional features.6
In the present book, the term język potoczny (informal variety) is

understood as a spoken variety of language (with or without dialectal features),
used in everyday situations, typically but not exclusively, by friends, equals,
members of a family and people on first name terms with one another.
5 As BARTMIŃSKI notes, however, the informal variety is not restricted to spoken language.
He mentions several examples of the types of written texts that can be said to belong to informal
style, such as personal letters and diaries (BARTMIŃSKI, 2001a: 118).
6 All translations by the present author.
26 ½ Chapter 2: Theoretical aspects of the concept...
Chapter 2
THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF THE CONCEPT

AND THE PROCESS OF BORROWING
2.1 Introduction
The previous chapter concentrated on some theoretical points concerning

the issue of spoken informal language. The aim of this chapter is to provide
some information regarding the notion of borrowing: the definition of the term,
types of loans and reasons for the existence of various types of loans.
2.2 The definition of borrowing
Before one can analyse the notion of a lexical and semantic loan, it is
necessary to establish the general definition of a loan (also referred to as
a borrowing) as the term is perceived differently by various linguists.
The Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar (by CHALKER and WEINER,
1994), for example, defines the process as
[t]he taking over of a word from a foreign language; a word so borrowed (also
called a loanword) [...]. (CHALKER and WEINER, 1994: 49)
As one can see, the above definition restricts the process to words only
(thus making it equivalent to lexical borrowing).
Encyklopedia językoznawstwa ogólnego (ed. by POLAŃSKI, 1999), on
the other hand, defines the term zapożyczenie językowe in a slightly different
way:
2.2 The definition of borrowing ½ 27
Element przejęty z obcego języka. Najczęściej jest nim wyraz (np. pol. afera
z franc. affaire), rzadziej prefiks lub sufiks (por. pl. arcydzieło z prefiksem
arcy- pochodzącym z grec. άρχι-, pocałunek z sufiksem -unek przejętym
z niem., por. niem. -ung) [...]. (POLAŃSKI, 1999: 668)
An element adopted from a foreign language. Most frequently it is a word

(e.g. Polish afera from French affaire), less commonly — a prefix or suffix
(cf. e.g. Polish arcydzieło with the prefix arcy- taken over from Greek άρχι-,
pocałunek with the suffix -unek taken over from German, cf. German -ung).
The process here is perceived in a broader way; nevertheless, it seems still

restricted, namely to words, prefixes and suffixes. Other linguists define
the term in a still broader way; PISAREK’S definition (taken from Encyklopedia
języka polskiego), for example, reads as follows:
Wszelkie elementy (głoski, fonemy, cząstki słowotwórcze, wyrazy, wyrażenia,

zwroty, znaczenia, konstrukcje składniowe) przejęte z innego języka. Zazwy-
czaj charakter z. [=zapożyczeń] bezpośrednich mają tylko z. [=zapożyczenia]
leksykalne, które z kolei umożliwiają lub ułatwiają z. [=zapożyczenia] wtórne
w postaci głosek, fonemów, cząstek słowotwórczych itp. [...] (URBAŃCZYK and
KUCAŁA, 1999: 440)
All the elements (speech sounds, phonemes, word-formation elements, words,

phrases, meanings, syntactic structures) taken over from a different language.
Usually lexical borrowings alone have the character of direct loans, and they
make the way for indirect loans, i.e. speech sounds, phonemes,
word-formation elements, etc.
CRYSTAL, on the other hand, seems to make a distinction between

‘borrowing’ and ‘loan’. He defines ‘borrowing’ as
[a] term used in comparative and historical linguistics to refer to linguistic

forms being taken over by one language or dialect from another; such
borrowings are usually known as ‘loan words’ (e.g. restaurant, bonhomie,
chagrin, which have come into English from French), and several types have
been recognized (cf. loan). Less commonly, sounds and grammatical
structures may be borrowed, e.g. the pronunciation of the above loan words
with a French or quasi-French accent, or the influence of English grammar
often found in European languages, e.g. using an English plural -s for a noun,
as in drinks, ski-lifts, goals, girls. (CRYSTAL, 1997: 46)
Furthermore, he states than ‘loan’ is
[a] linguistic unit (usually a lexical item) which has come to be used in
a language or dialect other than the one where it originated. Several types of
loan process have been recognized, such as loan words, [...] loan blends [...]
loan shifts [...] and loan translations.1 (CRYSTAL, 1997: 227)
As one can see, according to CRYSTAL, ‘borrowing’ can refer to any

linguistic form (e.g. a word, speech sound, a grammatical structure), whereas
‘loan’ is reserved mainly for lexical borrowings.
Nevertheless, one of the most succinct definitions was given by HAUGEN:
The heart of our definition of borrowing is then the attempted reproduction in

one language of patterns previously found in another. (HAUGEN, 1950: 163)
The term ‘borrowing’ can therefore refer not only to the sphere of lexicon,
with which it is most easily associated, but to the domains of semantics,
syntax, morphology and phonology as well. WEINREICH asserts, however, that if
foreign elements enter ‘the more highly structured domains of language’, such
as the syntax, morphology or even some areas of vocabulary (e.g. kinship,
colours), it is more appropriate to use the term ‘interference’ which implies not
‘mere additions to an inventory’ but ‘rearrangement of patterns’ (WEINREICH,
1974: 1).
To make the discussion of theoretical background of the process of
borrowing more complete, it is necessary to mention WEINREICH’S distinction
between ‘interference in speech’ and ‘interference in language’ (WEINREICH,
1974: 11). A very similar distinction is drawn by GROSJEAN (1982: 333—335;
cf. also LATKOWSKA, 2002: 87), who speaks of ‘speech borrowing’ and
‘language borrowing’, the former being also referred to as ‘language mixing’
(HATCH and BROWN, 1995; cf. also LATKOWSKA, 2002: 87). In the process of
speech borrowing the words are borrowed spontaneously by bilingual
individuals in order to ‘create certain effects and/or meet a momentary
linguistic need’ (LATKOWSKA, 2002: 87) whereas in language borrowing
‘the borrowed words become part of language and are used by its speakers as if
they were native lexical items’ (GROSJEAN, 1982; cited in LATKOWSKA, 2002:
87). In other words, the speech borrowing is a result of a speaker’s knowledge
of two languages, whereas language borrowing is habitualized and no longer
depends on bilingualism (WEINREICH, 1974: 11).
Interestingly enough, the term ‘borrowing’ itself was often perceived as
inadequate. However, it seems that it is hardly possible to invent a better one,
as linguists themselves admit:
1 The types of lexical loans enumerated by CRYSTAL will be discussed in greater detail in
section 2.3.2.
2.3 Types of loans ½ 29
At first the term ‘borrowing’ might seem to be almost as inept for the process
we wish to analyze as ‘mixture’. The metaphor implied is clearly absurd,
since the borrowing takes place without the lender’s consent or even
awareness, and the borrower is under no obligation to repay the loan. One
might as well call it stealing, were it not that the owner is deprived of nothing
and feels no urge to recover his goods. The process might be called
an adoption, for the speaker does adopt elements from a second language into
his own. But what would one call a word that had been adopted —
an adoptee? Anthropologists speak of ‘diffusion’ in connection with a similar
process in the spread of non-linguistic cultural items. We might well speak of
linguistic diffusion, though this would suggest the spread of the language
itself rather than of elements from it. The real advantage of the term
‘borrowing’ is the fact that it is not applied to language by laymen. It has
therefore remained comparatively unambiguous in linguistic discussion, and
no apter term has yet been invented. (HAUGEN, 1950: 163)
The process itself is called “borrowing”, but this term requires some caution.
Thus, that which is “borrowed” does not have to be paid back; the donor
makes no sacrifice and does not have to be asked for permission. Indeed,
nothing changes hands: the donor goes on speaking as before, and only
the borrower’s speech is altered. (HOCKETT, 1958: 402)
I use the terms loan-words and borrowed words because they are convenient
and firmly established, not because they are exact. There are two essential
respects in which linguistic borrowing differs from the borrowing of, say,
a knife or money: the lender does not deprive himself of the use of the word
any more than if it had not been borrowed by the other party, and
the borrower is under no obligation to return the word at any future time.
(JESPERSEN, 1964: 208)
In the present study, the terms ‘borrowing’ and ‘loan’ (which will be used
interchangeably) will primarily refer to word forms and/or word meanings
taken over from another language.
2.3 Types of loans
2.3.1 Introductory comments
Linguistic units which are used in a language other than the one where they
originated can be generally divided into two groups (WEINREICH, 1974):
(a) those affecting ‘more loosely patterned domains of a language,’

(b) those affecting ‘more highly structured domains of a language.’
The (a) group consists primarily of lexical borrowings, or loan words,
whereas the (b) group includes grammatical (syntactic and morphological)
loans as well as phonic ones.2
The two domains of a language are not equally liable to foreign language
interference. In general, it seems that the number of linguistic elements
affecting the more loosely structured areas is relatively larger than the one
affecting more highly structured domains.3 Numerous linguists tried to
established lists (called borrowability scale or borrowing hierarchy;
HASPELMATH, 2003) concerning this problem. According to WHITNEY (1881;
cited in WEINREICH, 1974: 67), for example, the list reads as follows (starting
with spheres most prone to foreign language interference):
• words (nouns first)
• suffixes
• inflections
• sounds.
PRITZWALD (1938; cited in WEINREICH, 1974: 67) proposed his own list:
• vocabulary
• sound system
• word-formation and compounding
• syntax
• proper names.
Another list is that of DAUZAT (1927; cited in WEINREICH, 1974: 67):
• vocabulary
• sounds
• syntax
• morphology (‘the fortress of a language’).
Yet another list was proposed by MCMAHON (1994: 209):
• lexicon
• phonology
• morphology
• syntax.
2 WEINREICH (1974: 1) asserts, however, that some areas of the vocabulary (e.g. the semantic
field of colour) can also be included here (i.e. in (b) group).
3 In other words, lexical borrowing is the most common outcome of language contact. Such
a view has been expressed by numerous linguists, cf. e.g. ‘[...] the most frequent and salient type
of contact innovation is the borrowing of lexical items, which usually involves no reanalysis or
restructuring of the grammar’ (POSNER, 1995: 217), ‘[...] there is no doubt that lexical borrowing
is less restricted to the bilingual portion of a language community than phonic or grammatical
interference’ (WEINREICH, 1974: 56).
According to ROT (1986: 208), the list reads as follows (with respect to
Hungarian):
• lexis (lexico-semantics)
• syntax
• word-formation
• phonetics/phonology
• morphology.
HASPELMATH (2003) points out that such scales can be interpreted in four
ways: temporal, implicational, quantitative and probabilistic. He presents those
hierarchies in the form of a horizontal line, so MCMAHON’S list would look as
follows:
lexicon > phonology > morphology > syntax
The interpretations offered by HASPELMATH are the following:
• temporal: ‘a language borrows elements on the left before it borrows
elements further to the right’
• implicational: ‘a language that contains borrowed elements on the right also
contains borrowed elements further to the left’
• quantitative: ‘a language borrows more elements belonging to the types on
the left that elements belonging to the types further to the right’
• probabilistic: ‘elements belonging to the types on the left are more likely to
be borrowed than elements further to the right’ (HASPELMATH, 2003).
As one can see, despite certain differences (regarding mainly the relation
between syntax and morphology), it is possible to establish a general pattern:
vocabulary is most often transferred, whereas syntax and morphology are more
resistant in this matter. In fact, it is widely accepted that lexical items are much
more likely to be borrowed than, say, bound morphemes or other grammatical
items. As for the domain of lexis, content words are more likely to be borrowed
than function words (cf. e.g. VAN HOUT and MUYSKEN, 1994; FIELD, 2002;
MORAVCSIK, 1978; all cited in HASPELMATH, 2003; POPLACK and MEECHAN, 1998;
cited in SANKOFF, 2001: 12). Moreover, it should be stressed that words
belonging to certain spheres of the vocabulary are borrowed more easily than
others, as HOCK and JOSEPH note:
From a purely linguistic perspective, the most important fact is that different
spheres of the vocabulary are borrowed more easily, others significantly less
easily. For instance, the most successful resistance to borrowing is offered by
basic vocabulary, words referring to the most essential human activities,
needs, etc., such as eat, sleep; moon, rain; do, have, be, [...]. (HOCK and
JOSEPH, 1996; cited in HASPELMATH, 2003)
2.3.2 Lexical and semantic loans
According to POPLACK et al., the process of lexical borrowing can be defined in

the following way:
Lexical borrowing involves the incorporation of individual L2 words (or

compounds functioning as single words) into discourse of L1, the host or
recipient language, usually phonologically and morphologically adapted to
conform with the patterns of that language, and occupying a sentence slot
dictated by its syntax. (POPLACK et al., 1988: 52)
Lexical borrowings, which are more frequently noticed (in comparison to

other types of borrowings, cf. the further part of the chapter) by the native
speakers of a given language, do not form a homogenous group; several
subclasses can be distinguished. Moreover, various linguists do not term and
define these subclasses in the same way (cf. e.g. CRYSTAL, 1997: 227; HAUGEN,
1950; HOCKETT, 1958: 408—416; MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 17—18;
MARKOWSKI, 2002: 1773; WEINREICH, 1974; WEINSBERG, 1983: 77—79).
The following division will be used throughout the present book (HAUGEN,
1950; WEINREICH, 1974)4:
• loan words (loanwords), where both form and meaning are borrowed (or
imported, as HAUGEN, 1950: 165, calls it), with some degree of substitution
of native phonemes, e.g. Polish word komputer from English computer.
According to HAUGEN (1950: 165), however, this term is vague, since it may
include practically any of the others listed below.
• loan blends (also called hybrids), where only part of the form is of foreign
origin, while the rest is native, e.g. ciucholand.
• loan translations (also called calques5), where the morphemes of
the borrowed words or phrases are translated one by one. As HAUGEN (1950:
166) asserts, they may be perceived as being similar to hybrids; however,
instead of substituting one half of the word, both are substituted, e.g.
telewizja kablowa from English cable television, nastolatek from English
teenager. According to WEINREICH, this class can be further subdivided into
loan translations proper, where the model is exactly reproduced, e.g.
Louisana French marchandises sèches ‘dry goods’, i.e. textile fabrics for sale
(READ, 1931; cited in WEINREICH, 1974: 51), loan renditions, where
4 This is a revised and updated version of the classification used previously in ZABAWA
(2004b).
5 Additionally, other researchers, for example SILVA-CORVALÁN (1995: 253—254), use
the term ‘single-word calques’ for the transfer of meaning into an already existing lexical item,
i.e. for semantic loans.
the model only gives a general hint for the reproduction, e.g. Polish drapacz
chmur after English sky-scraper (WEINREICH, 1974: 50), and loan creations,
i.e. new coinages ‘stimulated not by cultural innovations, but by the need to
match designations available in a language in contact’, e.g. Yiddish mitkind
‘sibling’ (literally ‘fellow child’) created on the stimulus of English sibling
and/or German Geschwister (WEINREICH, 1974: 51). Moreover, HAUGEN
(1950: 172) differentiates here a class of syntactic substitutions, that is loan
translations of complete phrases, e.g. Polish wydawać się być on the model
of English seem to be.
• semantic loans (termed loan shifts by CRYSTAL6), where the meaning is
borrowed, but the form is either native or fully assimilated (i.e. borrowed
much earlier), e.g. the word promocja used in the meaning of ‘advertising or
some other activity intended to increase the sales of a product or service.’7
There is, however, a visible disagreement among linguists: HAUGEN (1950:
166), for example, classifies both semantic loans and loan translations as
subtypes of loan shifts.8 Moreover, he seems to question the appropriateness
of the term ‘semantic loan’, saying that ‘all the loans described above [i.e.
loan words, hybrids, loan translations and semantic loans] are semantic’
(HAUGEN, 1950: 166). The term will, nevertheless, be used in the present
book.
It is possible to subdivide the classes enumerated above even further:
HAUGEN, for example, differentiates two subclasses within the group of loan
shifts: loan homonyms, where the new meaning (of a semantic borrowing) has
nothing in common with the old one, and loan synonyms, where only a new
shade of meaning is added to a native form. Loan synonyms can be further
subdivided into semantic displacements, where native terms are applied ‘to
new cultural phenomena that are roughly similar to something in the old
culture,’ and semantic confusions, where ‘native distinctions are removed
through the influence of partial interlingual synonymity.’ At the same time
HAUGEN admits, however, that there is no satisfactory method that might be
used to classify degrees of semantic similarity. As a result, it is often not
possible to make the distinctions outlined above (HAUGEN, 1950: 172).
It is also possible to classify lexical loans on different bases, with various
criteria being employed:
6 Still other linguists sometimes use a different name for the same phenomenon, for
example LEHNERT (1986: 134) uses the term ‘loan-meaning’.
7 The English definitions of words are based on Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of
Current English (ed. by WEHMEIER, 2000), Oxford Dictionary of English (ed. by SOANES and
STEVENSON, 2003) and Collins Cobuild English Dictionary for Advanced Learners (ed. by
SINCLAIR, 2001).
8 The present author uses a similar term, namely semantic shift, but in a different sense;
cf. section 6.2.

1. The stage of assimilation into a recipient language (HAUGEN, 1950: 183;

MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 16—17; MARKOWSKI, 2002: 1774):
a) unassimilated loans (also referred to as quotes or Fremdwörter), which
are used with a foreign spelling and foreign (or foreign-like)
pronunciation, with no morphological adaptation, e.g. sorry, ice tea used
in Polish on the model of English.
b) partly assimilated loans, which are used with a partly (or sometimes
completely) adapted spelling and pronunciation. They may or may not
inflect, e.g. Polish word tabu from English taboo and French tabou.
c) (fully) assimilated loans (also referred to as Lehnwörter), which are
inflected and their spelling and pronunciation are adapted to the system
of a recipient language, e.g. Polish words komputer, dżem borrowed from
English computer, jam. In fact, they are frequently not even perceived by
laymen as words of foreign origin.9
2. The number of stages (FISIAK, 1962: 287—294):10
a) resulting from simple contact, that is direct transfer from donor into
a recipient language, e.g. dżem, mecz from English jam, match.
b) resulting from complex contact, that is transfer from donor into
a recipient language via intermediate languages11. As for English lexical
loans in Polish, three types can be distinguished here:
• words of English origin transferred to Polish via another language
(mainly German, French or Russian), e.g. Polish farma from English
farm via German die Farm, Polish rober from English rubber via
French robber, Polish chuligan from English hooligan via Russian
chuligan, Polish budyń from English pudding via Dutch bodeng
(FISIAK, 1962: 289—290).
• words of foreign origin (both European, excluding English, and
non-European) transferred to Polish via English, e.g. Polish esej from
French essai via English essay, Polish skecz from Italian schizzo via
English sketch, Polish afryt from Arabic ifrit via English afrit, Polish
bambus from Malaysian bamboo via English bamboo (FISIAK, 1962:
292—293).
9 Additionally, ROPA (1974: 524) distinguishes here a fourth group, which consists of words
etymologically foreign, but perceived as native, e.g. but, szukać, róża. However, such loans are not
noted in the dictionaries of foreign terms (even in the large ones, cf. e.g. Wielki słownik wyrazów
obcych, ed. by BAŃKO, 2003) and are not treated as loanwords in the present book.
10 A similar distinction has been made by FILIPOVIĆ (1986: 334), who differentiates between
direct loans (especially if there is direct contact between speakers of the two languages) and
intermediary borrowings (in FILIPOVIĆ’S understanding of the term, the mass media may also
function as an intermediary).
11 According to WALCZAK (1997: 274—275, 279), however, the emergence of such loans is
not a result of one complex process but rather two or more independent and completely unrelated
processes (called ‘acts of borrowing’).
• neologisms composed of Greek and/or Latin morphemes transferred to

Polish (as well as to many other languages) via English, e.g. Polish
dyktafon from Latin dictare and Greek phone via English Dictaphone,
Polish strukturalizm from Latin structura + -al- + -ism via English
structuralism, Polish noktowizja from Latin noct- + vision via English
noctovision (FISIAK, 1962: 293—294).
3. The way of entering a recipient language (FISIAK, 1962: 287;
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 19; MIODEK, 2000: 5):
a) oral loans (called direct12 (bezpośrednie) or phonetic loans by FISIAK,
called acoustic (akustyczne) by MIODEK, 2000: 5), which are transferred
from a spoken donor language. As a result, they are pronounced in
a similar way as in a donor language, e.g. Polish words dog or pub
borrowed from English (MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 19; MIODEK,
2000: 5).
b) graphic loans, which are transferred from a written donor language. As
a result, they are pronounced according to the rules of a recipient
language, e.g. Polish word nylon borrowed from English13
(MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 19). Such loans are not uncommon in
contemporary Polish, as Berezowski pointed out:
The monolingual majority [in the context here: the Poles who do not speak
English] [...] is encountering now more and more English lexical items in
their written form only. Whether it is a sidewalk marketeer, shop assistant,
customer or engineer they are all frequently forced to use English lexical
items referring to the things they sell, buy or work with, though only rarely
are they aware of how these items are pronounced like in that language.
And that means that the pronunciations of these loanwords are not based
on the original ones, as it was assumed in Fisiak’s study, but somehow
derived from their spellings, which are the only clues available. (BEREZOWSKI,
1994: 10)
c) pseudo-direct loans (pseudobezpośrednie), introduced by FISIAK.

According to him, pseudo-direct loans are introduced by people who
know the pronunciation of a foreign word, but the form of a loan in
a recipient language (after the regular phonological substitution) has been
changed under the influence of the spelling of a word in a donor
language, e.g. the word ekonomajzer (FISIAK, 1962: 287).
4. The reason why they have entered a recipient language (MAŃCZAK-
-WOHLFELD, 1995: 19):
12 As was noted in footnote 10, FILIPOVIĆ uses the term ‘direct loans’ in a slightly different
meaning.
13 The phenomenon itself is also called ‘spelling pronunciation’ (HAUGEN, 1950: 175).
a) necessary loans (which roughly correspond to ‘cultural borrowings’,

MYERS-SCOTTON, 2002; or ‘items of acculturation’, BROWN, 1999; both
cited in HASPELMATH, 2003), which are used to designate new concepts
and things that had no names in the recipient language, e.g. Polish
walkman borrowed from English. This group includes also
internationalisms, that is words common to many languages, usually of
Latin, Greek, French or English origin (cf. MAĆKIEWICZ, 2001:
555—562), e.g. Polish words laser, sport borrowed from English and
exotics (cf. MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 19), that is words connected with
the culture of the country of a donor language, e.g. Polish words szeryf,
pudding borrowed from English.
b) unnecessary loans (which roughly correspond to ‘core borrowings,’14
MYERS-SCOTTON, 2002; cited in HASPELMATH, 2003), which were
borrowed for some other reason, usually because of snobbery. The loans
of this type have exact or near-exact equivalents in the native vocabulary,
e.g. English borrowings in Polish shop, sorry existing together with
Polish words sklep, przepraszam.15 As MYERS-SCOTTON notes, they
‘usually begin life in a recipient language when bilinguals introduce
them as singly occurring codeswitching forms in the mixed constituents
of their codeswitching’ (MYERS-SCOTTON, 2002; cited in HASPELMATH,
2003). An interesting account of such loans was also given by Jespersen:
When a nation has once got into the habit of borrowing words, people will
very often use foreign words where it would have been perfectly possible to
express their ideas by means of native speech-material, the reason for going
out of one’s own language being in some cases the desire to be thought
fashionable or refined through interlarding one’s speech with foreign words,
in others simply laziness, as is very often the case when people are rendering
thoughts they have heard or read in a foreign tongue. (JESPERSEN, 1964: 210)
Additionally, a group of pseudo-loans (also known as false anglicisms or

Scheinentlehnungen, cf. CARSTENSEN, 1980, 1981; cited in LEHNERT, 1986: 146;
ZINDLER, 1959; cited in K. VIERECK, 1986: 161; FISIAK, 1986: 253; FILIPOVIĆ,
1972: 157; W. VIERECK, 1986: 116; called ‘Selfmade English’ by BUCK, 1974;
cited in LEHNERT, 1986: 146) should be distinguished. They are ‘expressions
formed with foreign-building material which do not exist at all in the language
from which they appear to be borrowed’ (ZINDLER, 1959; cited in and translated
14 Core borrowings are defined as ‘words that more or less duplicate already existing words’
(HASPELMATH, 2003).
15 According to HOPE (1963; cited in MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 19), however, this division
is invalid, as any reason for borrowing a particular word is sufficient. Consequently, no loans can
be described as unnecessary.
by K. VIERECK, 1986: 161). As for examples, one could mention

the construction happy end used in Polish on the model of English happy
ending.
2.3.3 Other types of loans
As was noted before, there exist other types of borrowings, apart from lexical
ones, namely phonic and grammatical. Grammatical loans, in turn, can be
further subdivided into syntactic and morphological borrowings. In general,
both grammatical and phonic loans are much less common than the borrowings
in the sphere of lexicon.
On the whole, theoretical aspects of phonic and grammatical borrowings
will not be discussed, since these issues are clearly outside the scope of
the present book. Detailed information on phonic and grammatical influence of
one language upon another can be found in WEINREICH (1974). Additional
comments and examples can be found in e.g. JESPERSEN (1964), MCMAHON
(1994), SAPIR (1921) and SILVA-CORVALÁN (1995).
2.3.4 Concluding comments
It must be stressed that the nature of lexical borrowings is very different from
that of grammatical loans. Lexical borrowings, which are sometimes introduced
into a language consciously, are usually noticed (or at least some of them) by
the native speakers of a recipient language. What is more, such loans are often
strongly criticized. For example, the studies by SOBOCIŃSKA (1994) and
SATKIEWICZ (1994a)16 show clearly that the majority of young educated Poles
notice the tendency towards the use of words of English origin in contemporary
Polish. SOBOCIŃSKA based her research on the group of 136 secondary school
students, whereas SATKIEWICZ’S research was conducted on the group of 50
university students. One of the questions considered the most typical features of
contemporary Polish. The answers were highly interesting, though perhaps not
unpredictable: in the first group, 75% of the respondents complained about
16 The studies were based on the questionnaire written by BUTTLER, MARKOWSKI and
PUZYNINA (the full text of the questionnaire can be found in e.g. DALEWSKA-GREŃ and HANDKE,
1994: 67—70).
the fact of excessive use of lexical loans in contemporary Polish, whereas

in the second group the same tendency was noticed by as much as 99% of
the respondents (cf. also ZABAWA, 2002).
Semantic borrowings are, on the other hand, much more difficult to notice.
The research done by OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000: 124—125) shows this
clearly. Her research was conducted on the group of 150 people, mostly
students and graduates from universities. The respondents were divided into
three even groups, according to their level of English. The percentage of
the respondents who noticed given semantic loans in the text varied from
2—56% in the advanced group, 2—34% in the intermediate group and 2—36%
in the group of beginners and people who did not know any English. It can be
added at this point that the number of the respondents who noticed
grammatical loans was also not large.
It can thus be stated that semantic loans possess some characteristics of
both lexical and grammatical borrowings. They affect the domain of vocabulary
(like lexical loans), but are generally hardly ever noticed by an average Polish
native speaker (like grammatical borrowings).
2.4 Conditions and motives for borrowing
It is often pointed out that all types of borrowings (lexical, semantic, phonic or
grammatical) result from the language contact, that is ‘the situation in which
two or more languages coexist within one state and [...] the speakers use these
different languages alternately in specific situations’ (BUSSMAN, 1998: 260).17 In
other words, the majority of borrowings are first used by bilingual people only
and it is after some time that they begin to be used by monolinguals. This is
particularly evident in the case of lexical loans: a foreign word is usually first
used as a quote (often appearing in printed texts in italics), thus being similar
in character to single word code switching or code mixing (cf. section 5.2),
and later it is fully or partly assimilated on four levels: orthographic,
phonological, morphological and semantic18 (cf. e.g. MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD,
1995). Many loans, however, never go beyond the stage of a quote.
17 Other linguists do not mention the coexistence of different languages within one state as
a necessary condition for language contact. ZYBERT, for example, states simply that ‘language
contact arises with an alternate use of two languages’ (ZYBERT, 1983: 99).
18 As BEREZOWSKI (1994) noted, however, some loans may also be introduced by
monolinguals or by people whose knowledge of English is very limited (cf. the quotation in
section 2.3.2).
2.4 Conditions and motives for borrowing ½ 39
It is worth mentioning at this point that the term bilingualism is perceived

differently by various linguists, as Lehiste notes:
[...] the theoretical limits to bilingualism might be drawn to encompass

the range between the person who uses one nonintegrated loanword and
the so-called perfect bilingual who can pass for a monolingual in more than
one language. (LEHISTE, 1988; cited in MCMAHON, 1994: 200)
As was noted above, the term ‘bilingualism’ is understood differently by

the specialists dealing with the problem of language contact. MALMKRJÆR, for
example, defines a ‘bilingual person’ as ‘one whose linguistic ability in two
[...] languages is similar to that of a native speaker’ (MALMKRJÆR, 1991: 57).
Weinreich, on the other hand, defines ‘bilingualism’ more generally as
‘the practice of alternately using two languages’ (WEINREICH, 1974: 1). Another
general, though different, interpretation is offered by SPOLSKY: ‘the simplest
definition of a bilingual is a person who has some functional ability in
a second language’ (SPOLSKY, 1998: 45). Others, like DILLER, try to establish
a more precise definition:
We might ask then, when is a person minimally bilingual? Judging from

the statistical properties of the lexicon, I would say that in addition to
adequate pronunciation and control of grammar, a minimally bilingual person
must know at least 10,000 words. [...] This should be a minimal goal,
however. (DILLER, 1972: 148)
Moreover, some linguists state that it is possible to talk about the degrees
of bilingualism (cf. e.g. CRYSTAL, 1997: 42; EDWARDS, 1994; cited in DORIAN,
1996: 399). EDWARDS, for example, grants a degree of bilingualism to everyone,
because everyone knows some foreign words or phrases (at least passively), for
example a greeting, or a phrase like c’est la vie or O.K. A similar view has
been expressed by RUSIECKI, who has proposed using the term ‘latent
bilingualism’ with regard to an educated Polish speaker who has never learnt
English, but nevertheless knows some English words and/or constructions, for
example fifty-fifty, O.K., made in Poland, I love you (RUSIECKI, 1980: 97).
Furthermore, EDWARDS has proposed a term ‘balanced bilingualism’ and
‘balanced bilingual’ for a person equally fluent in two languages (cf. also
SPOLSKY, 1998: 45; a balanced bilingual is sometimes also referred to as
‘equilingual’, MALMKRJÆR, 1991: 58). Nowadays, however, many linguists
assume that such perfect bilingualism virtually does not exist (cf. e.g.
BAETENS-BEARDSMORE, 1986; cited in MALMKRJÆR, 1991: 58; cf. also MINDAK,
1983: 206).
As MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1995: 16) notes, some linguists state that
bilingualism is a social phenomenon and hence cannot be defined with respect
to a single person. For example, Encyklopedia językoznawstwa ogólnego (ed.

by POLAŃSKI, 1999) defines it as
Posługiwanie się na co dzień przez daną grupę społeczną dwoma różnymi

językami. Dwujęzyczność wytwarza się na terenach o mieszanym składzie
etnicznym. Konieczność współżycia na co dzień zmusza przedstawicieli jednej
narodowości do używania oprócz swojego języka ojczystego również języka
drugiej grupy etnicznej. (POLAŃSKI, 1999: 130)
Using two different languages on a daily basis by a given social group.

Bilingualism exists in the areas inhabited by mixed ethnic groups.
The necessity of coexistence forces people of one nationality to use — apart
from their native language — the language of the other ethnic group.
In the present book, the term ‘bilingualism’ will refer to the ability to speak
two languages; the knowledge of the second language may vary from fluent to
very basic. The contact between languages is therefore the fundamental
condition for the process of borrowing, common to all kinds of loans. It must
be noted, however, that nowadays the language contact does not necessarily
imply coexistence of two (or more) languages within one state. The contact
between languages may and does happen via the Internet, the press, books,
television, radio, etc. It seems that the most important factor in such situations
is the prestige of the donor language.
The more specific motives for lexical borrowing must also be considered. It
should be stressed that they are not only linguistic, but social, cultural and
psychological as well. WEINREICH (1974: 56—59) enumerates them as follows:
• the need to designate new things, persons, places and concepts
• low frequency of words (relatively infrequent words are more subject to
replacement)
• word homonymy, which may lead to misunderstandings
• the tendency of affective words to lose their expressive force
• insufficient differentiation of semantic
19
fields
• the prestige of a donor language.
HOCKETT, on the other hand, mentions two main motives for borrowing:
the need-filling motive (which seems to embrace all the reasons given by
WEINREICH and outlined above, with the exclusion of the last one) and
the prestige motive (HOCKETT, 1958: 404—406). Others, like PRATT, introduce
a dichotomy between linguistic and extralinguistic causes of borrowing.
The former, which correspond roughly to the need-filling motive (cf. HOCKETT,
1958: 404—406), can be further subdivided into extrinsic and intrinsic.
19 It seems that the first and last phenomena are especially visible in present-day Poland.
2.4 Conditions and motives for borrowing ½ 41
The latter involve the prestige of the donor language and the linguistic
snobbery (PRATT, 1986: 361—364).
As one can see, some of the motives (for example the prestige of a donor
language, insufficient differentiation of semantic fields) indicate that
the process of lexical borrowing can be conscious, at least to a certain extent.
As for hindrance factors in the process of both lexical and structural
borrowing, WEINREICH mentions the social value of the recipient language,
loyalty to it, puristic attitudes and the stability of systems (WEINREICH, 1974:
64—65). Other linguists, for example GROSJEAN, differentiate between two
groups of resistance factors: structural and sociocultural, the former being
connected with the stability of language and firm implementation of
phonology, morphology and syntax, whereas the latter — with puristic attitudes
and the prestige of a recipient language (GROSJEAN, 1982: 337—338). He
mentions French as an example of a prestigious language, which, being
the object of much loyalty, is more resistant to foreign borrowings, coming
mostly from English. As for individual loans (e.g. separate words), it has been
suggested that high-frequency items are less likely to be changed or replaced;
as a consequence, frequency (of a word in a recipient language) may also
function as one of the factors that inhibit the process of borrowing (cf. e.g.
VAN HOUT AND MUYSKEN, 1994; cited in HASPELMATH, 2003).
The present chapter concentrated on the theoretical aspects of language
contact and the process of lexical and semantic borrowing. The next chapter
will discuss the same issues, but in the specific English-Polish context.
42 ½ Chapter 3: The linguistic outcome of English-Polish contact
Chapter 3
THE LINGUISTIC OUTCOME OF ENGLISH-POLISH CONTACT
3.1 Introduction
The previous chapter concentrated on the theoretical aspects of the process of

borrowing in general. The aim of this chapter is to give a more specific picture
of English-Polish contact that resulted in the existence of various types of
loans. The examples of such loans are then given and briefly discussed.
The final section of the chapter is devoted to the research done in the field of
English influence upon Polish.
It is a well-known fact that the influence of one language upon another is
a result of a much wider phenomenon, namely culture contact, as SAPIR pointed
out:
Languages, like cultures, are rarely sufficient unto themselves. [...]

The simplest kind of influence that one language may exert on another is
the “borrowing” of words. When there is cultural borrowing there is always
the likelihood that the associated words may be borrowed too. [...] The careful
study of such loan-words constitutes an interesting commentary on the history
of culture. (SAPIR, 1921: 192—193)
The above view was echoed by other linguists:
Every speech-community learns from its neighbors. Objects, both natural and
manufactured, pass from one community to the other, and so do patterns of
action, such as technical procedures, warlike practices, religious rites, or
fashions of individual conduct. [...] Along with objects or practices,
the speech-forms by which these are named often pass from people to people.
(BLOOMFIELD, 1933: 445)
3.1 Introduction ½ 43
No language is entirely free from borrowed words, because no nation has

ever been completely isolated. Contact with other nations inevitably leads to
borrowings, though their number may vary very considerably. [...] Loan-words
always show a superiority of the nation from whose language they are
borrowed, though this superiority may be of many different kinds. (JESPERSEN,
1964: 208—209)
As would be expected, the linguistic import and export frequently goes

hand in hand with the import and export of things and ideas. (W. VIERECK,
1986: 118)
Historia różnych społeczeństw dostarcza mnóstwa przykładów

świadczących o tym, że wyjąwszy jednostkowe wypadki całkowitej izolacji
jakiejś grupy ludzi, przede wszystkim przez warunki geograficzne,
społeczeństwa współżyją ze sobą, wzajemnie się kontaktują, stykają się ze
sobą przy różnych okazjach. Przy takim współżyciu ludzi należących do
różnych grup językowych następują kontakty językowe. (RECZEK, 1968: 5;
cited in RYBICKA, 1976: 5)
The history of various societies gives a great deal of examples showing

that — with the exception of individual cases of complete isolation of a group
of people, mostly due to geographical reasons — societies coexist with and
contact each other. The language contact occurs during such coexistence.
To sum up, it can be stated that no language is completely free from

foreign influence.
The rich history of Poland and its cultural and political relations with
the European countries enriched the Polish language with a large number of
lexical loans coming from various languages, including Czech, German, Latin,
Italian, French, Hungarian, Greek, Russian and Ukrainian, Turkish and Tartar
(MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 20—22). Nowadays the most important source of
borrowings in Polish is undoubtedly English. As OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC
(2000) rightly states, one of the most important dates connected with
the English influence upon Polish is the turning point of 1989, when Poland
regained independence.
What is more, in the 1990s English started to be considered not only useful
but also a fashionable language. The development of modern technology,
particularly cable and satellite television and the Internet is of great
significance here. The dominant position of the United States in the present-day
world, as well as the opening of British labour market for the Poles (following
the entrance of Poland to the European Union in 2004), have played (and still
play) a very important role as well. As a consequence, English words
have managed to enter almost all semantic fields of the Polish language
(cf. MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1994, 1995, 2006, 2010).
Furthermore, it is apparent that nowadays English affects not only Polish

lexis (cf. lexical and semantic borrowings), but grammar (syntax and
morphology) and phonology as well. Nevertheless, as the present study focuses
on lexical and semantic loans, borrowings belonging to other spheres, i.e.
syntax, morphology and phonology, will not be discussed here.
3.2 Lexical loans
According to MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1987a, 2006), the earliest English loans in

the Polish language date back to the 18th century. This can be proved by
the early dictionaries, which list no words of English origin. As
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1987a) asserts, for example, the dictionary by MĄCZYŃSKI
(appeared in 1564) lists no English loanwords, but only geographical names
connected with Britain: Anglia, Brytania, Londyn and Szkocja; in addition,
the dictionary by KNAPSKI (appeared in 1632, cited in MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD,
1995: 24) lists only two words: brytan and Anglia.
According to KASPRZYCKA (1971, cited in MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 24),
the first real anglicisms appeared in SIARCZYŃSKI’S work written in the 18th
century (Geografia, czyli opisanie naturalne, historyczne i praktyczne krajów
i narodów we czterech częściach się zawierające). They were: cutter, ket(c)h,
sloop, yacht and an ephemeral word bord. The dictionary by LINDE (published
in 1807—1814), as MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1995: 26—27) asserts, lists 14 words
of English origin (flanela, foxal, frak, galon, golf, klub, kwakier, mada,
muchair, pikier, piknik, poncz/puncz, porter1 and rum).
As MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1995: 30) states, at the beginning of the 19th
century there were altogether 21 words of English origin (excluding
geographical names): 5 given by SIARCZYŃSKI, 14 by LINDE and 2 by PEPŁOWSKI
(1957).2 During the 19th century the number of English loanwords in Polish, as
well as in other European languages, was gradually increasing, which was,
according to HAUGEN (1988; cited in MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1994: 8; 1995: 39),
due to the emergence of the British Empire and the quick development of
the United States.
A growing number of the words of English origin is well reflected in
the dictionaries of foreign words. The dictionary by AMSZEJEWICZ (published in
1859), as MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1995: 30—32) asserts, contains about 100
1 Porter is not listed as a separate entry, but is used in the definition of the word galon
(MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 27).

2 The words given by PEPŁOWSKI were budget and bill.
3.2 Lexical loans ½ 45
lexemes of English origin, 30% of which turned out to be ephemeral (e.g. boll,
noble). The dictionary by ZDANOWICZ et al. (published in 1861, also known as
Słownik wileński), written only two years later, contains, according to
WALCZAK (1983: 124), already more than 180 words of English origin.
Moreover, MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1995: 34) describes about 30 ephemeral
words found in the dictionary in question.
The next dictionary (by KARŁOWICZ, KRYŃSKI and NIEDŹWIEDZKI), written
already in the 20th century (1900—1923), also known as Słownik warszawski,
contains about 250 words of English origin, out of which about 200 are still in
current use (MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 35—38).
The number of English borrowings in Polish grew rapidly in the 20th
century. At the beginning of the 20th century, as was mentioned above, there
were around 250 English words in Polish. In the 1930s KONECZNA (cited in
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 40) noted that 531 words of English origin were
used at that time. In 1961, the number of them grew to over 700 (according to
FISIAK’S doctoral dissertation, cited in MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 40) and in
1986 — to over 1,000 (FISIAK, 1986: 262).
The number of anglicisms in Polish is still growing, which can be proved
by a relatively new publication dealing with English loanwords
(MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1994). In her work she enumerates about 1,600 lexemes
of English origin. In 1995 the estimated number of anglicisms grew to over
1,700 (MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 67). At the beginning of the 21st century
the number of English loanwords grew to more than 3,000
(MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 2010). It would seem, however, that many of such loans
are highly specialized and are not used in general Polish, cf. such words as
overclocker (an IT term), kliwia (a term related to botany) or script girl (a term
connected with the film industry); they are not likely to be understood by an
average native speaker of Polish. Besides, it is only natural that some of
the English loans will turn out to be of the ephemeral character and thus will
not survive in Polish.
Today the words of English origin can be found in almost all semantic
fields.3 It is thus possible to group English loanwords according to the field
they belong to. Such classifications are plentiful in the literature on the subject.
One of the most thorough was given by MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1995: 68—73),
who divided the words of English origin into 45 semantic fields. Nevertheless,
as she admits herself, even such a classification is not complete or exhaustive,
as new loans appear constantly in Polish and some of them do not seem to fit
into any of the categories introduced before.
3 A semantic field is understood as ‘a set of lexical entries with shared core meanings. That
is, it [=a semantic field] groups together lexical items whose meanings are all pertinent to
a specific conceptual domain’ (CLARK, 1995: 9). For stylistic reasons, the term will be used
interchangeably with ‘semantic area’.
As one can see, it is beyond doubt that the number of words of English
origin in Polish is constantly growing. The tendency is visible mainly in
the written variety of Polish, particularly in the language of press articles and
press advertisements (cf. ZABAWA, 2004b). As might be expected, nowadays
the phenomenon in question evokes strong emotions, not only among linguists.
Lexical loans are often perceived as a treat to the Polish language; some other
people, however, do not see here any danger (cf. the discussion in BUGAJSKI,
1995; BUTTLER, 1990; R.S., 1988a, 1988b, 2001; PREYZNER, 1990, SZMAŃDA,
1979; WALCZAK, 1992; cf. also GRYBOSIOWA, 2000, who quotes the opinions of
CZ. MIŁOSZ, B. GEREMEK and H.G. GADAMER), cf. also MIODEK:
[...] historia naszego języka jest historią nieustannie napływających do niego

zapożyczeń [...]. Historia naszego języka jest historią nieustannych procesów
adaptacyjnych, przystosowawczych. Więc tak jak poradziliśmy sobie ze
złożem leksykalnym łacińskim, greckim, niemieckim, tureckim, tatarskim,
włoskim, węgierskim, hiszpańskim czy francuskim, adaptując je pod
względem fonetycznym i morfologicznym, tak samo poradzimy sobie
z anglicyzmami. (MIODEK, 2000: 2—3)
[...] the history of our language [i.e. Polish] is the history of constant influx
of borrowings [...]. The history of our language is the history of constant
assimilation and adaptation processes. We [i.e. Poles] were able to cope with
Latin, Greek, German, Turkish, Tartar, Italian, Hungarian, Spanish or French
borrowings by adapting them phonetically and morphologically. In the same
way, we will be able to cope with the borrowings of English origin.
Interestingly enough, the Polish parliament has relatively recently passed

a law concerning the use of the Polish language (Ustawa o języku polskim
‘The Polish Language Act’). Among other things, it regulates the use of foreign
languages. For example, it is unlawful to use only a foreign language in
advertisements and commercials, manuals, written guarantees, offers, invoices,
bills and receipts, and in the names of products and services (with
the exception of proper names and scientific or technical terminology used
customarily).4
4 The full text of the act (in Polish), together with the amendments, is available online at
http://www.abc.com.pl/index.php (1. Ustawa z dnia 7 października 1999 r. o języku polskim,
Dz. U. z dnia 8 listopada 1999 r.; 2. Ustawa z dnia 31 marca 2000 r. o zmianie ustawy
o radiofonii i telewizji i ustawy o języku polskim, Dz. U. z dnia 18 kwietnia 2000 r.; 3. Ustawa
z dnia 18 lipca 2002 r. o świadczeniu usług drogą elektroniczną, Dz. U. z dnia 9 września
2002 r.; 4. Ustawa z dnia 11 kwietnia 2003 r. o zmianie ustawy o języku polskim, Dz. U. z dnia
30 kwietnia 2003 r.; 5. Ustawa z dnia 2 kwietnia 2004 r. o zmianie ustawy o języku polskim,
Dz. U. z dnia 30 kwietnia 2004 r.).
3.3 Semantic loans ½ 47
It is interesting to note that the reverse situation, i.e. the influence of Polish
on the English vocabulary, is also documented, but such a phenomenon is very
limited in scope. PODHAJECKA, for example, enumerates as few as 19 words of
Polish origin, noted in Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition (abbreviated to
OED, ed. by SIMPSON and WEINER, 1989). They are: bobac, britzka, gmina,
hetman, kielbasa, Krakowiak, kromesky, macrolide, Mariavite, mazurka,
oberek, obertas, Piast, Polack, polka, pospolite, Sejm, szlachta, zloty
(PODHAJECKA, 2002: 333—337). Moreover, she asserts that the Polish
borrowings, being dispensable, play a peripheral role in English. It must be
added, however, that she restricted her study to the words borrowed directly
from Polish. Consequently, there are a few further words which are included
and treated as borrowings from Polish in some other English dictionaries (but
not in OED, hence they are not included in the above list), e.g. in Webster’s
Third New International Dictionary of the English Language (WID, ed. by
GOVE, 1961). The list includes such words as rendzina, duda, kujawiak,
kolomyika, babka, endek, grosz, leukergy, mazur, zubrowka, borscht, horde,
pirogi (PODHAJECKA, 2002: 335).
The English lexical loans found in the corpus are listed and analysed in
Chapter 5.
3.3 Semantic loans
At the end of the 20th century appeared, apart from a number of English
loanwords, two new phenomena: English semantic and grammatical loans.
The phenomenon itself is not new; however, semantic loans existing in Polish
before the 1990s were in the great majority of Russian or German origin. Most
of them were introduced in the past centuries. Examples of these include
(RYBICKA, 1976: 98—105):
• of German origin: zamek — in the meaning of ‘budowla obronna’ (‘a castle’)
on the model of German das Schloss; miasto — in the meaning of ‘gród’
(‘a medieval city’) on the model of German die Stadt
• Russian origin: cienki — in the meaning of ‘subtelny, finezyjny’
of
(‘subtle’), e.g. cienki żart (‘a subtle joke’); zabezpieczyć — in the meaning
of ‘zapewnić, zagwarantować’ (‘to guarantee’)
• of French origin: awantura — in the meaning of ‘zdarzenie, przygoda’
(‘an adventure’).
Semantic loans of English origin are not very numerous in contemporary
Polish, especially in comparison with lexical loans. Their number is, however,
slowly yet consistently growing. The lists and discussion of English semantic
loans in Polish can be found in, among others, GRYBOSIOWA (1994),

MARKOWSKI (1992a, 1999, 2000, 2004), MARKOWSKI and PAWELEC (2001: XIII),
OTWINOWSKA (1997), OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000), WASZAKOWA (1995:
7—8), WITALISZ (2004, 2007), WYRWAS (2004b: 320), and in the articles by
the present author (ZABAWA, 2004c, 2007b, 2008, 2010a).
The semantic loans found in the present corpus are listed and analysed in
Chapter 6.
3.4 Other types of borrowings
It must be noted once again that although the influence of English upon Polish
is most noticeable and intense in the sphere of vocabulary, it is no longer
restricted to it. It seems that nowadays English affects all areas of Polish:
phonology, morphology, syntax, lexis, semantics and pragmatics. What is more,
English influences Polish in a number of other ways, cf. such phenomena as
e.g. (1) using diminutives of first names in formal or semi-formal publications
(e.g. in newspapers and magazines) and in television or radio programmes
(cf. MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1993: 281), (2) being on first-name terms with
acquaintances or even strangers or using the form ty (‘you’ — informal) instead
of traditional pan, pani (‘you’ — formal), seen frequently in e.g. television
quiz shows and commercials5 (cf. also GRYBOSIOWA, 1998), (3) making phrases
look more English by adding various symbols, such as ‘&’ (cf. CHŁOPICKI and
ŚWIĄTEK, 2000: 232—233), (4) the sporadic use of quotation marks on
the model of English (“ ”) instead of Polish („ ”), or (5) the sporadic use of
dots instead of commas in decimal fractions and in prices.6
Finally, it must also be added that the lexical influence has been relatively
well researched with respect to written Polish only (particularly the language of
the press), whereas little attention has so far been paid to informal, especially
oral, Polish (cf. the next section).
5 This (and the previous) phenomenon is more connected with culture rather than language
itself. As a result, it can perhaps be termed ‘a cultural borrowing’.

6 It seems that the last two phenomena could be termed ‘punctuation borrowings’ (cf. also
the articles by the present author: ZABAWA, 2004c, 2005a).

3.5 Research done in the field of English influence upon Polish ½ 49
3.5 Research done in the field of English influence upon Polish
3.5.1 Introduction
In general, since the book focuses on lexical and semantic borrowings,

the publications dealing with other types of loans will not be discussed in
detail (but cf. section 3.5.4).
3.5.2 Lexical loans
According to MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1987a: 25—26), it is generally, though

erroneously, assumed that the influence of English upon Polish vocabulary
dates back to the 20th century only. As a consequence, few publications deal
with English loans introduced earlier into Polish. To the present author’s
knowledge, only four publications can be listed here: FISIAK’S doctoral
dissertation (1961; quoted in MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD 1995, 2006) and the articles
by MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1987a), PEPŁOWSKI (1957) and WALCZAK (1983).
As OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000: 24) rightly notices, the earliest
systematic studies on English elements in the Polish language were carried out
by FISIAK (1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1968, 1970, 1975, 1985, 1986). FISIAK
discussed not only the process of borrowing itself but introduced WEINREICH’S
and HAUGEN’S terminology (e.g. simple and complex language contact) into
Polish studies as well. Moreover, he discussed the following spheres:
• the mechanisms of 7lexical borrowing
• using double plural in Polish (e.g. English Eskimo — singular; Eskimos —
plural ® Polish Eskimos — singular; Eskimosi — plural)
• the problem of assigning gender to nouns borrowed from English
• the graphemic and phonemic aspects of English borrowings, including
phonological adaptation
• the semantics of English loanwords in Polish.
Further systematic studies on English influence upon Polish have been done
by MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1987a, 1987b, 1988a, 1988b, 1988c, 1991a, 1991b,
7 The Polish term for this phenomenon is depluralizacja. KREJA (1963; cited in
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 59) proposed a different name for the same process, namely
syngularyzacja (lit. ‘singularization’).
1992, 1993, 1994a, 1994b, 1995, 1997a, 1997b, 2000, 2004, 2006, 2010). She
gathered about 1,600 lexemes of English origin and presented them in the form
of a dictionary (1994a) with detailed information about individual words, such
as the spelling (including possible variants), pronunciation (if different from
the spelling), meaning(s) and examples presented in context. Her research was
based on various dictionaries, both of foreign terms and general Polish as well
as on the language of the press. Additionally, she edited the newest dictionary
of English lexical borrowings in Polish available on the market (Słownik
zapożyczeń angielskich w polszczyźnie, abbreviated to SZA, 2010).
The dictionary contains more than 3,000 entries, giving detailed information
about the words, including the spelling (and possible variants), pronunciation,
grammatical information (such as the gender of the noun, information on
inflectional endings, etc.), the semantic field where a given borrowings may
appear, the style/register of the word (with the help of labels) and etymology.
Moreover, MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD discussed the following spheres:
• theoretical aspects of the process of borrowing
• a brief history of English-Polish political, cultural and linguistic contact
• the assimilation of English loanwords in Polish on four levels: graphic,
phonological, morphological and semantic
• the influence of English upon the Polish of the Poles living in the United
States of America
• some new types of English influence upon Polish.
The growing number of lexical anglicisms is well reflected in the number
of publications dealing with this phenomenon. The publications in question can
be divided into seven main groups:
• dealing with general features of contemporary Polish and thus mentioning
the problem of foreign influence as only one of many characteristics
of the Polish language, e.g. BAJEROWA (2001), BRALCZYK (1999),
DALEWSKA-GREŃ (1994), DUNAJ (2001), DUNAJ, PRZYBYLSKA and SIKORA
(1999), GAJDA (2001a), KREJA (2001), LUBAŚ (2003), MAJKOWSKA and
SATKIEWICZ (1999), MARKOWSKI (1999), MIODEK (2000), MOSIOŁEK-KŁOSIŃSKA
(2000), OŻÓG (2000, 2001), RZESZUTEK (2000), RZETELSKA-FELESZKO (2001),
SATKIEWICZ (1994a, 1994b), SMÓŁKOWA (2000, 2001a, 2001b), SOBOCIŃSKA
(1994), WASZAKOWA (2001c).
• dealing with theoretical aspects of the process of introducing lexical loans
(mainly of English origin) into the Polish language, e.g. CYRAN (1974),
FISIAK (1962), MINDAK (1983), SZMAŃDA (1979), WALCZAK (1997).
• dealing with loans from various languages, including English, e.g. BUTTLER
(1981), DAMBORSKÝ (1974), DUNAJ (2000), MARKOWSKI (1995), ROPA (1974),
RYBICKA (1967, 1976), SOBCZAK (2000), TEKIEL (1988, 1989), WALCZAK
(1984, 1987, 1994, 2001), WASZAKOWA (2001a), WITASZEK-SAMBORSKA (1992,
1993).
• dealing with words borrowed from English, e.g. BEREZOWSKI (1994),

BOGUSŁAWSKA (1994), GRABOWSKA (1972), GRYBOSIOWA (2000), KODURA
(2002), MARKOWSKI (1992b), NETTMAN-MULTANOWSKA (2003), R.S. (1995),
SĘKOWSKA (1993) and the present author (ZABAWA, 2004b, 2010b).
• dealing with loans from a given semantic group, e.g. cuisine: SKUBALANKA
(2000); fashion and clothing: BOREJSZO (1990), MYSONA and MARCINKOWSKA
(1977), PARAFINOWICZ (1972, 1974, 1975), SKUBALANKA (2000), WILCZEWSKA
(1970); bicycles: WOJTAK (2000); business, marketing and economics:
DĄBROWSKA (2000); names of professions and positions: OCIEPA (2001);
computers: CUDAK and TAMBOR (1995), DZIKIEWICZ and MIODEK (1991),
MATUSIAK (1997); sport: OŻDŻYŃSKI (1970); physics: KAJETANOWICZ (1993);
army: KANIA (1975); medicine: GÓRNICZ (2000); music: WRÓBLEWSKI (1989);
hip-hop culture: BARTŁOMIEJCZYK (2008); sea and seamen: KOŁODZIEJEK
(1990); drugs: BARTŁOMIEJCZYK (2006). Moreover, certain works deal with
English loans in a given variety of Polish, e.g. in the language of university
students (MCGOVERN, 1992). It is also possible here to distinguish a subgroup
of publications dealing with the names of shops and companies, many of
which are modelled on English, e.g. RZETELSKA-FELESZKO (1994, 1997,
1998a, 1998b), KORNASZEWSKI (1994; cited in RZETELSKA-FELESZKO 2001:
170—171).
• dealing with individual words borrowed from English, both (1) lexical loans,
e.g. AIDS (A.M., 1991), puzzle (A.M., 1994), krakersy (CYRAN, 1975),
handicap (DOROSZEWSKI, 1971), grill, pager, notebook (PIĘCIŃSKA, 2001),
college/kolegium (WOJCIECHOWSKA, 1992), fan (WRÓBLEWSKI, 1991) and (2)
semantic borrowings, e.g. alternatywa (MIODEK, 2004), ikona (MIODEK, 2005).
• concentrating on the evaluation of the growing number of English loans in
Polish, e.g. BUTTLER (1990), MARKOWSKI and PUZYNINA (2001), PIOTROWSKI
(1998), PREYZNER (1990), SZMAŃDA (1979). It is also possible here to
distinguish a separate group of publications dealing generally with
the number and evaluation of foreign word forms in Polish, e.g. WALCZAK
(1992), BUGAJSKI (1995).
As one can see, much has been written about the influence of English upon
Polish vocabulary. It must be added, however, that the majority of
the publications listed above deal with loanwords in written language,
particularly in the press. There is, to the present author’s knowledge, still
a scarcity of publications dealing with lexical loans of English origin in
contemporary spoken spontaneous Polish. The only systematic work of this
type known to the present author is the one written by
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000). As she notes herself, however, her study
focuses primarily on the areas of semantics and syntax. The aim of the present
book, on the other hand, is to describe the English influence on informal
spoken Polish at the level of words and their meanings.
3.5.3 Semantic loans
English semantics loans, which form the second group of borrowings, have
been researched much less thoroughly. Older publications, such as written by
RYBICKA (1976), deal with semantic loans of Russian, German and French
origin. Nevertheless, certain authors dealt with the phenomenon in question,
e.g. DUNAJ et al. (1999), GRYBOSIOWA (1994), MARKOWSKI (1992a, 1999, 2000,
2004), OTWINOWSKA (1997), OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000), WASZAKOWA
(1995), WITALISZ (2004, 2007) and the present author (ZABAWA, 2004c,
2007b, 2008, 2010a). It must be added, however, that the majority of
the publications listed above, with the exception of the ones written by
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000) and WITALISZ (2007), concentrate on
individual instances of semantic loans in Polish and, while being useful in
presenting certain tendencies, can hardly be said to form systematic research on
the subject. OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC describes a very limited number (13) of
English semantic borrowings in Polish, whereas WITALISZ’S work is fairly
comprehensive, as she has collected around 220 semantic loans and presented
them in the form of a dictionary. The loans have been collected primarily from
mass media (the press, the Internet, television). However, such a publication,
albeit very important, gives no information on the frequency of semantic loans
in the language. Consequently, there is still a need for systematic research
concerning English influence on Polish in the sphere of semantics. Moreover,
as WASZAKOWA (1995: 8—9) asserts, the mechanisms of the emergence of
semantic loans in Polish remain yet to be analysed. The present author has
proposed his own hypothesis concerning the possible ways of introducing
semantic loans into spoken Polish (see section 6.3).
3.5.4 Final remarks
As was noted in section 3.5.1, the publications dealing with structural and
morphological influence of English upon Polish will not be discussed in detail,
as they lie beyond the scope of the study. It is worth noting, nevertheless, that
such phenomena as e.g. structural influence of English were noticed relatively
early, cf. MIODEK, who wrote about the attributive use of nouns (qualifying
other nouns) in 1980 (MIODEK, 1980). Other publications dealing with
grammatical (syntactic and morphological) borrowings of English origin
include CHŁOPICKI and ŚWIĄTEK (2000), CHRUŚCIŃSKA (1977), D.B. (1990),
DULIAN (2004), DUNAJ (2000), GRYBOSIOWA (2001), KREJA (1993),
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1993), MARKOWSKI (1992b, 1999), MIODEK (1993),

MYCAWKA (2000, 2001), OCHMANN (2000, 2004), OTWINOWSKA (1997),
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000), OŻÓG (2000), PRZYBYLSKA (1995), SAWICKA
(1995a, 1995b), SOBCZAK (2000), SZUPRYCZYŃSKA (1995), WALCZAK (1994,
2001), WASZAKOWA (2001b, 2001c, 2002), WYRWAS (2004a), ZAGRODNIKOWA
(1982) and the present author (ZABAWA, 2004a, 2009b).
Despite the existence of all the publications listed in the previous sections,
there is still a need to investigate English lexical and semantic loans in
the Polish language. While a lot of linguists’ attention has been devoted to
the problem of the lexical influence of English upon written Polish
(particularly upon the language of the press8), the influence in the domain of
the spoken variety of Polish (both formal and informal) is still far from
systematically researched. As was mentioned before, the only systematic
research in this field, to the present author’s knowledge, was conducted by
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000). She concentrated on the spoken Polish of
the Warsaw variety; special emphasis was given to semantic and syntactic
loans. As she admits herself, most of her informants knew English and could
be said to be under a strong influence of the English language (due to
the character of their study, work and/or interests). However, since
the knowledge of English among young Poles (and in the Polish society in
general) is still limited (cf. Appendix 1), it seems that the representativeness of
the corpus gathered by her would be improved if some informants with little
knowledge of the English language were also included in the study. The present
corpus, by contrast (cf. Chapter 4), does not exclude texts produced by such
people. Besides, the present corpus is not only a collection of spoken informal
texts in standard Polish, but it contains a large proportion of the texts in
dialectal, i.e. Upper Silesian, Polish.
The present book is similar in its foundations, but it concentrates on
the borrowings at word level, that is on lexical and semantic loans.
Furthermore, as was noted in the introduction, the present study devotes much
attention to individual loans, particularly semantic ones, discussing their use
and meaning. Moreover, as was noted above, some of the informants possess
little or even no knowledge of English (for details, cf. section 4.4.2). As
a consequence, the Polish of such respondents seems to better resemble
the language used by an average Pole.
8 Many linguists advocate using newspapers and magazines in order to prepare the lists of
contemporary borrowings (e.g. RYBICKA-NOWACKA, 1976; CIENKOWSKI, 1978; both cited in
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 40). Others, however, state that the press language is often not
representative, because ‘it [=the material from newspapers and magazines] frequently reflects
the individual journalist’s idiolect’ (CARSTENSEN, 1980).
54 ½ Chapter 4: The description of the corpus
Chapter 4
1
THE DESCRIPTION OF THE CORPUS
4.1 Introduction
The previous chapter concentrated on the linguistic outcome of English-Polish

language contact as well as on the research done in the field of English
influence upon Polish. The aim of the current chapter is to describe the corpus
of informal spoken Polish, upon which the study is based. First, however, some
theoretical information on the notion of ‘corpus’ is given.
4.2 General information about corpus studies2
The term corpus is defined differently by various specialists working in

the field. Some of the definitions are very broad and general, e.g. ‘any
collection of more than one text’ (MCENERY and WILSON, 1998; cited in
MYRCZEK, 2000: 44), whereas others are narrow, but at the same time fairly
comprehensive, e.g.
a collection of linguistic data, either written texts or a transcription of

recorded speech, which can be used as a starting-point of linguistic
description or as a means of verifying hypotheses about a language. (CRYSTAL,
1997: 87)
1 Some parts of this chapter have been published as a separate article (ZABAWA, 2009a).
2 The aim of the present section is not to give a detailed account of the issues relating to
a corpus and corpus studies, but rather to present a general introduction to the description of
the corpus used in the book. Further information about corpus studies and various types of
corpora can be found in e.g. SINCLAIR (1991) and MYRCZEK (2000).
4.2 General information about corpus studies ½ 55
Corpora can be basically divided into three main groups: (1) containing
only written texts, (2) containing only spoken texts (transcriptions) and (3)
composed of both written and spoken language. It seems fairly obvious that it
is the spoken language corpus that is particularly difficult to construct and
analyse. According to SINCLAIR:
Most corpora keep well away from the problems of spoken language — with
some honourable exceptions — and, for a corpus which in any way purports
to reflect a ‘state of the language’, this is most unfortunate. Many language
scholars and teachers believe that the spoken form of the language is a better
guide to the fundamental organization of the language than the written form;
and many writers comment on the differences. In my own experience, there is
no substitute for impromptu speech [...]. (SINCLAIR, 1991: 15—16)
The quotation above answers the question as to why it was decided to

collect a corpus of informal conversations for the purpose of the present study,
rather than, say, a corpus of press language. As was shown in Chapter 3,
a great deal of attention has been devoted to the examination of English loans
(primarily lexical ones) in written Polish, particularly of the press. However,
the situation looks completely different when it comes to spontaneous spoken
Polish (for details see Chapter 3).
The use of a corpus enables linguists to formulate hypotheses about
language on solid bases. It is thus possible not only to state the existence of
a given feature, but also to provide the evidence that would not be available
without a corpus. As for the use of borrowings in a language, for example,
a linguist working with a corpus typed into a computer is not only able to state
the existence of a given loan in a language, but also to discuss its frequency,
both absolute and relative (i.e. compared to other loans), usually in terms of
types and tokens, conduct the contextual analysis, determine all the senses in
which a word was used and rank them according to their frequency, discuss
the relation between the usage of a loan and various other criteria, such as
the types of texts, the topics, the informants (their sex, education, age,
knowledge of foreign languages). Moreover, as OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC
(2000) rightly notices, it is not only the existence of a given feature that may
be linguistically and/or statistically significant, but the non-existence of it may
also constitute an important observation.
Nowadays large corpora, stored in a computer memory, are an invaluable
aid in many branches of linguistics, most notably in lexicography. Here are
some examples of the dictionaries (both mono- and bilingual) based on
corpora:
• Collins Cobuild English Dictionary for Advanced Learners, 3rd edition, ed.
by SINCLAIR (2001), based on the Bank of English, a corpus consisting of
around 400 million words.
• Oxford Dictionary of English, 2nd edition, ed. by SOANES and STEVENSON

(2003), based on the Oxford English Corpus, composed of the British
National Corpus (100 million words), the Oxford Reading Programme
(around 77 million words) and other databases.
• Wielki słownik angielsko-polski PWN-Oxford and Wielki słownik
polsko-angielski PWN-Oxford, ed. by LINDE-USIEKNIEWICZ (2004a, 2004b),
both based on the British National Corpus and Korpus Języka Polskiego
PWN.
• Uniwersalny słownik języka polskiego, ed. by DUBISZ (2003), Wielki słownik
wyrazów obcych PWN, ed. by BAŃKO (2003), Wielki słownik ortograficzny
PWN, ed. by POLAŃSKI (2003), all based on Korpus Języka Polskiego PWN.
• Czasowniki angielskie. Słownik, by ARABSKI and ŁYDA (1997), based on
a corpus composed of British and American press and literature (consisting
of over 200 million words).
• Wielki słownik języka polskiego (in preparation), based on Narodowy Korpus
Języka Polskiego (The National Corpus of Polish).3
4.3 Problems connected with spoken language corpora
When one decides to construct a corpus of spoken language and analyse it in

terms of borrowed words and/or meanings, three difficulties are predominant:
first, it is much more difficult to construct a representative corpus of spoken
language, particularly consisting of informal conversations, than, say, of
the language of the press. On the one hand, to ensure a good quality of
the recording, it should be carried out openly, i.e. non-surreptitiously. On
the other, the presence of a tape recorder or a dictaphone may and often does
have influence on the linguistic behaviour of speakers (cf. the phenomenon of
‘observer’s paradox’; for details see LABOV, 19724). Moreover, it is often not
easy to find appropriate people that would act as informants. Second,
the creation of a corpus of spoken language is a difficult and time-consuming
process, as the conversations must be recorded, transcribed and finally typed
into a computer. The last two phases are particularly time-consuming,
especially when compared to the process of creating a corpus of written
language, which does not need to be transcribed and, instead of keyboarding,
one can use faster and more efficient methods, such as optical scanning,
i.e. machine reading (suitable especially for printed books, as SINCLAIR, 1991,
3 NKJP is available online at http://www.nkjp.pl.

4 I am grateful to Professor Rafał Molencki for drawing my attention to Labov’s work.
4.3 Problems connected with spoken language corpora ½ 57
notices) or the re-use of the material already in electronic form (suitable

especially for press texts, which can frequently be found on the Internet). One
could of course make use of such quasi-spoken varieties as interviews or film
scripts but, as SINCLAIR notes, they are not really instances of spoken, but
rather written-to-be-spoken language; hence they do not have typical features
of spontaneous informal conversations and could not be included in the present
corpus:
If it is impossible in an early stage of a project to collect the spoken

language, then there is a temptation to collect film scripts, drama texts, etc.,
as if they would in some way make up for this deficiency. They have a very
limited value in a general corpus, because they are ‘considered’ language,
written to simulate speech in artificial settings. Each has its own distinctive
features, but none truly reflects natural conversation, which for many people
is the quintessence of the spoken language. There is special integrity in a text
which is a full record of a public meeting, enquiry, court case, radio or
television station, etc., despite the mix of impromptu and considered language
that is used — scripts and even read-out statements are common. But such
records are not likely to be representative of the general usage of
conversation. (SINCLAIR, 1991: 16)
The above quotation answers the question as to why it was decided to

exclude such texts as interviews or discussions emitted, e.g. by the television,
from the present corpus.
Third, a typical spoken-language corpus does not contain many borrowed
words, as POPLACK et al. pointed out:
Gathering enough data for the systematic study of the use of borrowed
words in a speech community is inherently very difficult. Tokens of these
words are typically rare in monolingual discourse, so that several hours of
speech will yield only a few dozen, most of which occur only once. In certain
contexts, of course, and for certain topics of conversation, there will be some
set of borrowings which are used repeatedly, but the imposition of contextual
or topical restrictions would vitiate the comprehensiveness and
representativity of any investigation attempting to give a general
characterization of borrowing and integration. (POPLACK, SANKOFF and
MILLER, 1988: 48—49)
A similar view was expressed by DUNAJ:
Każdy, kto zajmował się badaniami języka mówionego, wie, że uzyskanie

obfitych materiałów leksykalnych z wypowiedzi mówionych nie jest łatwe.
Wymaga żmudnych, długotrwałych obserwacji. (DUNAJ, 2000: 34)
Any person conducting research on spoken language knows that it is not easy
to obtain rich lexical material from spoken utterances. It requires long and
laborious observations.
The above quotations answer the question as to why corpora of spoken

language are infrequently used for the systematic study of loans in a language.
Instead, as POPLACK et al. (1988: 49) note, most studies dealing with the use of
borrowed words in spoken language resort to three alternatives:
1. Artificial methods of the elicitation of data, used by e.g. POPLACK and
SANKOFF (1984), who prepared a random series of photographs of 45
everyday items which could be designated by concrete nouns. The bilingual
(Spanish-English) informants were then asked to name the object and
provide any additional words for the same concept they could think of.
2. The analysis of a few isolated borrowings that occurred naturally, a method
used by e.g. MOUGEON et al. (1985; cited in POPLACK et al., 1988: 49).
3. The analysis of anecdotal lists of borrowed words, a method used by e.g.
NASH (1970, cited in POPLACK et al., 1988: 49).
Nevertheless, it seems that such methods as e.g. using photographs to elicit
nouns from the respondents can provide only indirect data and thus the results
obtained in this way are not necessarily representative of the use of loanwords
in informal spontaneous conversations. As a consequence, it was decided for
the purpose of the present book to gather a corpus of spontaneous
conversations, since there is still a shortage of studies dealing with the use of
borrowings, particularly semantic ones, in spoken discourse. Some of
the recordings included in the corpus (6 out of 20) are connected with the topic
of computers, the Internet or modern technology so as to ensure that a larger
number of lexical and semantic loans will be available for analysis (cf. also
section 4.4.3 dealing with the topics of the recordings).
4.4 The corpus used in the study
4.4.1 Introductory remarks
To ensure the reliability and homogeneity of the corpus, it was decided that
only natural spontaneous conversations will be included. This automatically
excludes not only all written-to-be-spoken forms (such as film dialogues) but
also conversations conducted in a formal setting, such as interviews,
discussions or talk shows emitted by the television.
4.4 The corpus used in the study ½ 59
The entire corpus consists of twenty recordings (60,564 running words

altogether), recorded in 2003 and 2004. One could possibly state that the size
of the corpus is too small to draw general conclusions concerning the use of
lexical and semantic loans in spoken Polish. It seems, however, that it is large
enough to highlight certain tendencies. Besides, the entire corpus was
collected, transcribed and analysed by only one person, namely the author of
the book. As a consequence, it could not be very large for practical reasons.
4.4.2 The informants
Altogether, 48 people (including the author of the study) participated in

the conversations (31 women and 17 men). They are uniquely coded throughout
all the recordings. In other words, the same person is given the same symbol
in all the conversations in which he or she took part. The codes for
female speakers are F1, F2, ... , F30, F31 whereas the codes for male ones are
M1, M2, ... , M16, M17. The author of the book is symbolized by M6.
It must be noted at this point that nine speakers were not taken into account
in the present study. Five of them were accidental speakers (e.g. people asking
for something), who uttered only a few words altogether. The rest of
the excluded informants (four persons) were under the age of 18, and their
contribution to the recorded conversations was also insignificant. The group of
excluded speakers comprises the following respondents: F8, F14, F18, F19, F20,
F23, M5, M10 and M12.
The number of speakers taken into consideration in the present book is thus
39 (25 women and 14 men). The basic information about the speakers
(gathered in 2003) is presented in Table 4.1.
As one can see, most of the informants are university graduates, but
there is also a small percentage of people having secondary or vocational
education. The age of most of the speakers (27 out of 39) ranges between 21
and 36.
To make the corpus conversations as varied as possible, it was decided to
choose respondents representing various occupations, including the following
trades and professions: primary and secondary school teachers (of various
subjects), a university teacher, a computer programmer, computer specialists,
office workers, an entrepreneur, an interpreter, a lawyer, a bank clerk, security
guards, an electrician, a lorry driver, an electronics engineer, shop assistants,
a psychologist, a cleaner, a cook, a doctor (physician), hairdressers, an old-age
pensioner and unemployed persons.
Table 4.1 Basic information about the speakers

Knowledge of
Speaker Age Sex Education
Englisha
1 2 3 4 5
M1 26 male higher (physical education) intermediate
M2 36 male higher (history) basic
M3 25 male higher (English studies) advanced
M4 25 male higher (physical education) basic
M5 not taken into account in the present study
M6 26 male higher (English studies) advanced
M7 23 male higher (computer science) intermediate
M8 54 male higher (law) none
M9 38 male secondary (technical education) none
M11 49 male secondary (technical education) basic
M14 27 male higher (computer science) basic
M15 26 male higher (physical education) intermediate
M17 22 male secondary (general education) basic
F1 26 fem. higher (psychology) intermediate
F2 40 fem. higher (Russian studies, English studies) advanced
F3 25 fem. higher (biology) basic
F4 27 fem. higher (English studies) advanced
F5 55 fem. higher (biology) none
F6 46 fem. higher (history) none
F7 29 fem. higher (psychology, English studies) advanced
F8 not taken into account in the present study
F9 25 fem. higher (biology) intermediate
F10 29 fem. higher (Polish studies) intermediate
F11 31 fem. higher (theology) basic
F12 29 fem. higher (Polish studies) intermediate
F13 35 fem. higher (chemistry) none
F15 36 fem. higher (library science) basic
F16 27 fem. higher (German studies) basic
F17 48 fem. higher (German studies) basic
cont. tab. 4.1

1 2 3 4 5
F21 69 fem. primary (general education) none
F22 36 fem. vocational (gastronomy) none
F24 47 fem. vocational (technical education) none
F25 51 fem. higher (medicine) basic
F26 23 fem. vocational (hairdressing) basic
F27 23 fem. vocational (gastronomy) basic
F28 24 fem. vocational (hairdressing) none
F29 35 fem. higher (geography) basic
F30 50 fem. higher (law, English studies) advanced
F31 24 fem. higher (marketing and management) intermediate
a The knowledge of English of most of the informants was established by means of informal conversations and/or short
placement tests. With this end in view, a four-point scale was used: none, basic, intermediate and advanced. It must be
added that most of the speakers from the first group know a few English words and expressions, at least passively. The last
group, in turn, includes also informants fluent in English.
All of the speakers come from Upper Silesia; to be more specific, they live
in the following cities: Siemianowice Śląskie (the majority of the informants),
Chorzów, Świętochłowice, Bytom, Katowice and Piekary Śląskie.
4.4.3 The recordings
Altogether, there were twenty conversations recorded for the purpose of the present
study. All of them were recorded with a digital voice recorder Olympus VN-900.
All the recordings were conducted surreptitiously, in order to ensure as objective
performance on the part of the speakers as possible. In fact, there was one pilot
recording conducted non-surreptitiously, i.e. the speakers were informed that their
conversation was going to be recorded; the purpose of the recording was not,
however, revealed to them (they were informed only that it was for scientific
purposes). They expressed their agreement, but it was visible that their linguistic
behaviour was clearly influenced: for example, one person felt inhibited and thus
unable to speak in a natural way. As a result, it was decided not to include the pilot
recording in the corpus. Consequently, as was mentioned above, all
the conversations were recorded surreptitiously. Naturally, all the personal data
(such as first names, surnames, names of companies, etc.) have been removed from
the transcript and, consequently, the informants remain anonymous.
Most of the conversations were recorded in informal situations, happening
both indoors, during such events as a birthday party, a meeting with friends,
etc., cf. recordings 5, 12 and 20 (12,022 words in total) and outdoors, during
walks, often with a dog, e.g. in a park or the woods, along the lake shore,
through a housing estate etc., or during informal meetings with friends and/or
family members, e.g. in a garden, cf. recordings 1, 6, 9, 14, 16, 18 and 19
(25,871 words in total). Some other recordings, viz. number 2, 10 and 13
(6,581 words in total), were conducted in a place of work, namely in
a staffroom in a junior high school during long breaks. The situation was thus
more formal than in the previous cases, but nevertheless the conversations
could be safely described as informal, as most of the teachers taking part in
them were on first name terms with one another. The rest of the recordings,
namely number 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 15 and 17 (16,090 words in total) were
conducted between the students learning German in a foreign language school.
The conversations were spontaneous and informal (recorded before the actual
classes), as all the people involved were again on first name terms.
The number of running words and the topics of particular recordings are
presented in Table 4.2. The entire corpus consists of 60,564 words.
Table 4.2 The topics and the number of words of particular recordings
Number
Recording Topic of the conversation of running
words
1 dogs, holidays, sport contests, fishing 3,966
2 school, teachers, pupils 2,868
3 computers, the Internet, computer programs 1,620
4 student exchange, computers and e-mail, exams and cheating 2,027
5 acquaintances, family matters, working, excursions, holidays 3,290
6 computers, computer games, computer magazines, the Internet 3,654
7 computers and e-mail, student exchange, learning German 2,348
8 teaching and learning foreign languages 3,144
9 a wedding, doing shopping, business matters 3,327
10 school, pupils and teaching, doctors and health-care 2,178
11 correspondence, computers (esp. using a text processor) 2,393
12 family matters, acquaintances, keeping dogs at home 3,848
13 films, teaching and giving grades, marriages 1,535
14 looking for work, doing business, computers and the Internet 4,060
15 weather, holidays 2,229
16 looking for work, learning abroad, moving to another country 3,895
17 learning foreign languages, taking exams 2,329
18 birthdays, films, new technologies, software piracy 3,807
19 grilling and smoking food, working in the garden, ticks and other insects 3,162
20 everyday life, cooking and eating, family, taking care of a baby 4,884
As one can see, it was decided to include conversations on various topics.

Three of them, however, seem to be prevailing: (1) everyday activities, such as
working, living, talking about one’s family, friends and/or acquaintances
(recordings number 5, 9, 12, 19, 20), (2) computers and the Internet (recordings
number 3, 4, 6, 7, 11, 18) and (3) teaching and learning (recordings number 2,
8, 10, 13, 17). The conversations about computers have turned out to be
particularly interesting, as they contain a large percentage of both lexical and
semantic loans found in the corpus (compared to other recordings). This is
hardly surprising, especially when one considers the fact that the number of
lexical loans has always been substantial in the sphere of modern technology,
especially computers, particularly when compared to other semantic fields. It is
more surprising, however, that the aforementioned semantic area was rich in
semantic loans as well.
The lexical and semantic loans found in the corpus are discussed separately
in two subsequent chapters (number 5 and 6).
4.4.4 The type of language used
As was noted above, the entire corpus has been composed of spontaneous
conversations, hence the language used in it can be safely described as
naturally occurring Polish.
The type of the language used in the corpus conforms to all or almost all of
the oral situational characteristics of the genre of ‘ordinary conversation’
(based on BIBER, 1988: 46; see section 1.3.2 for more information):
multichannel, home acquisition, low social value, high interaction, shared
personal knowledge, negotiable goal, maintenance of the relationship, shared
space and time, low interaction with text and low informational focus (as
opposed to unichannel, school acquisition, high social value, low interaction,
low shared personal knowledge, non-negotiable goal, relationship
backgrounded, separate space and time, high interaction with text and high
informational focus, all belonging to literate situational characteristics of
the most typical literate genre, i.e. academic prose) (BIBER, 1988: 46).
It must be noted that the language of some of the speakers has visible
features of the Silesian dialect (notably the one of F21, F22, F24, F25, F28,
M6, M7, M8, M9, M11, M13 and M165). Some recordings are thus examples
5 It must be added that the situation of most of the speakers taking part in the study can be
characterized as diglossic; in other words, the informants are able to speak both standard Polish
and the Silesian dialect and alternate between them according to the situation.
of naturally occurring Silesian dialect (especially number 1, 5, 6, 9, 12, 14, 18

and 19).
In general, the Silesian dialect differs from regular Polish in the sphere of
phonology (indicated by a special pronunciation, e.g. the common use of narrow
vowels — samogłoski ścieśnione, special pronunciation of nasal sounds and
simplification of certain consonant clusters), morphology (indicated by changes
in inflection and the use of special endings), syntax (indicated e.g. by the special
use of prepositions and the passive voice or changes in word formation) and
semantics (indicated by the use of special vocabulary) (SKUDRZYKOWA et al.,
2001: 157—209). Detailed information about the Silesian dialect (including
samples of dialectal texts) can be found in SKUDRZYKOWA et al. (2001), TAMBOR
(2002) and ŻYDEK-BEDNARCZUK (1992). The dictionaries of special Silesian
vocabulary are also available, cf. e.g. CZAJKOWSKI et al. (1996), CZĄSTKA-SZYMON
et al. (1999), WYDERKA (2000—2004). In addition, some general information
about Polish dialects is given e.g. in MAZUR (2001) or in Encyklopedia języka
polskiego (ed. by URBAŃCZYK and KUCAŁA 1999). Furthermore, a great deal of
information on the notion of dialect in general can be found in BEREZOWSKI (1997).
For the sake of clarity, only some most noticeable features of the Silesian
dialect are marked in the corpus:
• some aspects of the special pronunciation, especially its most noticeable
features, e.g. special endings, extra consonants or mazurzenie:
M7: aaa to jo tam ida zaro [...]

M11: jo już zaczekom jo nie byda trzydzieści złoty płacił tyla piniędzy te [...]
F21: ale łonemu szybko rosną [...]
M9: jak to teraz mom nocki to ło cwortej chopie wiys jak łone jadą [...]
Moreover, some words (not necessarily connected with the Silesian dialect)
are written in a special way so as to reflect their pronunciation, e.g. dwajścia,
naobkoło, piniędzy, zaczło.
• some aspects of the special morphology, e.g. the use of special words such as
żech:
M8: bo eee dla odmiany jo żech czytoł
• the use of special vocabulary, e.g. godać, synek, dziołcha, kaj:

M11: z tyj wysokij / no jak tak z daleka patrzę to ci godom [...]
M11: a on czerwony się zrobił cały / mówi ale ja nie byłem przygotowany na
takie pytanie / a ten synek mioł może góra siedemnaście lat / tam się kładli
ze śmiechu dziołchy a on nie wiedzioł / drugie pytanie mu też coś zadali [...]
F25: cóż to za dziołcha / zamiast to mieć / fajno różowo kiecka z falbankami [...]
F25: kaj mocie ta idiotka?
4.4.5 The transcription and the use of fonts
As the study focuses on loanwords (particularly their semantics and

morphology, not phonology) and semantic loans, it was not necessary to
transcribe the recorded conversations phonetically. Instead, it was decided to
use orthographic transcription. However, no punctuation marks were used, with
the exception of a question mark, used for marking questions (indicated by
the intonation used by a speaker). Moreover, the slash symbol (/) was used to
show short (up to one second) pauses in the speech. Such a notation is aimed
at reflecting the natural flow of speech. The convention used for
the transcription of the recordings used for the purpose of the present study is
thus very similar to the one used by ŻYDEK-BEDNARCZUK (1994; cf. also section
1.4 on the research on spoken Polish), who conducted a study on the structure
of informal conversation.
A speaker’s turn is always indicated by his or her code, i.e. a letter (F for
women, M for men) followed by a number and a colon. All names, surnames,
nicknames and some other expressions denoting people (with the exception of
some of them referring to celebrities) are replaced by common nouns given in
curly brackets (e.g. {name}, {surname}, {nickname}, {person} — e.g. instead
of dyrektor or ojciec) in order to keep the informants and the people they speak
about anonymous, e.g.:
M6: a tyś szedł z {name}?

M11: z {name} i z {name} my szli z kościoła
Moreover, when it has seemed necessary, a case of such nouns is indicated:
F25: ale {name} co by się nie powiedziało to wiesz / te {name-genitive}

dziewczyny / są ładne zgrabne / yyy partnerów mają przystojnych / bo i jedna
i druga starszych ma
Similarly, some place names, e.g. of cities, town districts, as well as

the names of companies, are also replaced by common nouns in curly brackets:
F6: w {city} tak że po# podejrzewam że to byli jednak ludzie tacy majętni
[together 2 sec.] tylko miał w sobie coś muszę powiedzieć / a już kawały
All quotations from the corpus given in Chapters 5 and 6 as well as in

Appendix 5 are preceded by the word ‘Recording’ and the indication of
the number of the recording (given in square brackets), where the fragment in
question can be found:
[Recording 7]
F29: a do ciebie doszło?
M14: doszedło / doszedło
Other features marked in the transcriptions include:

• non-verbal behaviour of the speakers, such as laughter, a cough, a whistle,
etc., with the indication of its duration,6 given in square brackets:
F29: każdy ma coś innego

[laughter 2 sec.]
• semi-verbal behaviour, expressing some kind of indecision, tacit agreement

or having no real semantic function, marked as mmm, yyy, mhm:
F29: a teraz jak ten / jak właśnie mam te stałe łącze / to tak mmm / tak się
trochę napaliłam na to
[...]
F29: dobra / zapisane [pause 2 sec.] a ja ostatnio właśnie też / yyy Gadu
Gadu sobie zainstalowałam
M14: mhm
• background noises, which drowned out the words or made them

indistinguishable, together with their duration, indicated in square brackets:
F29: nie nie nie / no to się

[background noise 6 sec.]
This group includes also the sounds of various machines or appliances:
M11: a tu / jak mnie to swędzi tu

[grinder 23 sec.]
• words whispered and thus indistinguishable:

M14: wiesz tam [whisper 2 sec.] we dwójkę
• longer pauses (lasting more than one second), with the indication of their
duration:
6In general, the duration of the phenomena lasting up to one second is marked as ‘[1 sec.]’.
The only exceptions are short pauses marked with a slash (/).
F29: yyy ma raczej lepsze ikony / jakiś taki wygląd graficzny trochę inny / no
nie wiem [pause 2 sec.] ja tam aż tak wiesz nie korzystam dużo to mmm dla
mnie to fajny
• overlapping speech. In general, it was not necessary to mark overlapping

speech in a detailed way. Instead, it is marked with the word ‘together’ and
the duration of the overlap, given in square brackets:
M14: mhm / to trzeba jeszcze

[together 1 sec.]
M6: chyba coś źle / chyba mmm może coś źle zapisałeś se ten adres
When the speech of one person was drowned out by louder and/or more
distinct speech of another person, then the sentence uttered by the former
person was broken in the middle and marked with an asterisk:
F29: mhm / no dziwne / dziwne / a wczoraj *

M6: chociaż czasem się chyba rzeczywiście zdarza że
When the speech of one person was interrupted by another speaker giving
a short remark expressing e.g. confirmation or agreement (but not drowning out
the words uttered by the former interlocutor), then the moment of
the interruption is marked with the sign ^. It also indicates that the next words
uttered by the first speaker are directly connected with his or her previous
utterance (marked with ^):
M14: to nie jest / gwarantowana usługa^

M6: no to nie jest gwarantowana
M14: ale się nie zdarza żeby nie dochodziło
• moments of unclear speech and thus indistinguishable words, indicated by

the word ‘unclear’ and the duration, given in square brackets:
M8: ale ten pies bardzo posłuchliwy bo go wołoł i [unclear 1 sec.]
• incomplete words, indicated by a hash sign (#):

M8: ja to źle mówię / brakowało mi dwadzieścia sze# eee dwadzieścia dni do
dwudziestu sześciu lat
The English borrowings (lexical and semantic) found in the corpus are
written in bold for easy reference.7 For the sake of clarity, only a word dealt
7 Sometimes a word can be both a lexical and semantic borrowing, cf. e.g. test.
with in a given section is marked (always written in bold). All the other
borrowings (i.e. not dealt with in a given section) are not marked in any way.
The borrowings from other languages (mostly German) are not marked in any
way, either.
The English lexical and semantic borrowings found in the corpus will be
described in detail in the next two chapters.
5.2 Description of the lexical loans found in the corpus ½ 69
Chapter 5
1
LEXICAL LOANS FOUND IN THE CORPUS
5.1 Introduction
In general, it can be stated that there exist two main methods of introducing
foreign vocabulary into contemporary Polish: (1) by means of loanwords
(where both form and meaning are borrowed, cf. section 2.3.2) and (2) by
means of semantic loans (where only the meaning is borrowed, cf. section
2.3.2). This chapter is concerned with the first method (i.e. lexical loans),
whereas semantic loans, which constitute the most essential part of the book,
are presented in Chapter 6.
5.2 Description of the lexical loans found in the corpus
Altogether, 78 English lexical loans (types) were found in the corpus (225
tokens). This number includes derivatives, such e.g. komputerowy,
komputeryzacja from komputer (70 types when derivatives are excluded). They
can be roughly divided into four main groups, the criterion being the time of
their first occurrence in Polish: (1) introduced before 1990, (2) introduced in
the 1990s or later, noted in the new dictionary of contemporary Polish and/or
dictionary of foreign terms, i.e. Uniwersalny słownik języka polskiego, ed. by
Dubisz 2003, abbreviated to USJP and Wielki słownik wyrazów obcych PWN,
ed. by Bańko 2003, abbreviated to WSWO,2 (3) introduced only recently and
1 The description of English lexical loans in informal spoken Polish can also be found in
ZABAWA (2007a, 2011).

2 Naturally, the loans belonging to this group may have been noted in other Polish
dictionaries. See also the tables in Appendices 3 and 4, which indicate the existence or
70 ½ Chapter 5: Lexical loans found in the corpus
not yet noted in the aforementioned dictionaries, but noted in the newest
dictionary of English lexical loans in Polish, i.e. Słownik zapożyczeń
angielskich w polszczyźnie, ed. by MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD 2010, abbreviated to
SZA, and (4) newest loans of English origin, not noted in SZA. The last group
comprises mostly lexical loans which were used only occasionally and whose
meaning is not yet well defined. In fact, some of the loans belonging to
the fourth group may be, and often are, examples of single-word code-switches
rather than unassimilated borrowings. Additionally, the corpus contains some
forms which are not typical loanwords, but which seem, nevertheless, to be
modelled on English (or sometimes also German). Naturally, such forms do not
appear in either Polish or English dictionaries. They are not counted as lexical
borrowings, but they are listed as a separate group in Table 5.1. Moreover,
the corpus contains some expressions quoted directly from English or used
metalinguistically. Such constructions are not counted as lexical borrowings,
either.
It must be underlined at this point that it is sometimes not easy to decide
whether a given loanword is of English origin or not. According to
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD (1994: 9), such problems may arise in the case of
internationalisms (cf. the definition of the term in section 2.3.2), as such words
exist by definition in many European languages and, consequently, it is not
easy to decide where the word has originated. For example, the Polish word
kulis, coming probably from Indian koli, exist in many European languages,
such as English (coolie), French (coolie) and German (Kuli). As
a consequence, while it seems probable that Indian is the genetic source of
the borrowing in question, it is not easy to establish its immediate source,
i.e. the direct donor language (English, French or German) (MAŃCZAK-
-WOHLFELD, 1994: 9). The dictionaries are often of no great help, either, as they
not infrequently give different etymologies for the same word. Consequently,
the dictionaries cannot unfortunately be said to be fully reliable: PIOTROWSKI
(2009), for example, gives the example of the Polish word beton, treated
erroneously in WSWO as an English borrowing. This, in his view, is the result
of the fact that etymology is frequently treated as the least important piece of
information in a dictionary.
Furthermore, it is often very difficult, if not impossible, to determine
the date of the first occurrence of a given English loanword. The National
Corpus of Polish (NKJP, Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego,
http://www.nkjp.pl) is of great help here; nevertheless, it must be noted that
the division of the loanwords found in the corpus into four groups mentioned
non-existence of the English loanwords (found in the corpus) in various other dictionaries of
contemporary Polish and dictionaries of foreign terms.
at the beginning of the present section is in many cases only presumptive and
by no means definite.3
It must also be stressed that the corpus contains a number of proper names,
which are not, however, treated as loanwords.4 They are either taken over
directly from English (e.g. McDonald’s, X-Box) or created in Polish, but using
only English elements (e.g. CD Action, Top Secret). Moreover, some of them,
combining both English and Polish, belong to the class of hybrid constructions
(e.g. CyberMycha). It must also be added that it is very often the case that
proper names are built up of common nouns, e.g. CD Action (a title of
a computer magazine), consisting of two nouns: CD and Action. Such forms
are not counted as borrowings, either.5 The list of English proper names found
in the corpus is given in Appendix 2.
Additionally, a corpus contains a number of words, many of which are
internationalisms, of unclear origin. Such loanwords were not counted as
lexical borrowings of English origin due to the problems outlined above.
Examples of such words found in the corpus include elektryczny, globalny,
kajak, kod, produkt.
Moreover, it is sometimes very difficult, if not impossible, to make
a clear-cut distinction between single-word code switching (or code mixing)
and unassimilated borrowing.6 The linguists offer two main criteria that can be
used to distinguish between them: (1) the degree of phonological and
morphological adaptation and (2) the number of occurrences (i.e. frequency) of
a given form (cf. e.g. MYERS-SCOTTON, 1993; cited in BENTAHILA, 1995: 39;
MACSWAN, 1997; MALMKRJÆR, 1991). Still, it is necessary to note that such
a division is in many cases not definite, as the criteria seem to be insufficiently
precise. For this reason, both types (i.e. single-word code switches and
borrowings) have been counted as loanwords and discussed in the present
chapter.
As was noted in Chapter 2, it is generally assumed that lexical borrowings
are introduced into a language by bilingual people (but cf. also footnote 18 in
Chapter 2). It is only after some time that they begin to be used by
monolinguals. Furthermore, a given loan usually becomes completely or partly
assimilated on one or more levels: spelling, phonology, morphology and
semantics (for details, cf. MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995, 2006). It must be added,
3 This is true especially in the case of distinguishing between the loans from the first and
second groups.
4 They can function, however, as a base for derivatives, e.g. microsoftowy from Microsoft.
In the present study, such derivatives are treated as lexical borrowings.

5 The form CD is treated as a lexical borrowing because it was also used in the corpus as
an independent word, i.e. not as a part of a proper name.

6 For more information on code switching and code mixing (including definitions and
references), cf. the article by the present author (ZABAWA, 2011).

however, that many unassimilated borrowings (or instances of single-word

code switching) never go beyond the stage of a quote, and, as a result, may
soon be forgotten.
The Table 5.1 (cf. also ZABAWA, 2011) shows all the English borrowings
found in the corpus. As was noted at the beginning of the current section,
the loans are divided into four groups. The table includes also derivatives,
which, for the sake of clarity, are presented as separate entries.
The additional, fifth group comprises some other forms, non-existent in
either English or Polish dictionaries, but which nevertheless appear to be
modelled on English and/or German. Naturally, the forms belonging to this
group are not counted as borrowings.
Table 5.1 Lexical borrowings of English origin found in the corpus

a
Group Description of the group Borrowings found
1 English borrowings intro- anglikański, biznes, camping, disc jockey, dolar, dubbing,
duced before 1990 film, gadżet, grill, hi-fi, hipis, hobby, komfort, komputer,
komputerowy, komputeryzacja, OK, parking, parkować,
partner, przetrenować, pub, serial, sponsorować, standard,
standardowo, startować, szok, test, trener, trening, weekend,
wysportowany, zdopingować, zoo
2 English borrowings intro- CD, CD-ROM, CV, DVD, edytor [=word processor], e-mail,
duced in the 1990s or la- firewall, hip-hop, HTML, interaktywny, Internet, interneto-
ter (noted in USJP and/or wy, jacuzzi, kartridż, klikać, kompakt, mail, modem, multi-
WSWO)b medialny, non-stop, OEM, on-line, PC, serwer, SMSc,
subwoofer, top [na topie], van
3 new English borrowings net, screen, strongman, wow
(not noted in USJP or
WSWO, but noted in
SZA)
4 newest English borro- boxowy, hand-held, impossible, IP, mailowod, microsofto-
wings (not noted in SZA) wy, multiplayer, pass, PDF, singlee, zip file
5 other forms modelled on divix, empetrójka, erpeg, foluwa, integrale, menago
English and/or German
(not counted as loan-
words)f
a Variations in spelling in the case of some of the borrowings are possible, e.g. biznes/business, disc jockey/dysk dżokej,
kartridż/cartridge, etc. In such cases, only one form (the one believed more frequent, cf. their occurrence in NKJP) is
given.
b Interestingly enough, this group comprises the highest percentage of acronyms. Many of them are, however, not felt as
acronyms by an average native speaker of Polish, cf. e.g. the form DVD.
c The form SMS is of English origin (an acronym for ‘short message service’). Interestingly enough, it is used in Polish, but
not in English, where the construction text or text-message is used (both text and text-message can function as nouns and/or
verbs). Additionally, the form text-messaging is also documented. I am grateful to Professor Rafał Molencki for drawing
my attention to this fact.
d This is a derivative (an adverb) of mail. For the sake of clarity, it is listed as a separate borrowing.
e SZA lists the forms singel and singiel. The form found in the corpus, however, was pronounced differently (close to
English single, as indicated by its spelling) and used in a different meaning, not included in the dictionary.
f As the forms were only spoken, not written, their spelling is quite arbitrary.
The borrowings from the first, second and third groups have already been
noted in the dictionaries of Polish or of foreign terms (USJP, WSWO and/or
SZA).7 It is worth noting that some of them have quasi-native counterparts.
The counterparts are, however, usually loan translations or loan renditions from
English (hence the label quasi-native counterpats), e.g. zapora ogniowa or
ściana ogniowa (English firewall), płyta kompaktowa (English compact disc),
wersja pudełkowa (English box version), zrzut ekranowy (English screen dump)
and poczta elektroniczna (English electronic mail).
Additionally, it must be stressed here that some of the English constructions
are used in Polish in a more restricted sense than in English. As for examples,
firewall is used in Polish in the meaning of ‘a part of a computer system or
network which is designed to block unauthorized access while permitting
outward communication’ (ODE), whereas the core meaning of English firewall
is not connected with computers: ‘a wall or partition designed to inhibit or
prevent the spread of fire’ (ODE). In Polish, by contrast, it cannot be used
outside the context of computers. Another example of this kind includes
komputer/computer, which can be used in English, but not in Polish, in
the sense of ‘a person who makes calculations’ (ODE).8 A reverse situation,
though less frequent, can also be detected: some borrowings are used in Polish
in the meaning absent in English. As for examples, non stop can function
informally in Polish, but not in English (cf. OALD, ODE), as a noun in
the meaning of ‘a type of a nightclub, especially a discotheque’.9 Consequently,
the process of conversion must have been in operation here, as non-stop does
not function as a noun in English.
In other cases, English borrowings are used in Polish in the meaning
slightly different than the one in which the words appear in English. As for
examples, the form weekend can be mentioned: in English, the form is used to
denote ‘Saturday and Sunday’ (ODE), whereas in Polish it denotes the period
from Friday afternoon till Monday morning (USJP).
More importantly, some of the forms found in the corpus, namely camping,
DVD (in one of its uses), OEM and van have been used in the meaning
7 In spite of this, the status of some of such words appears to be still unclear. As for
examples, in the case of Internet, it is not clear whether the word should be obligatorily
capitalized or not, since dictionaries often give contradictory hints. NSPP allows only a capital
letter, WSWO, USJP and SZA accept both (additionally, the form internet, i.e. not capitalized, is
classified in WSWO and SZA as rarer), and WSO allows also both forms, but with a difference in
meaning: Internet — ‘a global computer network’, internet — ‘an independent, separate network
or a fragment of the Internet’ (cf. also ZABAWA, 2004c: 61).
8 Further examples (from the corpus) include klikać (English to click), kartridż/catridge
(English cartridge) and serwer (English server).

9 This usage has been noted in USJP but not in WSWO. Naturally, the word can also be
used in Polish, in the same way as in English, as an adverb or adjective in the meaning of
‘without stopping or pausing’ (cf. ODE).
different than the one noted in the dictionaries of Polish and/or of foreign
terms (USJP, WSWO, SZA). Table 5.2 always indicates the meaning in which
a given word was used in the corpus.10
Table 5.2 The meaning(s) of the lexical loans found in the corpus
Word a
Group The meaning(s) in which the word appeared in the corpus
(part of speech)
1 2 3
1 camping (n) a small, simple, single-storey house, used to live during one’s holidays
2 CD (abbr: n) 1. a small disc on which music or information is stored
2. a small empty disc on which music or information can be recorded
3. a machine for playing CDs; a CD player (the abbreviation for
compact disc)
CD-ROM 1. a kind of CD on which information can be stored, for the use on
(abbr: n) a computer
2. a machine, usually built into a computer, for reading CD-ROM
discs; a CD-ROM drive (the abbreviation for compact disc read-only
memory, OALD)
CV (abbr: n) ‘a brief account of a person’s education, qualifications, and previous
occupations, typically sent with a job application’ (ODE)
DVD (abbr: n) 1. a small empty disc, similar to a CD, on which large amounts of
information or video can be recorded
2. a disc on which large amounts of information or video is stored
3. a film recorded on such a disc (the abbreviation for digital videodisc
or digital versatile disk, OALD)
edytor (n) a computer program for storing, manipulating, and formatting text
entered from a keyboard (cf. ODE)
e-mail (n) an address of electronic mail
firewall (n) ‘a part of a computer system or network which is designed to block
unauthorized access while permitting outward communication’ (ODE)
hip-hop (n) ‘a style of popular music of US black and Hispanic origin, featuring
rap with an electronic backing’ (ODE)
HTML ‘a standardized system for tagging text files to achieve font, colour,
(abbr: n) graphic, and hyperlink effects on World Wide Web’ (ODE;
the abbreviation for Hypertext Markup Language, ODE)
interaktywny ‘(of a computer or other electronic device) allowing a two-way flow of
(adj) information between it and a user; responding to the user’s input’
(ODE)
Internet (n) a global computer network
10 The borrowings from the first group are not included in the table, since they are already
well assimilated and their meaning is obvious (e.g. komputer, parking, serial, zoo). The only
exception is camping, as it was used in the corpus in the meaning different from the one noted in
the dictionaries (SJP, USJP).
cont. tab. 5.2

1 2 3
internetowy (an adjective derived from Internet)
(adj)
jacuzzi (n) ‘a large bath with a system of underwater jets of water to massage the
body’ (ODE)
kartridż/ a case containing a computer program or game, designed for insertion
cartridge (n) into a games console
klikać (v) ‘to press one of the buttons on a mouse to select a function or item on
the screen’ (ODE)
kompakt (n) a compact disc
mail (n) 1. a message sent via e-mail
2. an e-mail address
3. an electronic mailbox
4. a system of electronic mail
modem (n) ‘a combined device for modulation and demodulation, for example,
between the digital data of a computer and the analogue signal of
a telephone line’ (ODE)
multimedialny ‘using more than one medium of expression or communication’ (ODE),
(adj) e.g. using text, sound, pictures and film
non stop (adv) ‘without stopping or pausing’ (ODE)
OEM (abbr: n, a special version of a computer program, usually an operating system,
adj) sold together with a computer or a piece of hardware, such as
e.g. a hard disk (the abbreviation for original equipment manufacturer,
ODE, or official equipment manufacturer, WSWO)
on-line (adj) ‘available on or performed using the Internet’ (ODE)
PC (abbr: n) ‘a microcomputer designed for use by one person at a time’ (ODE;
the abbreviation for personal computer)
serwer (n) ‘a computer or computer program which manages access to
a centralized resource or service in a network’ (ODE)
SMS (abbr: n) a text message sent via a mobile phone (the abbreviation for Short
Message/Messaging Service, ODE)
subwoofer (n) ‘a loudspeaker component designed to reproduce very low bass
frequencies’ (ODE)
top (n) ‘the highest or most important rank, level, or position’ (ODE)
van (n) (the word refers to Seicento Van, i.e. a kind of car used for carrying
goods and one or two persons)
3 net (n) the Internet (informal)
screen (n) a photograph (shown e.g. on an Internet site or published in a computer
magazine) of an image displayed by a computer game or a program
strongman/ 1. weightlifting contest (organized by a sponsor in a popular holiday
strongmen (n) resort)
2. a man/men of great physical strength
cont. tab. 5.2

1 2 3
wow (interj) (used to express the feeling of astonishment mixed with admiration)
4 boxowy (adj) a special version of the operating system (packed in a cardboard box)
which can be installed on a given computer and used without any
further restrictions
hand-held (n) a video game that is small enough to be held in the hand while being
used
impossible (adj) impossible
IP (abbr: n) ‘a unique string of numbers separated by full stops that indentifies each
computer attached to the Internet’ (ODE; the abbreviation for Internet
Protocol, ODE)
mailowo (adv) (an adverb derived from the noun mail and the adjective mailowy)
microsoftowy (an adjective derived from the proper name Microsoft)
(adj)
multiplayer (n) a computer game (or a mode of playing a computer game) designed for
or involving several players, usually, but not necessarily, involving the
use of the Internet
pass (n) ‘a success in an examination’ (ODE)
PDF (abbr: n) ‘a file format for capturing and sending electronic documents in
exactly the intended format’ (ODE; the abbreviation for Portable
Document Format, ODE)
single (n) a computer game (or a mode of playing a computer game) designed for
one player
zip file (n) a compressed computer file
5 divix (n) ‘a piece of software that compresses video from virtually any source
down to a size that is transportable over the Internet without reducing
the original video’s visual quality’ (http://www.divx.com)
empetrójka/ a popular compressed audio file format
MP3 (n)
erpeg (n) RPG; ‘a game in which players take on the roles of imaginary
characters who engage in adventures, typically in a particular fantasy
setting overseen by a referee’ (ODE)
foluwa (n) a lot of people, a crowd [modelled on either German voll or English
full, or both]
integrale (n) type of selling (of the products having all the necessary parts, rather
than of the individual elements)
menago (n) a variant of Polish menedżer/menadżer/manager (‘a person who is in
charge of running a business, a store, bank, hotel or a similar
organization’, OALD)
a In some cases the words were used in the corpus in exactly the same meaning as their English counterparts are used in
English. In such cases the definitions were directly quoted or modelled on English monolingual dictionaries: Oxford
Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, 6th edition (by A. S. HORNBY, ed. by WEHMEIER, 2000) and Oxford Dictionary of English,
2nd edition (ed. by SOANES and STEVENSON, 2003).
5.3 Statistical analysis ½ 77
As the book focuses primarily on semantic loans, the use of the lexical
loans will not be discussed in further detail (but cf. Appendix 5).11 Instead,
the loans will be analysed statistically (cf. section 5.3).
In addition to the loans given above, the corpus contains also some
instances of direct quotations from English12 (functioning as multi-word code
switches) and English phrases used metalinguistically. As for the former,
the constructions where are you from? and I am from France have been used in
the corpus (as a quote of what somebody has written during a multiplayer
game session); as for the latter, the construction red/red hair and sales engineer
have been used. One of the speakers has pointed out that sometimes English
words and phrases are used in advertisements in order to make the products
they advertise seemingly more sophisticated or even to confuse the reader.13
The very phenomenon of using English terms in Polish press advertisements
was noticed and commented upon by many linguists, cf. e.g. MOLENCKI (1997:
144—145).
All the loans found in the corpus (with the exception of the constructions
from the fifth group, direct quotations from English and the expressions used
metalinguistically), have been included in statistical analysis (see the next
section).
5.3 Statistical analysis
The aim of the current section is to present the statistical analysis concerning
the lexical influence of English on contemporary spoken Polish.
The frequency of occurrence of the lexical loans discussed in the present
chapter is summarized in Table 5.3.14
As one can see, some of the loanwords were used either only once or by
one speaker, but others appear to be relatively common. Moreover, a number of
new loans, not described before, were used in the present corpus.
11 More information on the meaning and use of the lexical loans found in the corpus can be
found in the article by the present author (ZABAWA, 2011). A short summary (in Polish) can also
be found in ZABAWA (2007a). In addition, the examples of the use of some of the loans from
the corpus are given in Appendix 5 in the present book.
12 The phenomenon was termed ‘verbatim quotes’ (also used as a verb, ‘to quote verbatim’)
by OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000).
13 For more information on the use of English unassimilated loans in Polish press
advertisements, cf. ZABAWA (2004b).

14 A similar table was compiled by OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000), but with respect to
semantic borrowings only.

Table 5.3 The use of the lexical borrowings in the corpus

Number of
Number of Number of
a recordings in
Group Lexical loan occurrences of speakers that
which the
the word used the word
word appeared
1 2 3 4 5
English loans introduced anglikański 1 1 1
before the 1990s biznes (business) 1 1 1
camping 1 1 1
disc jockey (dyskdżokej)b 2 2 1
dolar 5 3 2
dubbing 1 1 1
film 12 4 4
gadżet 1 1 1
grill 1 1 1
hi-fi 1 1 1
hipis (hippis) 1 1 1
hobby 2 1 1
komfort 3 1 2
komputer 18 5 6
komputerowy 6 3 4
komputeryzacja 1 1 1
OK 2 1 1
parking 7 3 2
parkować 1 1 1
partner 2 1 1
przetrenować 1 1 1
pub 3 2 2
serial 1 1 1
sponsorować 1 1 1
standard 2 2 2
standardowo 1 1 1
startować 1 1 1
szok 2 2 2
test 11 5 6
trener 1 1 1
trening 1 1 1
weekend 6 3 3
wysportowany 1 1 1
zdopingować 1 1 1
zoo 2 1 1
English loans introduced CD 5 3 3
in the 1990s or later CD-ROM 3 2 2
(noted in USJP and/or CV 2 1 1
WSWO) DVD 11 2 1
edytor 2 1 1
e-mail 1 1 1
firewall 2 2 1
cont. tab. 5.3

1 2 3 4 5
hip-hop 1 1 1
HTML 1 1 1
interaktywny 1 1 1
Internet 10 5 7
internetowy 5 2 2
jacuzzi 2 2 1
kartridż (cartridge) 1 1 1
klikać 1 1 1
kompakt 2 2 1
mail 14 3 5
modem 1 1 1
multimedialny 2 1 1
non-stop 3 3 3
OEM 2 1 1
on-line 3 1 1
PC 3 2 1
serwer 13 2 4
SMS 1 1 1
subwoofer 5 2 1
top 2 2 1
van 1 1 1
New English borrowings net 1 1 1
(not noted in USJP or screen 1 1 1
WSWO, but noted in strongman, strongmen 4 3 2
SZA) wow 2 1 2
Newest English loans (not boxowy (boksowy) 2 1 1
noted in SZA) hand-held 1 1 1
impossible 1 1 1
IP 1 1 1
mailowo 2 1 1
microsoftowy 1 1 1
multiplayer 1 1 1
pass 1 1 1
PDF 1 1 1
screen 1 1 1
single 1 1 1
zip file 1 1 1
Other forms modelled on divix 2 2 1
English/German (not co- empetrójka 6 2 1
unted as loanwords) erpeg 1 1 1
foluwa 1 1 1
integrale 1 1 1
menago 1 1 1
a For the sake of clarity, derivatives are listed as separate entries.
b The form appeared once as dyskdżokej and once as dżokej (in the same meaning).
As was stated above, some of the loanwords found in the corpus were used
only once, probably to ‘satisfy a momentary linguistic need’ (cf. Chapter 2).
Such loans belong to the group of momentary or nonce borrowings (a term
used by POPLACK et al., 1988: 52). Others, by contrast, were repeated relatively
frequently and thus belong to the group of recurrent borrowings (POPLACK et
al., 1988: 57). It is thus possible to divide the loanwords found in the corpus
into five groups15 (as in the case of semantic loans, cf. section 6.5): nonce
borrowings (that occurred once in the corpus), idiosyncratic borrowings
(used by one speaker), recurrent borrowings (that occurred at least four times
in the corpus), widespread borrowings (used by at least four speakers16) and
mid-frequent borrowings (the author’s own term), i.e. the ones which do not
belong to any of the previous four groups. The results of the classification are
presented in Table 5.4.17
Interestingly enough, the group of widespread loans is the smallest in terms
of the number of loan types (4). However, as all of the loans from this group
were used by at least four speakers, it constitutes a significant group in terms
of loan tokens (51).
The group of nonce borrowings consists of 39 types, while the group of
widespread loans (used by at least four speakers) comprises only 4 loan types.
The former group constitutes thus 50.00% of loan types from the entire corpus,18
whereas the latter only 5.13%. When the two groups are compared with respect
to the number of loan tokens, however, the situation looks quite different:
the group of nonce borrowings consists of 39 tokens (17.33% of the tokens from
the entire corpus), whereas the class of widespread borrowings comprises as
many as 51 tokens (22.67% of the tokens from the entire corpus). As
a consequence, one can state that an average speaker uses more widespread than
nonce loans. To be more precise, each of the widespread borrowings was used
12.75 times on average, whereas each of the nonce borrowings was by definition
used only once. The loans belonging to idiosyncratic class were used on average
only slightly more than once (1.29). Consequently, the nonce and idiosyncratic
groups, although large in terms of loan types, are in fact not very significant
when it comes to loan tokens and the number of uses of each individual loanword.
Interestingly but perhaps not surprisingly, the largest group in terms of
loan tokens (but not types) is the class of recurrent borrowings (132 tokens).
15 Some loans belong simultaneously to more than one group, e.g. anglikański belongs to
the group of both nonce and idiosyncratic borrowings (the word was used once by one speaker).
16 The number of speakers (four) is roughly 10% of the informants taking part in
the conversations that constitute the present corpus.

17 This is an extended and revised version of the classification used by POPLACK et al. (1988:
57). As they note, nonce borrowings are by definition idiosyncratic and widespread loans are by
definition recurrent.
18 The entire corpus includes 78 loan types and 225 loan tokens.
Table 5.4 The classification of the lexical loans found in the corpus according to their frequency
Widespread Mid-frequent
Nonce borrowings Idiosyncratic borrowings Recurrent borrowings
borrowings borrowings
Loansa
anglikański, biznes, camping, anglikański, biznes, boxowy, camping, CV, CD, dolar, DVD, film, film, Internet, CD-ROM,
dubbing, e-mail, gadżet, grill, dubbing, edytor, e-mail, gadżet, grill, hand-held, Internet, internetowy, komputer, test disc jockey
hand-held, hi-fi, hip-hop, hi-fi, hip-hop, hipis (hippis), hobby, HTML, komputer, komputerowy, (dyskdżokej),
hipis (hippis), HTML, impossible, interaktywny, IP, kartridż (cartridge), mail, parking, serwer, firewall,
impossible, interaktywny, IP, klikać, komfort, komputeryzacja, mailowo, strongman (strongmen), jacuzzi,
kartridż (cartridge), klikać, microsoftowy, modem, multimedialny, subwoofer, test, weekend kompakt,
komputeryzacja, multiplayer, net, OEM, OK, on-line, parkować, non-stop, PC,
microsoftowy, modem, partner, pass, PDF, przetrenować, screen, serial, pub, standard,
multiplayer, net, parkować, single, SMS, sponsorować, standardowo, szok, top
pass, PDF, przetrenować, startować, trener, trening, van, wow,
screen, serial, single, SMS, wysportowany, zdopingować, zip file, zoo
sponsorować, standardowo,
startować, trener, trening,
van, wysportowany,
zdopingować, zip file
Types (N)
39 52 15 4 11
Tokens (N)
39 67 132 51 26
Tokens:types ratio
1 1.29 8.8 12.75 2.36

a The words modelled on English (or German), but not actual loanwords (e.g. empetrójka, menago) are not included in this and any further tables. Derivatives (e.g. komputerowy,
komputeryzacja derived from komputer) are listed and counted as separate entries.
Each of the loans belonging to this group was used 8.8 times on average.
However, most of these loanwords were used by fewer than four speakers,
which means that they were popular and widely used among a limited group of
speakers.
As for individual loanwords, the most frequent ones were komputer (used
18 times), mail (used 14 times), serwer (used 13 times), film (used 12 times),
test (used 11 times), DVD (used 11 times) and Internet (used 10 times).19 All of
them were used by more than one speaker (5, 3, 2, 4, 5, 2 and 5 respectively).
When the number of speakers is taken into consideration, then komputer, test
and Internet are among the most widespread, since all of them were used by
five informants.
It is not surprising that the majority of the commonest loanwords in
the corpus are well assimilated (with the exception of DVD and mail). It is
more interesting, however, that five out of seven commonest lexical borrowings
are connected with the semantic area of computers, the Internet and modern
technology. This seems to be due to the fact that the respondents, when talking
about the subjects in question, used repeatedly a limited number of loanwords.
Moreover, the semantic field of computers, the Internet and modern technology
is known to have a large number of loanwords of English origin.
As for the parts of speech of the loanwords found in the corpus, it can be
observed that the vast majority of the borrowings belong to the class of nouns,
as Table 5.5 shows.
It is interesting, though hardly surprising, that the percentage of nouns is
much higher when compared to other parts of speech. What is more, the group
of abbreviations/acronyms can be added to the class of nouns (cf. footnote a in
Table 5.5). The group of nouns would then constitute as much as 71.05% of
the loanwords found in the corpus. Additionally, one can note that most
(though not all) adjectives and adverbs are not ‘independent’ loanwords but
merely derivatives of nouns, e.g. standardowo (derived from standard),
mailowo (derived from mail), komputerowy (derived from komputer),
wysportowany (derived from sport), internetowy (derived from Internet). These
facts make the predominance of nouns even more striking.
The preponderance of nouns is even greater when one compares
the number of loanwords belonging to different parts of speech in terms of
tokens (not types), as Table 5.6 illustrates.
As one can see, when tokens are taken into account, the nouns constitute as
much as 68.61% of the loanwords found in the corpus. When the group of
abbreviations/acronyms is added to the class of nouns, the latter would
constitute as much as 82.06% of the loanwords found in the corpus.
19 It is evident that the number of occurrences of the loans would be higher when one is to
include derivatives: komputer/komputerowy/komputeryzacja (used 25 times altogether), mail/

mailowo (used 16 times altogether), Internet/internetowy (used 15 times altogether).
Table 5.5 The number of lexical loans (types) belonging to different parts of speech
Parts of speech
abbreviations
nouns verbs adjectives adverbs other
(acronyms)a
Types – 78 (76) loans (types) in totalb

44 6 11 3 10 2
Loans
biznes, camping, disc jockey, dolar, dubbing, edytor, klikać, parkować, anglikański, boxowy, mailowo, CD, wow,
e-mail, film, firewall, gadżet, grill, hand-held, przetrenować, hi-fi, impossible, non-stop, CD-ROM, OK
hip-hop, hipis, hobby, Internet, jacuzzi, katridż, sponsorować, startować, interaktywny, standardowo CV, DVD,
kompakt, komfort, komputer, komputeryzacja, mail, zdopingować internetowy, HTML, IP,
modem, multiplayer, net, parking, partner, pub, komputerowy, OEM, PC,
screen, serial, serwer, standard, strongman microsoftowy, PDF, SMS
(strongmen), subwoofer, szok, trening, test, top, multimedialny, on-line,
trener, van, weekend, zip file, zoo wysportowany
% of the total group
57.89c 7.89 14.47 3.95 13.16 2.63
a According to Encyklopedia języka polskiego (ed. by URBAŃCZYK and KUCAŁA, 1999: 349), acronyms belong to the class of nouns. In the present table, however, they are listed separately
as their character appears to be quite distinct from regular nouns.
b The words single and pass are not taken into account here, as it is unclear which part of speech they belong to. The words modelled on English (or German) but not actual loanwords
(e.g. empetrójka, menago) are not included in the current table, either. Derivatives (e.g. komputerowy, komputeryzacja derived from komputer) are listed and counted as separate entries.
c 71.05% when the group of abbreviations/acronyms is to be included here.
Table 5.6 The number of lexical loans (tokens) belonging to different parts of
speech
a
Tokens
Parts of speech % of the total group
(223 in total)
Nouns 153 68.61b
Verbs 6 2.69
Adjectives 24 10.76
Adverbs 6 2.69
c
Abbreviations (acronyms) 30 13.45
Other 4 1.79
a Cf. footnote b in Table 5.5.
b 82.06% when the group of abbreviations/acronyms is to be included here.
c Cf. footnote a in Table 5.5.
As for other parts of speech, adjectives seem to constitute a relatively high

percentage of the loanwords (14.47% in terms of types, 10.76% in terms of
tokens), especially in comparison with verbs (7.89% in terms of types, 2.69%
in terms of tokens). It must be added at this point, however, that, as was stated
above, most borrowed adjectives found in the corpus were not ‘independent’
borrowings but only derivatives, which were, nevertheless, counted as separate
loanwords (anglikański derived from anglikanin, internetowy from Internet,
komputerowy from komputer, microsoftowy from Microsoft, multimedialny from
multimedia, wysportowany from sport). If one were to exclude such derivatives,
then only five adjectives would remain in the group (boxowy, hi-fi, impossible,
interaktywny, on-line), i.e. 6.58% of the loanwords found in the corpus in terms
of types and 3.59% in terms of tokens. As one can see from the percentages,
the independently borrowed adjectives (i.e. not derivatives) were considerably
less frequent in the corpus that the adjectives derived from nouns.
As might have been expected, adverbs do not constitute an important group
of borrowings, either (at least in quantitative terms). The class in question
constitutes 3.95% of the loanwords found in the corpus in terms of types and
2.69% in terms of tokens.
Verbs also constitute a minor class in the group of loanwords: only six
types were found, each of which was used only once in the corpus. As a result,
verbs do not constitute a high percentage of the loanwords (7.89% in terms of
types, 2.69% in terms of tokens).
It is also worth noting that there are very few English interjections or
exclamations in the corpus. Altogether, only two were used: wow and OK,
both of which occurred twice in the corpus. However, OK was not really
used as an exclamation borrowed from English, but rather as a direct quotation
of one of the options displayed on a computer screen (the second being
‘cancel’):
(1—2) [Recording 11]

F29: najpierw mi coś napisał że / że niby nie mam takiego słownika czy jest
za za ubogi coś tam jakoś taki taki / yyy wiesz komunikat jakiś tam
M6: aha aha
F29: komunikat wyskoczył / no ale że ja / mmm OK OK / i najpierw^
M6: aha aha
F29: mi się pojawiło / wiesz / że mówię ci że / czy chcesz sprawdzanie też
gramatyczne i ten
Thus it is possible to say that the interjections of the English origin are
virtually non-existent in the corpus, the only exception being wow, used twice
by the same speaker M2. Consequently, pace OŻÓG (2001: 189, 236—237)20,
English interjections and exclamations do not appear to be widely used by
native speakers of Polish.
It is interesting, and perhaps surprising, to note that there was a relatively
high percentage of abbreviations/acronyms in the group of loans found in
the corpus (13.16% in terms of types, 13.45% in terms of tokens). Although they
can be treated as nouns (cf. footnote a in Table 5.5), it is also possible to list them
separately as their character seems to be quite distinct from regular nouns.
As was stated before, nouns predominate in the group of the loanwords
found in the corpus. This predominance becomes even more striking when
the results of the classification (cf. Table 5.6) are compared with the general
classification of the words used in the corpus (i.e. all words, not only
loanwords). With this end in view, a sample of the corpus (consisting of 2,000
words) was carefully analysed and the words appearing in it were classified
according to the parts of speech they represented. The sample consists of first
100 words taken from each of the 20 recordings that constitute the corpus.
The results of the classification are presented in Table 5.7.
Table 5.7 The number of words (taken form a sample of 2,000 words)
belonging to different parts of speech
Tokens
(2,000 in total)
Nouns 269 13.45
Verbs 300 15.00
Adjectives 80 4.00
Adverbs 42 2.10
Abbreviations (acronyms)a 0 0.00
Otherb 1,309 65.45
a Cf. footnote a in Table 5.5.
b This group includes mainly pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions and particles.
20It must be added, however, that OŻÓG’S remarks were connected mainly with the speech of
young Poles, not Poles in general.
Table 5.8 combines the data from Tables 5.6 and 5.7 in order to show
the difference in percentages.
Table 5.8 The comparison of the percentage of different parts of speech in

the corpus sample (2,000 words) and in the group of loanwords
a
Corpus sample Loanwords (225/223 tokens)
Parts of speech
N % N %
Nouns 269 13.45 153 68.61b
Verbs 300 15.00 6 2.69
Adjectives 80 4.00 24 10.76
Adverbs 42 2.10 6 2.69
c
Abbreviations (acronyms) 0 0.00 30 13.45
Otherd 1,309 65.45 4 1.79
d Cf. footnote b in Table 5.7.
As one can see, the difference in percentages is enormous. The borrowed

nouns constitute a very large class among the group of loanwords, especially
when compared with the percentage of nouns among all the words taken from
the corpus sample (68.61% and 13.45% respectively). The borrowed verbs, by
contrast, constitute a surprisingly small group in comparison with
the percentage of the verbs among all the words taken from the corpus sample
(2.69% and 15.00% respectively).
It is perhaps even more surprising that there were no
abbreviations/acronyms found in the corpus sample. As a consequence, it
appears that most of such constructions used in the corpus were of English
origin.
It may also be puzzling that nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs constitute
only 34.55% of the word tokens from the entire sample (2,000 words). When
a small excerpt from the corpus is analysed, however, it becomes evident that
the number of words belonging to other classes (such as e.g. pronouns,
conjunctions, prepositions and particles) is much larger that the one of nouns
(but not pronouns), verbs, adjectives and adverbs. Here are some examples:
M7: tak tak no on tam pilnuje tego parkingu

(one noun, one verb, six words belonging to other classes)
M6: to właśnie chyba była taka godzina / nie / chyba to koło drugiej / czy
jakoś tak
(two nouns, one verb, eleven words belonging to other classes)
F7: moi też chcą na to iść ale na to z nimi nie pójdę bo ja takich filmów nie
lubię
(one noun, four verbs, fourteen words belonging to other classes)
What is more, even when the words belonging to such classes as pronouns,
prepositions, conjunctions, etc. (i.e. not belonging to one of the four main
classes) are not taken into account, nouns still do not constitute the largest
group, as Table 5.9 indicates.
Table 5.9 The number of words (excluding the ones from the ‘other’ group)
belonging to different parts of speech
a
Tokens
(691 in total)
Nouns 269 38.93
Verbs 300 43.42
Adjectives 80 11.58
Adverbs 42 6.08
b
Abbreviations (acronyms) 0 0.00
a Excluding words belonging to the ‘other’ group.
b Cf. footnote a in Table 5.5.
It is interesting to compare now the percentage of nouns (as well as other

parts of speech) in the corpus sample (excluding the words belonging to
the ‘other’ group) and in the group of the loanwords. The difference, although
not as striking as the one shown in Table 5.8, is still considerable, especially
with respect to nouns, verbs and abbreviations, as indicated in Table 5.10.
Table 5.10 The comparison of the percentage of different parts of speech in

the corpus sample (excluding the words belonging to the ‘other’ group) and in
the group of loanwords
a
Corpus sample Loanwords
Parts of speech (691 word tokens) (221/219 tokens)
N % N %
Nouns 269 38.93 153 69.86b
Verbs 300 43.42 6 2.74
Adjectives 80 11.58 24 10.96
Adverbs 42 6.08 6 2.74
Abbreviations (acronyms)c 0 0.00 30 13.70
It must be added at this point that the preponderance of nouns in the group
of loanwords is by no means restricted to Polish. In fact, linguists of various
nationalities have pointed out that nouns are most easily borrowed (cf. section
2.3.1; cf. also FISIAK’S doctoral dissertation, cited in MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995:
54; WHITNEY, 1881; cited in WEINREICH, 1974: 67; HAUGEN, 1950; WEINREICH,
1974; MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995). Moreover, some of the scholars have tried to
explain the tendency in question. As HAUGEN (1950; cited in
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, 1995: 55) notes, for example, the vocabulary of
a language usually contains more nouns than words belonging to other classes.
According to WEINREICH (1974: 56—57; cited also in MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD,
1995: 55), on the other hand, one of the universal causes of lexical innovation
(and thus borrowing) is the need to designate new concepts and things, for
which nouns are used.21 Furthermore, the referents of nouns are ‘more readily
delineable from the environment’ (HUTTAR, 2002). Moreover, nouns are less
integrated structurally (POPLACK et al., 1988: 65) and, as WHITNEY has pointed
out, ‘whatever is more formal or structural in character remains in that degree
free from the intrusion of foreign material’ (WHITNEY, 1881; cited in HAUGEN,
1950: 176). It is interesting, however, that in the corpus the percentage of nouns
in the group of loanwords is still much higher than among all the words used in
the corpus22 (at least in terms of tokens, cf. Tables 5.8 and 5.10). This
corroborates the observation made by HAUGEN (1950) and MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD
(1995: 55).
The next table (5.11) illustrates the relation between the number of
loanwords found in the corpus (in terms of both types and tokens) and the topic
of a given conversation.
As Table 5.11 indicates, the number of the loanwords found in the corpus
seems to depend on the topic of the conversation. This is especially visible in
the case of the borrowings belonging to the area of computers, the Internet and
modern technology. It must be added that some other loans, though not very
numerous, are also topic-dependent, e.g. test is likely to appear in the context
of teaching and learning, being thus connected with the teaching profession.
However, a considerable number of loans do not appear to depend on
the topic of the conversation. Such borrowings either (1) occurred in various
recordings throughout the corpus (e.g. parking, film, pub, non stop, standard,
weekend, dolar) or (2) were used accidentally in a given recording and could
have possibly been used in any other recording (e.g. gadżet, szok, hipis, biznes,
zoo, hobby).
21 This can also be seen in the present corpus, where many of the borrowed words refer to
new devices or concepts, mostly connected with computers, the Internet and modern technology.
22 As was noted before, the statement is formulated on the basis of the corpus sample
consisting of 2,000 words (first 100 words taken from each of the 20 recordings which constitute
the corpus).
Table 5.11 The use of lexical loans in particular recordings

a b
Recording Topic of the conversation List of loans (N)
1 2 3
1 dogs, holidays, sport contests, CD (3), gadżet (1), sponsorować (1), strongman,
fishing strongmen (2), wysportowany (1), [foluwa (1)]
2 school, teachers, pupils *Internet (1), SMS (1), szok (1), test (2), wow (1)
3*** computers, the Internet, computer *boxowy (2), *edytor (2), film (2), impossible
programs (1), *interaktywny (1), *Internet (2), *internetowy
(3), *IP (1), *komputer (4), *mail (2),
*microsoftowy (1), *OEM (2), *serwer (1)
4** student exchange, computers and *mail (8), *mailowo (2), *modem (1), *serwer
e-mail, exams and cheating (1), test (2)
5 acquaintances, family matters, hipis (1), *Internet (1), *komputer (1), parking
working, excursions, holidays (6), parkować (1), pub (2)
6*** computers, computer games, biznes (1), CD (1), *firewall (2), *hand-held (1),
computer magazines, the Internet hip-hop (1), *kartridż (cartridge) (1), *klikać (1),
kompakt (2), *komputer (3), *komputerowy (2),
*multimedialny (2), *net (1), *on-line (3),
parking (1), *PC (3), pub (1), *screen (1),
*serwer (5), test (1), [empetrójka (6)], [erpeg (1)]
7** computers and e-mail, student *CD-ROM (2), dubbing (1), *e-mail (1),
exchange, learning German *komputer (5), *mail (2), serial (1), zoo (2)
8 teaching and learning foreign *mail (1), top (2)
languages
9 a wedding, doing shopping, dysk dżokejc (2), non stop (1), partner (2),
business matters standard (1)
10 school, pupils and teaching, *HTML (1), test (1), wow (1)
doctors and health-care
11** correspondence, computers (esp. *Internet (1), OK (2), zdopingować (1)
using a text processor)
12 family matters, acquaintances, film (1), *komputer (1), non stop (1), strongman,
keeping dogs at home strongmen (2)
13 films, teaching and giving grades, anglikański (1), film (1), standard (1), test (3)
marriages
14* looking for work, doing business, *zip file (1)
computers and the Internet
15 weather, holidays komfort (2), *komputerowy (1), *komputeryzacja
(1), weekend (3), [integrale (1)]
16 looking for work, learning abroad, dolar (3), *Internet (3), *komputerowy (1),
moving to another country standardowo (1), [menago (1)]
17* learning foreign languages, taking hobby (2), *Internet (1), komfort (1), pass (1),
exams *PDF (1), startować (1), test (2), weekend (2)
18** birthdays, films, new CD (1), *CD-ROM (1), dolar (2), DVD (11), film
technologies, software piracy (8), hi-fi (1), *Internet (1), *internetowy (2),
*komputer (4), *komputerowy (2), *mail (1),
*multiplayer (1), non stop (1), *serwer (6),
*single (1), subwoofer (5), [divix (2)]
cont. tab. 5.11

1 2 3
19 grilling and smoking food, camping (kemping) (1)
working in the garden, ticks and
other insects
20 everyday life, cooking and eating, CV (2), grill (1), jacuzzi (2), przetrenować (1), szok
family, taking care of a baby (1), trener (1), trening (1), van (1), weekend (1)
a An asterisk (*) after the number of the recording indicates that the Internet and/or computers were very briefly mentioned
during a given conversation. However, such a recording cannot really be said to deal with the topic of computers. Two
asterisks (**) indicate that the Internet and/or computers (among other topics) were discussed during the conversation in
question; three asterisks (***) indicate that the entire conversation was about computers and/or the Internet.
b The loans preceded by an asterisk belong to the semantic field of computers and the Internet. The forms modelled on
English or German (e.g. empetrójka, menago, foluwa) are given in square brackets. They are not, however, counted as
loanwords in subsequent tables.
c Cf. footnote b in Table 5.3.
The next table (5.12) indicates the number of the loanwords (in terms of
both types and tokens) found in particular recordings. The loans are divided
into two groups: Group A, which is comprised of the loans belonging to no
specific semantic field (or to various semantic fields, with the exception of
computers) and Group B, which consists of the loans belonging to the area of
computers and the Internet.
Table 5.12 The number of types and tokens of lexical loans in particular recordings
Group A Group B Both groups combined
Recordinga
types tokens types tokens types tokens
1 5 8 0 0 5 8
2 4 5 1 1 5 6
3*** 2 3 11 21 13 24
4** 1 2 4 12 5 14
5 4 10 2 2 6 12
6*** 7 8 12 25 19 33
7** 3 4 4 10 7 14
8 1 2 1 1 2 3
9 4 6 0 0 4 6
10 2 2 1 1 3 3
11** 2 3 1 1 3 4
12 3 4 1 1 4 5
13 4 6 0 0 4 6
14* 0 0 1 1 1 1
15 2 5 2 2 4 7
16 2 4 2 4 4 8
17* 6 9 2 2 8 11
18** 7 29 9 19 16 48
19 1 1 0 0 1 1
20 9 11 0 0 9 11
a See footnote a in Table 5.11 for the explanation of the system of asterisks.
As Table 5.12 indicates, the number of lexical loans (in terms of both types
and tokens) is larger in the conversations where the Internet and computers
were discussed. Such a finding is hardly surprising, as one has to bear in mind
that a high percentage of the loanwords found in the corpus belong to
the aforementioned semantic fields. It must be stressed, however, that
the difference is visible only in Group B (and thus A+B), i.e. among the loans
belonging to the area of computers and the Internet. As regards the loans
belonging to other semantic fields (Group A), their number does not appear to
depend on the topic of the conversation. The only exception is a large number
of A-Group loan tokens in Recording 18 (29), but this is due to the repeated
use of the word DVD (11 times), film (8 times) and subwoofer (5 times).
The next table (5.13) shows the number of lexical loans (tokens) as
the percentage of the total number of words, counted separately for each
recording.
Table 5.13 The number of lexical loans (tokens) shown as the percentage of the total number of
words
Lexical loans as % of the total number of
a Total number of Number of lexical
Recording words (tokens of lexical loans ÷ number of
words (tokens) loans (tokens)
words)
1 3,966 8 0.20
2 2,868 6 0.21
3*** 1,620 24 1.48
4** 2,027 14 0.69
5 3,290 12 0.36
6*** 3,654 33 0.90
7** 2,348 14 0.60
8 3,144 3 0.10
9 3,327 6 0.18
10 2,178 3 0.14
11** 2,393 4 0.17
12 3,848 5 0.13
13 1,535 6 0.40
14* 4,060 1 0.02
15 2,229 7 0.31
16 3,895 8 0.21
17* 2,329 11 0.47
18** 3,807 48 1.26
19 3,162 1 0.03
20 4,884 11 0.23
Total 60,564 225 0.37
a See footnote a in Table 5.11 for the explanation of the system of asterisks. Moreover, cf. the analogous table compiled by
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000).
Table 5.14 shows the same data as Table 5.13, but the figures are arranged
according to the percentage of English loanwords in particular recordings.
As a consequence, the table below better illustrates the relation between
the particular recordings and the percentage of lexical borrowings.
Table 5.14 The percentage of loanwords in particular recordings

a
% of the lexical loans Number of the recording
0.02 14*
0.03 19
0.10 8
0.13 12
0.14 10
0.17 11**
0.18 9
0.20 1
0.21 2
0.21 16
0.23 20
0.31 15
0.36 5
0.37 average
0.40 13
0.47 17*
0.60 7**
0.69 4**
0.90 6***
1.26 18**
1.48 3***
As one can see, Table 5.14 indicates clearly that there is a close
correspondence between the topic of the conversation (especially when
the Internet and computers have been discussed) and the number of loanwords
(tokens), expressed as the percentage of the total number of running words of
a given recording (cf. also Tables 5.12 and 5.13). As regards the percentage,
almost all of the conversations connected with the Internet and/or computers
were above the average. Such a tendency cannot thus be accidental, but it
shows clearly that the semantic field of computers and the Internet (in spoken
Polish) is particularly rich in lexical loans of English origin. As one will see,
a similar tendency is visible in the case of semantic loans (see Chapter 6). It
must be underlined once more, however, that the topic of the conversation does
not appear to have a significant influence on the number of loanwords
belonging to other semantic fields or to general Polish (cf. Table 5.13).
6.2 General description of the semantic loans found in the corpus ½ 93
Chapter 6
SEMANTIC LOANS FOUND IN THE CORPUS
6.1 Introduction
The previous chapter concentrated on the lexical loans found in the corpus,
whereas the aim of the present chapter is to describe and analyse semantic
loans.
The methodology used for describing and discussing semantic borrowings
found in the corpus is similar to the one used by such linguists as DUNAJ et al.
(1999), MARKOWSKI (1992a, 1999), WASZAKOWA (1995) and
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000). First, the corpus was carefully analysed and
searched for words which were used in new contexts, i.e. other than
encountered so far. Second, the meaning of a given Polish word was checked in
the new dictionary of contemporary Polish (Uniwersalny słownik języka
polskiego, ed. by DUBISZ, 2003, abbreviated to USJP) and, for comparative
purposes, in the older Polish dictionary (Słownik języka polskiego, ed. by
SZYMCZAK, 1982—1983, abbreviated to SJP). If a given meaning of the word
(i.e. the one in which the word was used in the corpus) was not included in
the dictionary, particularly in the newer one, then it was assumed that the word
is a semantic neologism. Third, the meanings of an English counterpart
(cf. section 6.3) of the Polish word were analysed and compared with
the senses of the Polish word. For the purpose of the comparison, both English
and Polish monolingual dictionaries were used.1 The details about Polish
dictionaries are given above; as for the English ones, the following were used:
Oxford Dictionary of English, 2nd edition (ed. by SOANES and STEVENSON,
1 According to SMÓŁKOWA, monolingual dictionaries constitute the major source of
information for a linguist dealing with lexical and semantic neologisms. Additional information
sources include dictionaries of foreign words, encyclopedias, and bilingual dictionaries
(SMÓŁKOWA, 1997: 258).
94 ½ Chapter 6: Semantic loans found in the corpus
2003, abbreviated to ODE), Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current

English, 6th edition (by HORNBY, ed. by WEHMEIER, 2000, abbreviated to
OALD) and Collins Cobuild English Dictionary for Advanced Learners (ed. by
SINCLAIR, 2001, abbreviated to CCED). Additionally, the results of
the comparison were confronted with English-Polish and Polish-English
bilingual dictionaries (mainly Wielki słownik angielsko-polski PWN-Oxford and
Wielki słownik polsko-angielski PWN-Oxford, ed. by LINDE-USIEKNIEWICZ,
2004a, 2004b, abbreviated to WSAP and WSPA respectively). The crucial
thing here was to decide if there was a correspondence between the new
meaning or meanings of the Polish word (the one or ones appearing in
the corpus) and the meaning or meanings of its English counterpart given in
English dictionaries. If so, then it seemed reasonable to assume that
the emergence of a new meaning of a Polish word had been triggered (or at
least intensified) by English2 (or, to be more precise, by imperfect translations
of English words and phrases; cf. also section 6.3 for the description of
the presumptive process of introducing semantic borrowings into spoken
Polish). Consequently, such a word was counted as a semantic loan and
included in the present chapter. Additionally, it was determined if the word
was used in new collocations, unheard of before. The entire process is
illustrated in Diagram 6.1.3
The methodology used for analysing semantic loans was thus inductive
rather than deductive. In other words, first the particular instances of semantic
borrowing were identified and analysed and then the general rules governing
the process in question were inferred. For the sake of clarity, however,
the general facts concerning the process of semantic borrowing are placed in
sections 6.2 and 6.3, i.e. before the discussion of individual semantic loans
(section 6.4). The last section of the present chapter (6.5) is concerned mostly,
but not exclusively, with statistical information relating to the use of semantic
borrowings in the corpus.
2 This is generally in line with the findings of MARKOWSKI (2004: 39), who also postulates
that it is reasonable to assume that a given Polish word is a semantic loan when there is
a correspondence between its new meaning and the older meaning of its English (or other
foreign-language) counterpart.
3 Diagram 6.1 has also been presented and briefly discussed in ZABAWA (2007b: 157—158).
6.1 Introduction ½ 95
A Polish word used in a new

context, i.e. unseen/unheard-of
before (or seen/heard rarely)
The meaning(s) of the word

is/are checked in
the dictionaries of Polish,
e.g. USJP and SJP
The meaning(s) of the English
counterpart of the Polish word
Is the new meaning of NO is/are checked in
the word (i.e. the one that the dictionaries of English,
appeared in the corpus) e.g. OED and OALD
included in the dictionary?
Does (one of) the meaning(s)

YES of the English word given in
the dictionary correspond to
It is reasonable to assume that the new meaning of the Polish
that the word is not a semantic word (i.e. the one that
borrowing or it belongs to appeared in the corpus)?
the group of older (and
possibly well-assimilated)
semantic loans
YES NO
It is reasonable to assume that It is reasonable to assume that

the emergence of the new the Polish word is a semantic
meaning of the Polish word neologism, but not a semantic
has been influenced (or at loan
least intensified) by English
The word is treated as The word is briefly mentioned

a semantic loan and discussed in section 6.4.40
in the present chapter
Diagram 6.1 The procedure used for finding semantic loans in the corpus
6.2 General description of the semantic loans found

in the corpus
Altogether, there are 44 types of semantic loans found in the corpus (158
tokens), discussed in detail in sections 6.4.2—6.4.39. They can be divided into
two main groups: (1) belonging to no specific semantic field (or to various
semantic fields, with the exception of computers) and (2) belonging to
the semantic area of computers and the Internet.4 The first group comprises
the following words: absolutnie, album, cyfrowy, dinozaur, dokładnie, globalny,
kasa, obrazek, opcja, operować, partner, profesjonalnie, promocja, super, test,
whereas the second consists of the following ones: adres (adresat), ikona,
inteligentny, karta, klawiatura, konsola (konsolowy), konto, list, ładować,
pakiet, piracki (piractwo, pirat), poczta, rozpakować, sieć, słownik,
strona, transfer, wirus, wczytać/wczytywać, wejść/wchodzić, wyjść/wychodzić,
zainstalować (zainstalowany, instalacja), zawiesić. Moreover, the corpus
contains some other semantic neologisms whose emergence results probably
from the internal development of Polish; the English language, however, may
have intensified such processes. This group comprises the following words:
dojść (dochodzić, doszło), wysłać (wysyłać, wysłane, wysyłacz), przysłać
(przysyłać), przesłać (przesyłać), kawiarenka, oryginalny (oryginał), system,
ściągać (ściąganie), stacjonarny, gazeta, mega, kilo, chodzić, komórka, plik,
załącznik. The overall analysis of those words, including the description of
three older semantic loans connected with the sphere of computers (program,
gra/grać, dysk) is given at the end of the chapter, section 6.4.40.
Most of the semantic loans found in the corpus are semantic extensions,
i.e. their meaning has been extended, probably under the influence of English,
but some words display also certain characteristics of a semantic shift
understood in the present book as an extension of meaning followed by
a gradual disappearance of the traditional sense (as in the case of the words
piracki and konsola, see sections 6.4.23.b and 6.4.14 respectively; the term
‘semantic shift’ is used in historical linguistics in a similar sense, cf. e.g.
MOLENCKI, 2003: 76). The third type of change, a semantic restriction, i.e.
the restriction of the meaning of a word, probably under the influence of
English, was not detected in the corpus.5
4 In fact, two words, namely opcja and obrazek, can be said to belong simultaneously
to both groups. In general, such words are discussed within the first group, i.e. as semantic
loans belonging to general Polish. A similar division of semantic loans was used by
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000).
5 The terms ‘semantic extension/restriction (narrowing)/shift’ were used by various
linguists, cf. e.g. OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000).

6.2 General description of the semantic loans found in the corpus ½ 97
It must be noted at this point that it is often difficult, if not impossible, to

determine whether the emergence of a given semantic neologism resulted from
the internal development of the Polish language or from the influence of
English (or other foreign language). As was noted earlier, however, if
a semantic change (extension, narrowing/restriction or shift) in Polish is
analogous to the one that happened earlier in English (or an English word was
used in a given meaning from the beginning) then it is reasonable to assume
that the change in Polish was triggered (or at least intensified) by English (for
the summary of the criteria used to distinguish between the two phenomena in
question, cf. WITALISZ, 2007: 84—89; cf. also MARKOWSKI, 2004: 39).
Moreover, it is usually not easy to state when a new meaning of the word came
into existence (cf. also SMÓŁKOWA, 1997: 257—258).
Most of the semantic loans, as in the case of lexical borrowings, belong to
the class of nouns, as Tables 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 show.6
Table 6.1 The number of semantic loans belonging to different parts of speech (Group A:
semantic loans belonging to no specific semantic field)
Parts of speech
Types (15 in total)
8 1 2 3 1
Loans
album, dinozaur, kasa, operować cyfrowy, absolutnie, superc
obrazek,a opcja,b partner globalny dokładnie,
promocja, test profesjonalnie
53.33 6.67 13.33 20.00 6.67
a The word obrazek is included in both tables (6.1 and 6.2).
b The word opcja is also included in both tables (6.1 and 6.2).
c Super can play a variety of functions; it can be used as a noun, adjective, adverb or as a bound morpheme (see section
6.4.31).
It must be noted that it is sometimes difficult to determine which form of

a given semantic loan is a base form (i.e. which was borrowed first) and which
is only a derivative. The answer is quite straightforward in the case of e.g.
the words konsola/konsolowy (see section 6.4.14 for details), where konsolowy
is clearly derived from konsola (used in the new meaning), but it is more
difficult in the case of such words as pirat/piractwo/piracki (see section 6.4.23
for details). It seems that piracki was the first word used in the new meaning
(cf. the computer magazines issued in the 1980s and 1990s), and only later did
6
The tables do not include the semantic neologisms discussed briefly at the end of
the present chapter (section 6.4.40).
Table 6.2 The number of semantic loans belonging to different parts of speech (Group B:
semantic loans belonging to the semantic field of computers and the Internet)
Parts of speech
Types (31 in total)
20 7 4 0 0
Loans
adres, adresat,a ikona, ładować, rozpakować, inteligentny, — —
instalacja, karta, klawiatura, wczytać (wczytywać), konsolowy,
konsola, konto, list, obrazek, wejść (wchodzić), piracki,
opcja, pakiet, piractwo, pirat, wyjść (wychodzić), zainstalowany
poczta, sieć, słownik, strona, zainstalować, zawiesić
transfer, wirus
64.52 22.58 12.90 0.00 0.00
a For the sake of clarity, derivatives (e.g. adresat derived from adres) are counted as separate words.
Table 6.3 The number of semantic loans belonging to different parts of speech (groups
A and B combined)
Parts of speech
a
Types (44 in total )
26 8 6 3 1
59.09 18.18 13.64 6.82 2.27
a Here the words opcja and obrazek are counted only once. As in the previous case, derivatives are counted as
separate words.
pirat and piractwo appear in the new meaning.7 Hence, for the sake of clarity,
it was decided to list derivatives as separate entries. It must thus be underlined
that the division of the loans into different parts of speech is in some cases not
definitive.
Nevertheless, it is apparent that the percentage of nouns is much higher
when compared to other parts of speech. This predominance is roughly
the same as in the case of lexical loans (see section 5.3). It must also be noted
that the change of meaning is much more subtle in the case of verbs and
adjectives than nouns. As for most of the verbs, it is not really the meaning
sensu stricto that is changed but rather the possible collocations of the word
(i.e. the range of nouns with which the verb may be used), as in operować or
wyjść/wychodzić (for details see sections 6.4.20 and 6.4.37 respectively). As for
7
This is in opposition to WITALISZ’S view; she claims that pirate was the first form used in
the new meaning (2007: 276).
6.3 The process of introducing semantic loans into spoken informal Polish... ½ 99
adjectives, in three cases out of four (the only exception being the form
piracki8), the change in meaning was quite subtle. The situation is different in
the case of adverbs, as in two cases out of three (absolutnie and dokładnie) it
is not really the meaning that was changed, but rather the function (for details
see Diagram 6.2 and sections 6.4.2 and 6.4.7).
In general, the reasons why nouns predominate among the semantic
borrowings are virtually the same as in the case of lexical loans (cf. section
5.3): nouns are less integrated structurally and at the same time they ‘carry
most lexical content’ (POPLACK et al., 1988: 65). They acquire new meanings
easier because they are ‘semantically more independent of their syntagmatic
context than are adjectives’ (HUTTAR, 2002). Moreover, they are less complex
semantically and their referents are ‘more readily delineable from
the environment’ (HUTTAR, 2002). All of these factors appear to contribute to
the fact that the class of nouns is the most common not only within the group
of lexical loans, but within the one of semantic loans as well.
6.3 The process of introducing semantic loans

into spoken informal Polish (a hypothesis)9
It appears that most of the semantic loans (particularly those belonging to

the area of computers and the Internet) are introduced first into written Polish
(cf. e.g. words in the commands appearing on a computer screen or in
newspapers and magazines, especially in the articles written not by Polish
journalists but translated from English) or into written-to-be-spoken Polish
(cf. e.g. words in television films and series, esp. American ones). It can be
argued here that English words are often translated into Polish by means of
primary counterparts.10
According to ARABSKI, who used the term in relation to interlanguage,
a primary counterpart is
the equivalent which in the process of foreign language learning is acquired

to render the common meaning of a given L1 lexical item. (ARABSKI, 1979:
137)
8 In fact, as was stated above, it is unclear whether the semantic borrowings

pirat/piractwo/piracki should be classified as belonging to the class of adjectives or nouns.
9 A summary of the author’s hypothesis concerning English semantic loans in Polish was
presented in ZABAWA (2007b).

10 This is a revised version of the theory presented by the author in ZABAWA (2007c).
an item which in IL [=interlanguage] represents the whole group (list) of L2

translation equivalents and thus causes underdifferentiation errors. (ARABSKI,
1979: 139)
the lexical or grammatical construction transferring L1 construction into IL.

(ARABSKI, 1979: 142)
As for examples, ARABSKI states that English in may be acquired as

a primary counterpart of Polish w or English have — as a primary counterpart
of Polish mieć. As a result, a learner may produce erroneous sentences, such as
My husband could not help me in the housework (instead of correct with
the housework), Marriage in the time of study can be a new problem (instead
of correct marriage during one’s studies), I have twenty years (instead of
correct I am twenty years old) (ARABSKI, 1997a: 46—47).
It seems that the notion of primary counterparts can be useful in accounting
for the emergence of semantic loans in contemporary Polish. As was mentioned
before, many English words are first carelessly translated into Polish by means
of their primary counterparts (i.e. the most ‘obvious’ translation, often
resembling the original English words in spelling) and only then do the Polish
words start to be used in new meanings in informal everyday conversations. It
is important to note, however, that the process of translation goes here in
the opposite direction, i.e. not from L1 into L2 (as was in ARABSKI’S
understanding of the term), but from L2 into L1.
The presumptive process is shown in Diagram 6.2. This diagram illustrates
how the Polish word dokładnie, originally used as an adverb in the meaning of
‘in a precise and accurate way; thoroughly, carefully, accurately’, came to be
used in the new meaning, functioning as a reply emphasizing that something is
correct or agreeing with what somebody has just said. Such meanings are most
probably introduced into informal spoken Polish due to careless translations of
(1) films and series, commonly broadcast by the Polish television and (2) press
articles, published in popular magazines. As for examples, the phrase ‘So you
want to go with him?’ ‘Exactly’ is fairly likely to be rendered as ‘Więc chcesz
z nim iść?’ ‘Dokładnie’ rather than oczywiście, jasne, właśnie tak (see section
6.4.7, cf. also MARKOWSKI, 1992a: 157).
As one can see, dokładnie has not only acquired a new meaning, but also
a different function. Consequently, it seems more appropriate to use the term
functional extension11 rather than semantic one. A similar process can be
noticed in the case of the word absolutnie (see section 6.4.2) and (partly) super
(see section 6.4.31).
11 The term ‘functional extension’ has been used here independently of other linguists. It
should be noted, nevertheless, that the term was used by various authors (cf. e.g. YIN, www or
HÄCKER, www), in the meaning similar (but not identical) to the one used by the present author.
English multifunctional Primary counterparts Polish unifunctional word

word dokładnie ‘in a precise,
exactly accurate, meticulous way’
Meaning similar to Function absent in Polish

Polish, i.e. ‘in i.e. used as a reply
a precise way, emphasizing that
precisely’ something is correct or
agreeing with what
somebody has just said
The word
appears in this meaning
(e.g. in a TV series) and must be
translated
Translation using Polish word dokładnie used

in a new function (as a reply
the primary emphasizing that something
counterpart is correct or agreeing with
what somebody has just
said)
The word in this

function is repeated,
and finally starts to be used
in spoken language
Polish
multifunctional
word dokładnie
Fuctional Old meaning: ‘in

New function
extension a precise, accurate,
(used as a reply
meticulous way’
emphasizing that
something is
correct or agreeing
with what somebody
has just said)
Diagram 6.2 The presumptive process of introducing the semantic loan dokładnie
Other words, for example belonging to the semantic field of computers and
the Internet, appear to be introduced in a similar way. Diagram 6.3 shows how
the Polish lexeme ikona, originally used only in the meaning of ‘a painting of
Christ or another holy figure, used in the Byzantine and other Eastern
Churches’ (cf. SJP),12 came to be used in the new meaning of ‘a small symbol,
representing a program or a file, visible on a computer screen’ (see section
6.4.9; cf. also OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 97). It seems that the extension
is due to the translation of the original English term icon by means of its
Polish primary counterpart ikona (other possible equivalents of English icon,
i.e. idol, symbol are not used in connection with computers, but e.g. She is
a feminist icon is translated as Ona jest symbolem feminizmu; WSAP, 2004:
584). The mechanism is similar to the one presented in Diagram 6.2. Here,
however, the process has gone a step further: not only has the word ikona
acquired a new meaning, but its original meaning (‘a painting of a holy
person’) is beginning to be only secondary (at least for certain groups of
people). As a consequence, it seems quite probable that in the future the new
meaning of ikona will prevail and the traditional meaning may be used in very
restricted contexts or even disappear altogether among certain groups of
speakers.13 This is also connected with the fact that the young generation is in
general more likely to talk about modern technology (e.g. computers) than
religion, especially the one they do not know much about. This, however, is
a matter for sociology and psychology rather than linguistics.
It may thus be argued that the emergence of semantic loans should not be
perceived only as ‘mere additions to an inventory’ (a WEINREICH’S phrase used
with respect to lexical loans) but also as certain deeper changes, such as
involving the disappearance of the traditional meanings.
It must be noted that the process applies not only to words with identical or
similar spelling and/or pronunciation in English and Polish. A similar process
has taken place e.g. in the case of the word sieć (which is a primary
counterpart of the English form net). Thus the Net (meaning ‘the Internet’) is
often rendered in Polish as sieć or sometimes Sieć (see section 6.4.28).
The process in question is illustrated in Diagram 6.4.
It may thus be said that the process illustrated by Diagrams 6.2—6.4
applies to all three groups: (1) words with identical spelling in English and
Polish, (2) words with similar spelling (and sometimes also pronunciation) and
(3) words with completely different spelling (see Table 6.4). What follows is
that the extension of meaning of Polish words does not really depend on
the degree of the similarity between the spelling and pronunciation of them and
of their English counterparts.
12 Diagram 6.3 has also been presented and briefly discussed in ZABAWA (2007b: 160).
13 It must be added here that the part of Diagram 6.3 below the broken line is only
a hypothesis of the development of the word in the future, not the illustration of the actual state.
Primary counterparts Polish monosemous

English polysemous
word ikona
word icon
‘a painting of a holy person’
Meaning similar to Meaning absent

Polish, i.e. in Polish, i.e. ‘a small
‘a painting of symbol on
a holy person’ a computer screen’
The word
appears in this meaning
(e.g. on a computer screen)
and must be translated
Translation using Polish word ikona used

in the new meaning
the primary (‘a small symbol on
counterpart a computer screen’)
The word in
this meaning is repeated by
other writers and translators, and
finally starts to be used in spoken
language as well
Polish polysemous
word ikona
Old meaning: New meaning:

STAGE 1
‘a painting of a holy ‘a small symbol on
semantic extension
person’ a computer screen’
STAGE 2 This
semantic shift meaning starts to This meaning
(a hypothesis) disappear (eg. in the language becomes more common than
of the younger the old meaning
generation)
Polish monosemous word

ikona ‘a small symbol on
a computer screen’
Diagram 6.3 The presumptive process of introducing the semantic loan ikona
Primary counterparts Polish word sieć

English polysemous
‘a piece of net used for
word
catching fish’, ‘a network’,
net/the Net
etc.
Meanings similar
to Polish: ‘a piece
Meaning absent in Polish,
of net used for
i.e. ‘the Internet’
fishing’,
‘a network’, etc.
The word appears

in this meaning and must be
translated
Translation using
Polish word sieć (often
the primary rendered as Sieć) used
counterpart in a new meaning
(‘the Internet’)
The word in this

meaning is repeated,
and finally starts to be used
in spoken language
Polish
polysemous word sieć
(and sometimes Sieć)
Old meanings:
Semantic extension ‘a piece of net used New meaning:
for fishing’, ‘the Internet’
‘a network’, etc.
Diagram 6.4 The presumptive process of introducing the semantic loan sieć
Table 6.4 The degree of similarity between Polish and English primary counterparts
English-Polish
% of the total
primary Types Loans
group
counterparts
With identical 5 album, partner, super, test, transfer 11.36
spelling
With similar 23 absolutnie — absolutely, adres — address, adresat — 52.27
spelling addresee, dinozaur — dinosaur, globalny — global,
ikona — icon, instalacja — installation, inteligentny —
intelligent, karta — card, kasa — cash, konsola —
console, konsolowy — console, opcja — option,
operować — operate, pakiet — package/bundle, piracki
— pirate(d), piractwo — piracy, pirat — pirate,
profesjonalnie — professionally, promocja — promotion,
wirus — virus, zainstalować — install, zainstalowany —
installed
With different 16 cyfrowy — digital, dokładnie — exactly, klawiatura — 36.36
spelling keyboard, konto — account, list — letter, ładować —
load, obrazek — picture, poczta — mail, rozpakować —
unpack, sieć — net, słownik — dictionary, strona —
page, wchodzić/wejść — enter, wczytać/wczytywać —
read, wyjść/wychodzić — come out, zawiesić — hang
It may generally be hypothesized that the semantic changes result probably

from the influence of English when English-Polish counterparts have identical
or similar spelling. In the case of the counterparts with different spelling,
the changes in the meaning of Polish words may also result from the influence
of the English counterpart, but the role of the internal development of Polish
seems to be bigger.
It must be added at this point that there may be exceptions to the processes
described above: file, used in the sense of ‘data stored in computer memory, or
on a floppy disk, under a particular name’ (cf. ODE), was not translated into
Polish as teczka, skoroszyt, segregator or kartoteka, but an existing Polish word
plik ‘a wad’ has begun to be used in a new meaning. Plik has thus become
a semantic neologism, but not really a semantic loan (the words of this kind
found in the corpus are briefly mentioned in section 6.4.40).
6.4 The analysis of the semantic loans found in the corpus
6.4.1 Introduction
The semantic loans found in the corpus are discussed in detail in sections
6.4.2—6.4.39. Moreover, a brief overall analysis of some other semantic
neologisms is given in section 6.4.40.
6.4.2 Absolutnie
According to USJP, the word absolutnie is an adverb derived from the adjective
absolutny, used in the following senses: (1) ‘completely, totally, absolutely’,
e.g. to się absolutnie niczym nie różni ‘there is completely no difference’,
(2) ‘unquestionably, absolutely’, e.g. wygrał absolutnie ‘he won
unquestionably’, (3) (as a philosophical term) ‘not viewed in relation to other
things’, e.g. twierdzenie absolutnie prawdziwe ‘an absolutely true statement’
and (4) (as a political term) ‘despotically, absolutely’, e.g. rządzić absolutnie
‘to rule despotically/absolutely’.
The word absolutnie was used once in the corpus in the above-mentioned
meaning (sense 1):
(1) [Recording 8]
M6: znaczy / absolutnie początkujących z angielskiego to raczej nie ma / no
bo jakieś tam słowa^
F29: no no
M6: to zna dzisiaj każdy
Nowadays, however, absolutnie is sometimes used as a reply, agreeing,

usually in an emphatic way, with what somebody has just said, or giving
someone permission to do something (cf. WITALISZ, 2007: 218). The word is
thus an example of a functional extension (cf. section 6.3). It is quite possible
that the extension has been triggered by the English word absolutely, cf. one of
the definitions of the word given by OALD: ‘used to emphasize that you agree
with sb, or give sb permission to do sth: “They could have told us, couldn’t
they?” “Absolutely!”, “Can we leave a little early?” “Absolutely!”’ (cf. also
MARKOWSKI, 1992a: 156—157).
6.4 The analysis of the semantic loans found in the corpus ½ 107
The word was used once in the corpus in the above-discussed extended sense:
(2) [Recording 5]
M6: {person} ty słodzisz?
F24: nie nie
M8: nawet zdjęcie kiedyś mioł jak on na tym balkonie
F24: po prostu jo nie słodza
M6: nie słodzisz?
M8: a jego kolega notabene^
F24: absolutnie
M8: ten chyba co mo tyn pub
As one can see, absolutnie is used as a reply, thus conforming to

the pattern of its English counterpart. Interestingly enough, however, the word
is used in the negative sense (słodzisz? — nie słodzę — nie słodzisz? —
absolutnie > absolutnie nie słodzę ‘I take absolutely no sugar’), being thus
roughly equivalent to English absolutely not (cf. the example given by OALD:
‘Was it any good?’ ‘No, absolutely not’). Although the exclamation was used
only once in the corpus, it can be observed elsewhere that in everyday spoken
Polish the word in question is increasingly often used in the negative sense.
As MARKOWSKI (1992a: 157) notes, it would be natural to expect in such
situations an exclamation absolutnie nie ‘absolutely not’ rather than just
absolutnie, adding that such a change is difficult to explain. It seems, however,
that it may have been influenced by the English grammar; to be more specific,
by the rule of single negation (as opposed to Polish, where double and multiple
negatives are commonly used; cf. FISIAK et al., 1978: 188—197 for the
discussion on negation): when the phrase preceding the exclamation absolutnie
contains an overt negative word, then absolutnie means usually absolutnie nie
(as in Example 2); when the phrase contains no overt negative word, then
absolutnie can mean both, but the negative interpretation seems to be slightly
more likely nowadays, cf. the following made-up examples:
(a)
Czy mogę pójść z tobą?
Absolutnie (ambiguous; it is the stress, intonation and/or gestures that will
make the meaning clear in spoken language)
(literally: ‘Can I go with you?’ ‘Absolutely’)
(b)
To nie mogę iść z tobą?
Absolutnie (negative sense, i.e. equivalent to absolutnie nie)
(literally: ‘So I can’t go with you?’ ‘Absolutely’)
The new usage of absolutnie has not been noted so far in USJP.
6.4.3 Adres, adresat
Traditionally, the word adres was used in the sense of ‘the particulars of
the place where someone lives or an institution is situated’, and, figuratively,
‘the place where someone lives’14 (cf. SJP). Today the word is sometimes used,
under the influence of the English form address, in three new meanings:
(1) ‘a string of characters which identifies a destination for e-mail messages’,
(2) ‘a number that identifies a particular computer connected to the Internet;
an IP address’, (3) ‘a string of characters which identifies a particular website’
(cf. also OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 96).
Altogether, the word in question was used ten times in the corpus. Five
instances of the use of the word, however, refer to the old meaning of ‘the
details where someone lives’.
As for the extended meaning, the word was used four times in the first
sense (‘a string of characters which identifies a destination for e-mail
messages’):
(1) [Recording 4]
M6: chyba coś źle / chyba mmm może coś źle zapisałeś se ten adres
(2) [Recording 4]
M6: eee raczej się chyba nie zdarza że maile nie dochodzą / no jeśli dobrze
wpiszesz adres / się tam nie pomylisz / w żadnej literze / no to raczej się
chyba nie zdarza żeby nie doszły
(3) [Recording 7]
F29: wiem ale / przez komputer myślałam właśnie / a ona wiesz że prześle bo
ja jej adres jeszcze wcześniej podałam
(4) [Recording 7]
F29: eee on przyjechał / i mmm miał te adresy / nie / i ja
M6: no
F29: ja mówię / to chociaż takie podziękowanie po niemiecku napiszę że
It must be noted that Example 3 is ambiguous, as the word adres may refer
to both old and extended meaning and the context does not seem to clarify it.
Nevertheless, it is more probable that the word is used in the new sense, hence
it is included in the list.
14 The English definitions are formulated with the help of or quoted from English
monolingual dictionaries, primarily Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, 6th edition (by
A.S. HORNBY, ed. by WEHMEIER, 2000) and Oxford Dictionary of English, 2nd edition (ed. by
SOANES and STEVENSON, 2003).
Despite the new meaning of the word, no completely new collocation has
emerged: such constructions as zapisać sobie adres ‘to write down an address’
(Example 1) or podać adres ‘to give an address’ (Example 3) can be freely
used with the word in the old sense. The only exception is Example 2, wpisać
adres ‘to write (down) an address, to put down an address’. In the traditional
sense of the word adres, one would perhaps use the form napisać, rather than
wpisać, e.g. napisać adres (na kopercie) ‘to write an address (on an envelope)’.
Moreover, the word was used once in the corpus in the second new
meaning (i.e. ‘a number that identifies a particular computer connected to
the Internet’):
(5) [Recording 3]
M14: no oni / czepiają się w firmach / nie takich prywatnych / no to /
prywatnych to się czepiają jeżeli ktoś / udostępnia na przykład jakieś filmy
adresy IP / coś takiego
As one can see, the word was used in the collocation adres IP, which
seems to be a direct translation of the English construction an IP address.
The fact that the component IP was added shows that this use of the word
adres is not very common in spoken Polish, even when computers and
the Internet are discussed. It appears that in such a conversation the word adres
is primarily associated with ‘a string of characters which identifies either
(1) a destination for e-mail messages or (2) a particular website’.
The third extended sense, i.e. ‘a string of characters which identifies
a particular website’, though quite common in computer magazines, is
non-existent in the corpus. Instead, the word strona was used in this meaning
(see section 6.4.30).
Analogically, the word adresat ‘an addressee; a person that a letter, parcel
etc. is addressed to’ can also be used in the new sense (‘a person to whom
e-mail is sent’). Such a form was used once in the corpus. It must be noted at
this point that Polish dictionaries (e.g. USJP) define the word adresat in
the traditional way (cf. USJP: ‘the person to whom a letter, or another parcel is
addressed to’), whereas English dictionaries define the word addressee in
a general way that can include e-mail as well (cf. ODE: ‘the person to whom
something is addressed’).
The new meaning of the word adres has only partly been included in USJP,
namely only the second new sense is given as one of the definitions of
the word. The first and third new senses are included only in the set phrase
adres internetowy ‘an Internet address’. The new sense of the word adresat has
not so far been included in the dictionary in question.
The word adres appeared also in OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC’S corpus (2000:
96—97). It seems, however, that in her corpus the word was used
predominantly in the third new meaning (in contrast to the corpus gathered by
the present author, where no such usage appeared).
6.4.4 Album
Traditionally, the word album was used in two main senses: (1) ‘an album;
a blank book for the insertion of photographs, stamps, pictures etc.’ and
(2) ‘a coffee-table book’ (cf. SJP)15. Nowadays the word is sometimes used,
most probably under the influence of English album, to denote ‘a collection of
recordings issued on a cassette or CD’ (cf. also WITALISZ, 2007), thus being
an antonym of singiel ‘a single’. This use is already fairly well assimilated in
Polish.
Altogether, the word in question was used four times, three out of which
referred to the new meaning:
M7: jeden cały album muzyczny ale dwupłytowy
M6: album aha to cała płyta
(3) [Recording 6]
M7: no nazwa jaka cię interesuje nazwa piosenki no i do użytkowników /
nowe albumy wszystko
Additionally, the word appeared once in the old meaning of ‘a blank book
for photographs’.
As one can see, the word may also refer to a collection of songs issued on
more than one CD (cf. Examples 1 and 2). Moreover, a new collocation has
appeared (album muzyczny, literally: ‘a music album’).
The new meaning of the word has been noted in USJP.
6.4.5 Cyfrowy
According to USJP, the word cyfrowy is an adjective derived from cyfra, used
in the sense of ‘relating to or connected with digits/figures/numbers’. However,
15 Additionally, the word album can also be used in Polish in some technical contexts, to
denote e.g. ‘a student register’, ‘a sketchbook’ or ‘an autograph album’ (cf. SJP).
the word was used several times in the corpus in the new meaning of ‘using
a system of receiving and sending information as a series of the numbers one
and zero, showing that an electronic signal is there or is not there’ (OALD).
What follows, is the fact that the word is mostly used in connection with
modern technical devices, such as cameras, video cameras, tuners, tuner
amplifiers, etc. The lexeme in question was used six times in the corpus during
two conversations (Recordings number 7 and 11), when cameras and
photographs were discussed:
(1) [Recording 7]
F29: napisała że zdjęcia mi prześle / bo tam ona robiła / mmm tam właśnie /
mmm też / jakimś tam chyba aparatem cyfrowym / też dzieciom / nie /
jestem ciekawa
(2) [Recording 7]
M6: mmm znaczy ja mam tylko taki aparat tradycyjny / ale właśnie mój brat
sobie niedawno sobie cyfrowy^
F29: mhm i
M6: właśnie też to sobie podłączył do komputera
(3) [Recording 7]
F29: wiesz co / ja na przykład moi moi znajomi / yyy byli / na na wakacjach
w zeszłym roku / mieli też cyfrowy / to nam zgrali na płycie / nie / na
CD-ROM-ie^
(4) [Recording 7]
M6: a tak no to / jak jak wywołujesz / jak mmm ma się ten aparat tradycyjny
/ jak ja mam / no to wiadomo jak to z reguły jest / tam się robi / no niby się
wydaje że to jakieś tam inne ujęcia potem sprawdzam [laughter 1 sec.]
dziesięć zdjęć to jest praktycznie to samo / tam minimalnie tu kawałek muru
więcej a tam / to się niby wydaje że niby inne zdjęcia a to wszystko potem
[pause 2 sec.] wygląda tak samo
F29: no i klepię tak / i mówię że że wiesz / jakby nie wyszło to przynajmniej
na tej cyfrowej od razu sobie sprawdzę i robię następne a tu jednak / to jest
yyy mmm mówię to jest fajna sprawa żeby to mieć kiedyś / no [pause 2 sec.]
od razu w razie czego się jest w tym mmm miejscu / bo wiesz nie wiadomo
czy się gdzieś wróci znowuż / nie / jak się kiedyś gdzieś tam wyjeżdża

F29: to ja mówię / on mówi no jakieś duże [together 2 sec.] no / jakieś duże /
że tam / dwa mega czy jakieś jedne / nie / no i te zdjęcia przesłała / wiesz /
i potem no ja jej napisałam
M6: te cyfrowe
F29: no / chociaż niektóre takie / bym powiedziała jak na cyfrowe to takie nie
bardzo no ale
As was mentioned above, the word in the new meaning is used mainly to
describe technical devices. Thus, in Example 1, cyfrowy is used in
the collocation aparat cyfrowy16 ‘a digital camera’; in Examples 2 and 3
the word is used independently, but it clearly refers to a camera as well
(the word aparat is left out here, as the meaning is clear from the context and
the general topic of the conversation). The noun in Example 4 is omitted as
well; nevertheless, the topic of the conversation suggests that the word refers
again to a camera (although the gender of the adjective (na tej cyfrowej,
i.e. feminine) suggests that it may refer to a video camera, which is feminine in
Polish17). Finally, in Examples 5 and 6 the form in question refers to
photographs.
Interestingly enough, the last occurrence of the word (see Example 6)
suggests that the word cyfrowy may have strong positive connotations.
The speaker F29 states that some of the photographs are not of a very high
quality considering the fact that they have been made with a digital camera.
Consequently, cyfrowy suggests sophistication and high quality. This is also
confirmed by the popularity of the word in e.g. store catalogues and leaflets.
Moreover, technically speaking, the antonym of the word cyfrowy (in the new
sense) is analogowy ‘analogue’; the speaker M6 used, however, a new
collocation aparat tradycyjny ‘a traditional camera’ (see Example 4). It seems
here that the word tradycyjny ‘traditional’ may have slightly disapproving
flavour, especially when compared with cyfrowy ‘digital’, which suggests
modernity.
The extension of meaning of the word cyfrowy has most probably been
triggered by English digital. It is also worth noting that all the instances of
the use of cyfrowy in the corpus refer to the new meaning of the word. In fact,
it appears that the new sense of the word is squeezing out the old one. As
a consequence, this loan is not a typical semantic extension, but it displays
some characteristics of a semantic shift as well (cf. sections 6.2 and 6.3).
Curiously enough, the form cyfrówka (which is a merged form of the two
words aparat + cyfrowy) also exists in the corpus. The tendency to merge two
nouns into a single expression is extremely common in contemporary Polish,
especially in its informal spoken variety. Some forms of this type include18:
tirówka, sezonówka, weekendówka, asfaltówka, ~czasówka, komórka,
okrętówka, mineralka, bezołowiówka, budżetówka, filmówka, firmówka,
oparzeniówka, porodówka, drogówka, obiegówka, lojalka, magisterka, cesarka,
fałszywka, jednorazówka, zimówka, ~kablówka, ~koszykówka, ~siatkówka,
16 The phrases aparat cyfrowy and kamera cyfrowa can be said to be quite well assimilated,
as they occur frequently in store catalogues and leaflets.
17 According to ROSZKO (1997: 231), the term kamera ‘a video camera’ can also be
informally used in Polish to refer to aparat fotograficzny ‘a camera’.

18 The forms actually found in the corpus are preceded by the sign ~.
~przygodówka, ~platformówka, ~złotówka, ~objazdówka, ~reklamówka,

~rybaczówka, ~podstawówka (cf. DUNAJ, 2001: 77; DUNAJ, PRZYBYLSKA and
SIKORA, 1999: 234—235; MOSIOŁEK-KŁOSIŃSKA, 2000: 82; MYCAWKA, 2001:
18; URBAŃCZYK and KUCAŁA, 1999: 410; WASZAKOWA, 2001c: 91, 102—103).
Such a use (of the form cyfrówka) may indicate that the word cyfrowy (in
the new sense) is already quite well assimilated. The form was used in
the corpus twice:
(1) [Recording 11]

M6: i wysłałaś?
F29: jeszcze nie bo ja wiesz / ja nie mam cyfrówki / nie
(2) [Recording 11]

M6: no to możesz zwykłą przesłać
F29: no ale fajnie wiesz *
M6: bo specjalnie cyfrówkę kupować no to
F29: no nie / no tam wiesz / koleżanka ma tutaj *
It must be noted, however, that the second instance of its use (by M6) is
clearly a repetition of the form heard a moment before (uttered by F29).
To the present author’s knowledge, the new meaning of the word has not so
far been discussed in the literature on the subject.19 It was not included in
USJP, either (with the exception of some set expressions, e.g. sygnał cyfrowy
‘a digital signal’, technika cyfrowa ‘digital electronics’).
6.4.6 Dinozaur
Traditionally, the word dinozaur referred to ‘an extinct reptile of the Mesozoic
era’ (cf. SJP). Nowadays, however, the meaning of the word has been extended.
It is used once in the corpus, in a figurative sense of ‘a person who is outdated
or old-fashioned and who cannot adapt to changing circumstances’ (cf. OALD):
(1) [Recording 4]
M6: no i właśnie proszę żeby mi podała maila / a ona mi mówi że nie ma
maila
F29: mhm
M6: tak że no raczej / [laughter 1 sec.] dziś mówię rzadkość
M14: to może jakiś dinozaur
[laughter 3 sec.]
19 With the exception of ZABAWA (2008: 32—34).
It seems more probable that this extension results from the internal
development of the Polish language. However, it may also be due to
the influence of the English language, as English dinosaur can also refer to
‘a person or thing that is old-fashioned and cannot change in the changing
conditions of modern life’ (ODE). It must also be noted that the English word,
when used in the above-mentioned figurative sense, has a strong flavour of
disapproval. The use of the Polish word (see the example above), on the other
hand, seems to be free from such connotations; it appears to be jocular, but not
disapproving or intending to mock the person talked about.
The new meaning of the word dinozaur has been noted in USJP.
6.4.7 Dokładnie
According to USJP, the adverb dokładnie is used in the sense of ‘in a precise,
accurate, meticulous way’. The word is thus used to emphasize the accuracy of
a description, a figure etc. (in the meaning of ‘precisely, accurately, carefully,
exactly, thoroughly’), e.g. dokładnie coś wiedzieć/określić ‘to know/determine
something exactly/precisely’ (USJP). Here are some selected examples of
the use of the word in this sense from the corpus:
(A) [Recording 2]
F3: gdzieś nas wywieźli tak dokładnie też nie wiem
(B) [Recording 3]
M6: no ja dokładnie nie wiem co i jak
(C) [Recording 4]
M14: dokładnie tak napisałem
F29: no to wiem / albo mi się coś schrzaniło / ale ostatnio wysyłałam / tak że
no
(D) [Recording 17]

F29: czy / teraz on się nawet też zzz zaczął tam interesować czy nie / to
znaczy bo nie wiedział dokładnie ile / że do matury / bo niekiedy że
sześćdziesiąt to ci zaliczą że na przykład ten certyfikat zdasz / nie
(E) [Recording 19]

M6: no a kiedy {person} przyszoł to mu {person} dokładnie dała te te same
/ w tym samym worku
Nowadays, however, dokładnie is increasingly often used as a reply,

agreeing with what somebody has just said, or emphasizing that something is
true or correct (cf. also OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 84—88). The word is
thus an example of a functional extension. It seems probable that the extension
has been triggered by the English word exactly (cf. one of the definitions given
by ODE: ‘used as a reply to confirm or agree with what has just been said:
“You mean that you’re going to tell me truth?” “Exactly.”’). On the other
hand, it must be noted that PIOTROWSKI (1998: 273) suggests that the new usage
of dokładnie may result from the influence of the German form genau (or from
both English exactly and German genau). This hypothesis may well be
the case, especially in Upper Silesia, where German loans are used relatively
frequently, e.g. the form genau itself was used once in the corpus. Most other
authors, however, claim that the extension in question was triggered by English
exactly (cf. e.g. GAJDA, 2001a: 55; MARKOWSKI, 1992a: 157; WASZAKOWA,
1995: 8). Whether borrowed from English or German, dokładnie is a relatively
old semantic borrowing, noted already in the early 1990s (cf. GRYBOSIOWA,
1994: 65—69).
Altogether, there were 35 instances of the use of dokładnie in the corpus.
Out of these, 23 occurrences referred to the old sense (see Examples A—E). In
the remaining 12 instances the word was used in the new sense, that is as
a reply to what has just been said. By using the word, a speaker either agrees
with what somebody has just said or emphasizes that something is accurate or
true:
(1) [Recording 2]
M2: żadna uroczystość się już nie odbywa bez Kościoła
F1: dokładnie
(2) [Recording 2]
F1: no i mówi że te osoby które się po prostu uczą to i tak napisały dobrze
bez względu na to czy to by były te same pytania czy inne a te co się nie
uczą
M6: no to i tak nie napisały
F1: no to i tak nie napisały
M6: no / dokładnie / no bo tak jest
(3) [Recording 2]
F1: a te nasze dziewczynki to są takie głupie że się wyrażę że naprawdę
F7: no / no {name} z trzeciej B / jak ja to usłyszałam
F1: dokładnie
(4) [Recording 2]
F1: ale bezmyślność taka że
F7: dokładnie
(5) [Recording 6]
M6: widać jakieś uszkodzenia oni tam wymieniają rury albo coś no to raczej
tak wymieniać ten kabel
M7: dokładnie
(6) [Recording 9]
M6: bo on potem chce ciągnąć w stronę jeziora / on zawsze tam ciągnie
potem w prawo
M8: no dokładnie
(7) [Recording 9]
F25: i {name} / i opowiada to {name} przecież który ma taką / bo tako jest
prowda
M6: no żeby {name} powiedzieć
F25: no dokładnie
(8) [Recording 10]

F10: i jak on by mnie zapytał to ja bym też leżała i ja mówię ale najpierw mi
zrób lekcję na ten temat^
F1: dokładnie
F10: a potem mnie zapytaj
(9) [Recording 10]

F1: no są lekarze
M6: i lekarze
F1: dokładnie / i lekarze
(10) [Recording 11]

M6: ja to chcę zrobić po swojemu ale on / mmm na okrągło poprawia że jego
zdaniem / on on to układa lepiej / typu jakieś tam punkty na przykład / nie
tak jak chcę / czy on
F29: mhm / dokładnie
(11) [Recording 17]

M6: znaczy to / mmm czy się / uczy w szkole czy tu / czy wszystko jedno
gdzie po prostu jak się odpowiednio nie przyłoży
F29: no dokładnie
(12) [Recording 18]

M7: Wizards and Warriors / mmm czy czy to jest to^
M6: to jest to co jo żech kupił / co były takie problemy
M7: co nie działało / coś zapłacił ze sto siedemdziesiąt kilka złotych
M6: ja / dokładnie [pause 2 sec.] to jest Wizards and Warriors
The frequency of both uses of dokładnie is presented in Table 6.5.

Table 6.5 The frequency of the use of the word dokładnie in the two senses
Number of Number of speakers Number of
Usage of the word dokładnie occurrences of that used the word recordings in which
a given meaning in a given meaning the meaning appeared
An adverb in the traditional sense 23 8 12
A reply, modelled on English 12 7 7
exactly
As one can see, dokładnie is still used more often as an adverb in

the traditional sense. However, the new usage is becoming increasingly
common.
Table 6.6 illustrates the relation between individual speakers and
the frequency of the use of the word dokładnie in the two senses.
Table 6.6 The relation between individual speakers and the frequency of the use of the word
dokładnie in the two senses
Speaker F1 F3 F7 F25 F29 M6 M7 M8 M14 Total
Number of uses of 1 1 0 1 2 11 4 2 1 23
dokładnie as an adverb
in the traditional sense
Number of uses of 4 0 1 1 2 2 1 1 0 12
dokładnie as a reply
modelled on English exactly
Table 6.6 shows clearly that the new usage of dokładnie depends to a certain
extent on the idiolect of a given speaker (which corroborates
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC’S (2000: 86) findings). On the other hand, as Table
6.7 shows, this use of dokładnie, contrary to most other semantic loans discussed
in the present book, does not seem to depend on the topic of the conversation.
Table 6.7 The use of dokładnie in the new sense in particular recordings
Number of occurrences
Recording Topic of the conversation of dokładnie in the new
meaning
2 school, teachers, pupils 4
6 computers, computer games, computer magazines, the Internet 1
9 various (weddings, doing shopping, business matters) 2
10 school, pupils and teaching; doctors and health care 2
11 correspondence, computers, using a text processor 1
17 learning foreign languages, taking exams 1
18 birthdays, films, new technologies, computers, the Internet, 1
software piracy
Total 12
It seems that the new use of dokładnie has emerged from careless
translations of American films and series, broadcast by the Polish television
(see also Diagram 6.2, section 6.3). Nowadays, judging from the corpus, one
can state that the word has already penetrated into informal spoken Polish used
in everyday situations. The word in the new sense was used by as many as
seven speakers; what is more significant, however, is the fact that for most of
the speakers who used the word dokładnie, it has already two meanings. Few
speakers (two out of nine, viz. F3 and M14) used dokładnie only in
the traditional way, that is according to the prescriptive norms. One speaker
(F7) used the word in the new meaning only; the remaining six informants (viz.
F1, F25, F29, M6, M7 and M8) used dokładnie in both senses. This suggests,
as was noted above, that for most of the speakers the word has already two
patterns of use.
The new usage of the word dokładnie has not so far been noted in USJP.
What is more, it is explicitly marked as erroneous in NSPP. It would seem,
however, that perhaps the new sense should, due to the frequency of its use, be
accepted in informal Polish.
6.4.8 Globalny
Traditionally, the word globalny was used in the meaning of ‘covering or

affecting all parts of something; overall, general, complete, total’ (cf. SJP).
Nowadays the word is also used, most probably under the influence of English
global, in the meaning of ‘covering or affecting the whole world; worldwide’
(cf. also MARKOWSKI, 2004: 39). It must be added, however, that the new
meaning is very similar to the traditional one. Consequently, the semantic
change is extremely subtle here.20
The word globalny was used four times in the corpus; all the instances of
its use refer to the extended meaning. The new meaning of the word can also
be detected in certain constructions, non-existent in the corpus, but fairly
common in the language of the press, e.g. globalna wioska ‘the global village’,
gospodarka globalna ‘the global economy’ (cf. also WITALISZ, 2007:
246—247).
20 The analogous extension, non-existent in the corpus, but noted in USJP, has taken place in
the case of the adverb globalnie.
6.4.9 Ikona
The word ikona was traditionally used to describe ‘a painting of Christ or other
holy figure, typical for Byzantine and other Eastern Churches’ (cf. SJP).
Nowadays the word is often used in the semantic field of computers, to signify
‘a small symbol or picture representing a program or a file, visible on
a computer screen’. Such a change can be attributed to the influence of English
icon (cf. also OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 97; WITALISZ, 2007: 248—249).
The word is a relatively old semantic extension, commonly used in e.g.
computer magazines, but nevertheless it was used only once in the corpus:
(1) [Recording 3]
M6: ale jest dobry ten XP?
F29: fajny
[...]
F29: yyy ma raczej lepsze ikony / jakiś taki wygląd graficzny trochę inny / no
nie wiem [pause 2 sec.] ja tam aż tak wiesz nie korzystam dużo to mmm dla
mnie to fajny
As the word ikona is a relatively old semantic borrowing, its new meaning
has been noted in USJP. It appeared also in the corpus gathered by
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000: 97—98). What is more, it seems that the word
is nowadays used more often in the new meaning than in the traditional one, at
least in the speech of the younger generation. As a consequence, the word is not
only a simple semantic extension, but it has some characteristics of a semantic
shift as well (see also Diagram 6.3, section 6.3).
6.4.10 Inteligentny
Traditionally, the word inteligentny was used in the sense of (1) ‘having
intelligence; good at learning, understanding and thinking in a logical way’,
referring to people (e.g. inteligentny rozmówca ‘an intelligent interlocutor’) or
(2) ‘showing intelligence’, referring to physical appearance and some human
activities (e.g. inteligentna twarz ‘an intelligent face’, inteligentna rozmowa
‘an intelligent conversation’) (cf. USJP). It seems that nowadays the meaning of
inteligentny has been extended and the word is used in a wider variety of
contexts (cf. also MARKOWSKI and PAWELEC, 2001: XIII; WITALISZ, 2007:
248—249).
In the corpus the form in question was used only once, but in a new
context, namely with respect to computer software and the Internet:
(1) [Recording 3]
M6: no / tylko że najśmieszniejsze to jest to / oni tam w Internecie
teoretycznie mają jakiś taki / inteligentny / interaktywny system sprawdzania
/ czy blok jest w danym tym
M14: zasięgu
M6: no no no / i tam po prostu brat tego / akurat z ciekawości sprawdzał /
wpisał naszą ulicę / dostał odpowiedź że / yyy niestety nie jesteś w naszym
zasięgu [pause 2 sec.] a dzwonią do nas średnio raz na tydzień
As one can see, inteligentny was used in a completely new context

(inteligentny system sprawdzania). It seems quite probable that the extension is
due to the influence of the English language, as English intelligent has wider
meaning and can be used with respect to computers and computer programs,
cf. one of the definitions given in OALD: ‘(computing) (of a computer,
program, etc.) able to store information and use it in new situations: intelligent
software/systems’.
Interestingly enough, the word in question has already found its way into
written Polish as well; for example, it was used in a press advertisement:
inteligentny system zarządzania przestrzenią bagażową (ZABAWA, 2004b). Such
a usage of inteligentny results probably from a literal translation of English
intelligent system.
The new meaning of the word inteligentny has not so far been noted in
USJP.
6.4.11 Karta
Traditionally, according to SJP, the word karta was used in the following main
senses: (1) ‘a sheet of paper’, (2) ‘a page, e.g. of a book’, (3) ‘a playing card’,
(4) ‘a page, i.e. an important period of history’, (5) ‘a charter, e.g. the teacher’s
charter’, (6) ‘a menu, e.g. in a restaurant’ and, archaically, (7) ‘a map’.
Nowadays the word is used in two new senses, both of which seem to be
triggered by the English word card: (1) ‘a plastic card, issued usually by
a bank, used for buying things’ and (2) ‘a small device that can be inserted in
a computer to perform particular functions, e.g. a sound/graphics/network
card’. The word was used once in the corpus, in the second extended sense,
i.e. referring to computers:
(1) [Recording 6]
M7: ten firewall jest przecież no / na tym no na karcie nie
In the above context, karta refers to a network card. The new meaning of
the word has been noted in USJP.
6.4.12 Kasa
Traditionally, the word kasa was used in the sense of (1) ‘a safe’ or (2)
‘a cashier’s office, cash desk, ticket window, ticket office or box office’ (cf. SJP).
Nowadays the meaning of the word in question has been extended, as
the word can be used in two additional senses: (1) ‘a machine used in shops to
keep money; a cash register; a till’ and, colloquially, (2) ‘money in the form of
coins and/or notes’. It seems that the emergence of the second new meaning,
which has become extremely popular in spoken Polish, could be attributed to
the influence of the English word cash (cf. also OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC,
2000: 88).
Kasa (in the meaning of ‘money’) was used eight times in the corpus by
seven different speakers (M6, M7, M11, M13, F25, F28, F31):
(1) [Recording 9]
F25: ale to co ja ci powiedziałam {name} i chyba ja się nie mylę / to że
{name} jest w ciąży to jest chyba pięć minut w ciąży / i dokładnie [together 1
sec.] no też ja się tylko się eee i pierwsza która wiedziała o tym to była
{person, name} i / jeżeli {person} ło tym wiy i to {name} to jest po prostu
tylko powiedzenie po to / żeby {person} zaś tą kasą
(2) [Recording 9]
M6: no na pewno powiedzieli i liczyli^
F25: no [unclear 1 sec.]
M6: na jakąś^
[together 1 sec.]
M6: na jakąś kasę

M11: z piętnastu takich bajtli / do pary młodej tam rozumiesz a łon kasa
chyba doł / nie / łon chyba kasa dowoł
(5) [Recording 19]

M13: czekolady im doł / te
M7: a fto ci kasa do / no

F28: kasy raczej nie dają
M13: kaj tam kasa coś ty
(8) [Recording 20]

F31: te / osiemset złotych na dwa na dziesięć dni czy na dwa tygodnie
M16: basen mają
M7: no / no to / fajnie
F31: no to wybacz te / fajna kasa
It must be noted, however, that the form in question was used in three
recordings only, which points to the fact that some of the uses may have been
mere repetitions of the word heard immediately before.
The English word cash has two principal meanings (according to ODE): (1)
‘money in coins or notes, as distinct from cheques, money orders, or credit’,
(2) ‘money in any form’. It would seem that the new usage of kasa refers
mainly to the former meaning, being thus synonymous, though belonging to
informal register, with gotówka. This sense is meant in Examples 1—7.
The only exception is Example 8, where kasa may refer to money in general,
being thus synonymous, though colloquial, with pieniądze.
In the corpus, the most common collocation of kasa is dać kasę ‘to give
cash’, which was used four times (out of eight occurrences of kasa in total), in
Examples 3—6. There is no particular collocation in the rest of the instances of
the use of the word in question: in Example 1 the sentence is clearly broken in
the middle; in Example 2 kasa is used in the construction liczyć na (jakąś) kasę
‘to count on (some) cash; to hope to get (some) cash’; finally, in Examples 7
and 8 kasa is used with no verb.
It is important to notice that there is no single occurrence of kasa in any of
the older senses (quoted at the beginning of the present subsection). This may
indicate that a certain shift of meaning has taken place, at least in the informal
register, where kasa is now primarily used to refer to money (especially in
the form of notes and/or coins).
Interestingly enough, only two words referring to money were found in
the corpus: colloquial kasa and neutral pieniądze. The frequency of the use of
both forms is summarized in Table 6.8.
Table 6.8 The frequency of use of kasa, pieniądze and other words for ‘money’
Number of Number of recordings
Number of speakers
Word occurrences of in which the word
that used the word
the word appeared
Kasa 8 7 3
Pieniądze 11 6 8
Other informal words for — — —
‘money’: forsa, szmal, waluta
As one can see, Table 6.8 indicates clearly that kasa has replaced other
colloquial words denoting money, common in the 1980s and 1990s, for example
forsa, szmal and waluta. The opposition formal-informal (with respect to
‘money’) is now realized by a pair of words pieniądze-kasa.
The relation between the frequency of use of the words in question and
the speakers is presented in Table 6.9.
Table 6.9 The relation between the frequency of the use of kasa and pieniądze and the speakers
Speakers F4 F25 F28 F29 F31 M2 M6 M7 M8 M11 M13 M16 Total
Number of occurrences 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 8
of kasa
Number of occurrences 1 0 0 3 0 1 4 0 1 0 0 1 11
of pieniądze
Table 6.9 clearly illustrates a certain preference among speakers for

the use of either kasa or pieniądze. Only one speaker (M6) used both words;
however, his use of kasa (see Example 2) is obviously a repetition of this word
used before by another speaker (F25; see Example 1). This indicates that
the use of the word kasa can be said to be connected with the idiolect of
a given speaker.
Finally, it must be noted that the word kasa is slowly penetrating into more
formal variety of Polish as well; it can be found, for example, in the language
of the press and commercials (emphasis mine): Kasa utopiona w oknach (a title
of the article describing a dishonest company selling windows, Dziennik
Zachodni, 246/2004, p. 1), W końcu kasę na remont zaplanowano
w przyszłorocznym budżecie (Dziennik Zachodni, 304/2004, Bliskie strony,
p. 3), Wygraj wielką kasę (an advertisement, TeleMagazyn, 4/2005, p. 31),
Można wygrać mnóstwo nagród i tyle kasy, że szok (a yoghurt commercial,
TVN, 25.01.2005).
6.4.13 Klawiatura
According to USJP, the word klawiatura is used in the sense of ‘a set of keys
or buttons in/on musical instruments, computers, typewriters, etc.’ In
the corpus, however, the word is used, besides its regular meaning, in the sense
of ‘a driver’, i.e. ‘a computer program which controls the sending of data
between a computer and an additional device, in the case here — a keyboard’.
In the corpus, the word klawiatura was used seven times. All of
the occurrences are connected with the semantic field of computers. However,
three instances of the use of the word refer to the old sense of ‘a set of keys
used for operating a computer’. The remaining four occurrences, all of which
were used during the same recording (number 11), are presented below:

M14: można sobie dodać klawiaturę niemiecką
F29: aha / a to jak to się dodaje tą klawiaturę niemiecką
M14: panel sterowania / klawiatura
F29: panel sterowania / aha
M14: klawiatura / a potem tam są ustawienia regionalne / trza sobie dać
niemiecką tylko trza / trza właściwą [unclear 1 sec.]
F29: a to przejdzie
M6: ale potem problem / który klawisz jest do czego / czy nie
M14: no na
F29: widzę
M14: na średniku jest o z kropkami [laughter 2 sec.] potem na tym
apostrofie^
In Examples 3 and 4 the word klawiatura is used as a direct quotation of

one of the options of Windows (panel sterowania / klawiatura ‘control panel /
keyboard’). In the Polish version of the operating system Windows, the options
for a keyboard were straightforwardly translated into Polish as klawiatura.
The above-mentioned occurrences (Examples 3 and 4) cannot hence be treated
as genuine examples of the use of the word in the extended meaning in
spontaneous speech.
The situation is different, however, in the case of Examples 1 and 2. Here
klawiatura niemiecka ‘literally: a German keyboard’ clearly refers not to
a physical keyboard with German letters (i.e. ä, ö, ü, ß) visible on the keys, but
rather to a special program, which enables a user to make use of the German
letters (e.g. ö by pressing ALT + o). Such a use results probably from
the above-mentioned straightforward translation of keyboard as klawiatura.
Here, however, the word in question is not meant to be a direct quotation of
the name of the option appearing on a computer screen, but is used
spontaneously.
Additionally, it is worth noting that the word klawiatura was used in a new
collocation dodać klawiaturę ‘literally: to add a keyboard’. This suggests that it
is possible to have a few keyboards (that is, drivers for a keyboard) and choose
the one needed at the moment.
It must be noted that the second instance of the use of the word in the new
sense (by F29; see Example 2) is only a repetition of the phrase uttered
immediately before by another speaker (M14).
The extended meaning of the word klawiatura has not so far been included
in USJP.
6.4.14 Konsola, konsolowy
According to USJP, the word konsola can be used to denote (1) ‘a console
table’, (2) ‘a console; an ornamented bracket or corbel supporting something’,
(3) ‘a console; a control panel’ and (4) ‘a kind of a consolidated bond’. What
follows, is the fact that most of its meanings are fairly technical and are not
likely to be used by laymen. One would thus not expect to come across
the word in informal variety of Polish.
Nevertheless, there are two instances of the use of the word in corpus. Both
of them refer to the semantic field of computers and the Internet; they were
used in the same phrase rozwój konsol zostanie zahamowany / rozwój konsol
zostanie tak zahamowany [...] i gry na PC przeżyją taki jakby renesans.
The extension of the meaning of the word is probably a result of
the influence of the semantics of English, as the English word console can also
refer to ‘a small machine for playing computerized video games’ (ODE).
The meaning of the Polish word konsola, as represented in the corpus, is
exactly the same.
What is more, an adjective derived from the word konsola (namely
konsolowy) was also used in the corpus. The word itself is a neologism, and it
shows that the base form (i.e. konsola) used in the new meaning is already
well-assimilated in Polish, at least for some speakers: jakaś gazeta wychodzi
w ogóle — komputerowa, nie konsolowa. The neologism is thus used in
the collocation gazeta konsolowa ‘a newspaper about consoles’, as contrasted
with gazeta komputerowa ‘a newspaper about computers’.
Interestingly enough, the word konsola is often used in
the above-mentioned extended sense in the language of Polish magazines
dealing with computers and computer games. Here are some examples: Final
Fantasy VII to nadłużej i najbardziej niecierpliwie oczekiwana gra w historii
konsoli PlayStation (Gambler, 3/1998, p. 47), Jak wszyscy wiedzą, większość
gier na konsole to bezpośrednie konwersje z tzw. automatów [...] (Gambler,
4/1997, p. 62), I rzeczywiście, pad jest prawie wielkości konsoli (p. 62), Doom
ma opcję łączenia dwóch konsol, co pozwala np. rozgrywać deathmatch, czyli
walkę dwóch graczy przeciwko sobie (p. 66), Zamiast — tradycyjnej już na
konsolach — płynnej animacji, autorzy konwersji otrzymali podobny efekt, co
w Doomie działającym na słabym 486 (p. 66), Nawet przeciętny komputer PC
znacznie przewyższa wszechstronnością każdą sprzedawaną obecnie konsolę
(Enter, 8/2004, p. 52). Moreover, the authors use derivatives as well, for
example: W normalnych konsolowych wyścigach samochód ma zwyczaj
reagować na skręcanie w momencie naciśnięcia guzika [...] (Gambler, 4/1997,
p. 64), Z działu konsol pozostawimy tylko NewsPad, który będzie pełnił rolę
„Kuriera Konsolowego” i relacjonował, co się w świecie konsol dzieje.
Powstałe po likwidacji działów konsolowych miejsce przeznaczymy na

rozbudowę działu recenzji oraz news (a konkretnie — dłuższe teksty
o charakterze Preview) (Gambler, 4/1998, p. 7), Nie sądzę, żeby miała się
zwiększyć objętość działów konsolowych — jeśli już, to może pomyślimy
o specjalnym piśmie dla konsolowców (Gambler, 10/1997, p. 7).21
As one can see, the use of the word in the above-mentioned sense is very
common in computer magazines. What is more, it is used in spoken Polish as
well.
Nevertheless, the new meaning of the word konsola has not so far been
noted in USJP. As for the adjective konsolowy, it was not included in USJP at
all.
6.4.15 Konto
The word konto, traditionally used to denote ‘a bank account’ is now

sometimes used in the meaning of ‘an e-mail account’ (cf. also
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 94). The new sense has probably been
triggered by a direct translation of English account, cf. such phrases as załóż
konto ‘to set/start an account’ or nowe konto ‘a new account’, which can be
found on Polish websites.
The word konto appeared four times in the corpus. All the instances of its
use refer to the Internet and e-mail:
M6: to masz coś / z Chipem wspólnego? / czy tam po prostu tylko konto
masz?
M14: ja?
M6: no
M14: tylko konto
M6: a [pause 2 sec.] nie / bo czasem tak jest że na przykład musisz coś tam /
yyy na niektórych serwerach musisz coś z nimi mieć wspólnego / żeby tam
mieć u nich konto / musisz tam mieć u nich coś
(4) [Recording 6]
M7: ściąga i^
M6: aha
M7: jednocześnie różne fragmenty ale idzie to na jedno konto że je#
21
More examples of the use of konsola and its derivatives can be found in ZABAWA (2008:
30—32).
In Example 4, the meaning of konto is ambiguous, as it may refer to

a single computer (where all the data are copied from Internet websites) but it
may also be used figuratively (iść na jedno konto).
Despite the new sense, the word was not used in any new collocation.
The construction found in the corpus, i.e. mieć (u nich) konto ‘to have
an account (at them)’ can safely be used with konto referring to a bank account
as well.
The new meaning of konto has not so far been noted in USJP. However,
the word appeared in the corpus gathered by OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000:
94). In her corpus, however, the word in the new sense appeared as many as
twelve times. Additionally, it was used in completely new collocations. By
contrast, in the present corpus the word was used only four times. What is
more, some of its uses (e.g. in Example 2, uttered by M14) seem to be only
repetitions of the word heard a few seconds before. This indicates that the new
sense of konto is far from assimilated in contemporary Polish.
6.4.16 List
The word list is used in Polish in the sense of ‘a letter; a message that is
written down and sent to somebody, usually by post’ (cf. USJP).
The word was used seven times in the corpus. In one instance, however, it
was used in a completely new sense, referring to e-mail, that is, ‘a message
received on a computer’. Such a use may result from the internal development
of the Polish language, but it may also be intensified by the English form mail
(common in the semantic field of computers) as the word can be used with
reference to both (1) traditional post and letters as well as (2) electronic mail
send and received on a computer.
The fragment of the corpus containing the word used in the new sense is
presented below:
(1) [Recording 11]

F29: a ja dzisiaj właśnie bo wiesz mąż mi dzwoni że / że mmm jest na tym
yyy mmm w Internecie i że do mnie przyszedł list od tej {name} / wiesz
z tego / z tej Austrii / nie
M6: aha aha aha
F29: to ja mówię / on mówi no jakieś duże [together 2 sec.] no / jakieś duże /
że tam / dwa mega czy jakieś jedne / nie / no i te zdjęcia przesłała / wiesz /
i potem no ja jej napisałam
As one can see, no new collocation has appeared: the form list is used in
the construction przyszedł do mnie list od {imię} ‘a letter has come to me from
{name}’. Such a construction is typical for the word list used in the traditional
sense. It points to certain semantic parallelism between the traditional post and
electronic mail (cf. also section 6.4.40, where some other words, which were
used previously in connection with post office and letters and are now also
used with reference to e-mail, are discussed).
Still, the form list is primarily used in the traditional sense. The use of
the word in the extended sense can thus be perceived as an exception.
The frequency of both senses is summarized in Table 6.10.
Table 6.10 The frequency of the use of the word list in two senses
Number of speakers
that used the word
the word appeared
List (in the traditional sense) 6 4 3
List (in the extended sense of 1 1 1
‘e-mail’)
6.4.17 Ładować
According to USJP, the word ładować is used in the meaning of (1) ‘to load,
e.g. a lorry with coal, a car with luggage, clothes into a bag, etc.’, (2) ‘to
charge, e.g. a battery’, (3) ‘to load bullets (e.g. into the muzzle)’ and,
colloquially, (4) ‘to hit or punch someone’.
It would seem, however, that the meaning of the word has recently been
extended and the word is now also used, probably under the influence of
English to load, with reference to computer data. The new sense is equivalent
to one of the meanings of the English lexeme load: ‘(computing) transfer
(a program or data) into memory, or into the central processor from storage’
(ODE).
The word in question was used five times in the corpus (out of which four
were used with various prefixes: załadować, władować, naładować,
obładować); only one of its uses refers to computer data:
(1) [Recording 6]
M6: bo z tymi obrazkami to on by już w ogóle ładował chyba godzina jedna
strona
The word ładować is used here in a new collocation, referring to

an Internet website: on [=komputer] ładuje stronę, ‘it [=the computer] loads
a website’.
The word ładować is sometimes used in computer magazines, but the agent
of the process denoted by it is either the user (e.g. załadowałeś program? ‘have
you loaded the program?’) or the program/game (e.g. gra się ładuje ‘the game
is loading’). Thus in the corpus the word in question is used, as was mentioned
above, in a completely new collocation: it is not a user that loads a program, or
a program that is loading, but it is a computer that is loading software (or, as in
the case here, an Internet website).
The extended meaning of the word ładować (even the one referring to
the process done by a user or a computer program/game) has not so far been
noted in USJP.
6.4.18 Obrazek
According to USJP, the word obrazek is used in three basic senses: (1) ‘a small
picture, especially in a book or hanging on a wall’, (2) ‘a picture, scene, e.g.
shown on TV’, (3) ‘a short story’. In the corpus, however, the lexeme in
question is used several times in a wider range of contexts.
In the following example, obrazek is used instead of zdjęcie ‘a photograph’:
(1) [Recording 2]
M2: Lamborgini coś tam / ale nie umiem przeczytać co tu pisze
[together 2 sec.]
M4: ładne zdjęcia są
M2: co
M4: ładne obrazki
The phrase ładne obrazki ‘nice pictures’ was used with respect to
photographs published in a newspaper dealing with cars and the car industry.
Thus the construction in question refers to the photographs of cars.
Interestingly enough, the first phrase used by the speaker M4 was ładne zdjęcia
‘nice photographs’. After being asked for repetition (by M2’s co ‘what’), he
repeated his thought with a different word. It is thus possible to assume that
the speaker M4 used obrazki as an equivalent of zdjęcia.
In the following fragment, the word obrazek was used to denote ‘a digital
image visible on a computer screen; a part of an Internet website’:
M6: przecież my na początku wyłączyli w ogóle obrazki
M7: no
strona
Finally, in the example below, the lexeme in question could refer to both
‘small pictures’ and/or ‘photographs’:
M6: już tam dzieci miały / takie [laughter 1 sec.] nowe książki z obrazkami
to niektórych to nie motywowało
F29: tak?
M6: nawet mimo że mieli / mimo że mieli obrazki / kolorowe / i tam też /
teoretycznie te tematy / no to teoretycznie tam były takie dopasowane że / ich
powinny zainteresować ale też byli i tacy których to / nie interesowało
The dialogue refers to textbooks used for teaching English in Polish

secondary schools. The construction książka z obrazkami ‘a book with pictures;
a picture book’ (see Example 4) is a common collocation, which functions
almost like a fixed phrase. In the present context, however, it may refer to
photographs as well. Such a textbook would thus be contrasted with the old
generation of textbooks, containing only black-and-white pictures (not
photographs). The same is true in the case of Example 5, where the phrase
mieli obrazki kolorowe ® kolorowe obrazki ‘colourful pictures’ seems to refer
to photographs rather than pictures.
Such extensions are probably a result of the internal development of
the Polish language and the figurative use of words. It may, however, be
intensified (at least indirectly, for example by careless Polish translations of
English texts appearing on a computer screen) by the English language, as
English picture can be used in a much wider variety of contexts; it may, for
example, be safely used with the reference to photographs (cf. e.g. one of
the definitions given by ODE and OALD: ‘a photograph’).
The extended meaning of obrazek has not been noted in USJP.
6.4.19 Opcja
Traditionally, the word opcja was used only in fairly technical contexts in
the sense of (1) (as a marine term) ‘option of port’, (2) (as a legal term)
‘option of nationality’, (3) (as a legal term) ‘copyright’ (cf. SJP).
Nowadays, however, the word is sometimes used in two new senses: (1)
(belonging to general Polish) ‘a choice’ or ‘one of the possibilities that can be
chosen’ and (2) (belonging to the semantic field of computers) ‘one of
the choices that a computer user can make when using a computer program’
(cf. also OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 91; WITALISZ, 2007: 272). It seems
very probable that both new meanings were triggered by the English form
option (cf. two of the definitions given by OALD: (1) ‘something that you can
choose to have or do’, (2) ‘(computing) one of the choices you can make when
using a computer program’).
As might be expected, opcja is non-existent in the corpus in the ‘old’
senses (enumerated in SJP and listed above). The word was, however, used
once in the first new meaning (see Example 1 below) and three times in
the second new meaning (see Examples 2, 3 and 4):
(1) [Recording 2]
F2: to samo gdzieś yyy kobieta / wyczytałam o nowej specjalności rocznych
studiów yyy do wychowania mmm rodzinnego
F1: rodzinnego mhm
F2: i seksu# seksualnego tak / dwie opcje są tych studiów znaczy dwa kierunki
jeszcze takie [unclear 1 sec.] można takie no i to daje uprawnienia do *
(2) [Recording 4]
M14: jeżeli na przykład wysyłasz Outlook Expressem / to jak ktoś ma też
Outlook Expressa albo / Outlooka tego z Office’a / to ma to zaznaczone *
F29: mhm / ja właśnie szukałam wiesz w opcjach / czy ja to będę mogła
gdzieś potem włączyć / no i nie wiem
(3) [Recording 6]
M7: miołech kiedyś dwa numery tego no naprawdę nie o wszystkim nie takie
do nauki / ale takie typowo sprzętowe testy wszystko bardzo dokładne a# ale
konkretnie wiedziołech o czym no porównanie procesorów wszystko / a tu dej
pokój kompakty multimedialna nauka tym podobne / multimedialna nauka
pakietu tam Office XP bo jest nowy Office ik# XP no i efekt taki^
M6: mhm
M7: no że jakiś facio no nagrany i mówi jakie tam mówi jakie doszły tam
nowe opcje yyy w porównaniu z yyy z dwutysięcznym a z tym XP
(4) [Recording 7]
M6: przede wszystkim / no [pause 3 sec.] no właśnie / mmm znaczy ja mam
tylko taki aparat tradycyjny / ale właśnie mój brat sobie kupił niedawno sobie
cyfrowy^
F29: mhm i
M6: właśnie też to sobie podłączył do komputera i teraz taką ma manię tam
co chwilę [laughter 1 sec.] tam coś próbuje to korygować / bo tam są różne
takie opcje / że tam coś można rozjaśniać^
As one can see, the word opcja, when used in connection with computers,
appeared in a new collocation, unheard of before: szukać w opcjach ‘literally:
to search in options’ (Example 2). Other collocations, such as doszły tam nowe
opcje ‘new options were added’ (Example 3), tam są różne takie opcje ‘there
are various such options there’ (Example 4) can be probably used not only in
the area of computers, but also in general Polish, with opcja meaning
‘a choice’ or ‘a freedom of choice’.
Interestingly enough, the first new meaning of opcja is marked in NSPP as
overused, although it occurred only once in the corpus. One may thus say that
the word in question in the meaning of ‘a choice’ or ‘one of the possibilities
that can be chosen’ is perhaps overused in the language of the press, but not in
spoken everyday language.22
The new meanings of opcja have been noted in USJP.
6.4.20 Operować
According to USJP, the word operować can be used in the following senses:
(1) ‘to perform a surgical operation; to operate’, (2) ‘to use, e.g. one’s voice,
a metaphor, sound etc.’, (3) ‘to work, to be in effect, e.g. about the rays of
the sun’, (4) ‘to manage (a business)’, (5) ‘to trade e.g. in shares; to earn
money e.g. on the stock exchange’ and (5) ‘(of armed forces) to conduct
military activities’.
The word was used in the corpus twice, but in the extended sense: kto to
bedzie operowoł / nikt z nas, z tego co wiem, nie potrafi koparką operować.
The meaning of the word operować is close to Sense 2 given above.
According to the dictionary definition, however, operować in the sense of ‘to
use’ is used with abstract nouns, cf. the collocations given by USJP: operować
metaforą/ciałem/dźwiękiem/głosem ‘to use (literally: to operate) a metaphor/
one’s body/sound/one’s voice’. In the corpus, by contrast, operować is used in
the construction with the noun denoting a machine (a digger/an excavator). As
a consequence, the word is used in a new collocation, unheard of before:
operować koparką ‘to operate a digger’. Such usage hardly conforms to
the traditional understanding of the term operować.
The extension may be attributed to the internal development of the Polish
language (analogous to the word operator, also used in the corpus, which can
22 This is generally in line with the findings of OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000: 91). In her
corpus, the word opcja in the meaning of ‘choice’ was also used only once and there were
probably no occurrences of opcja referring to options visible on a computer screen (as a part of
a computer program).
be used to denote a person that operates a machine, as in operator dźwigu

‘a crane operator’), but it may have been reinforced by the English form to
operate, which can safely be used in connection with machines and technical
devices, cf. one of the definitions given by OALD: ‘to use or control
a machine or make it work’.
The new sense of the word operować has not so far been noted in USJP.23
6.4.21 Pakiet
Traditionally, the word pakiet was used to denote ‘a collection of something’,

referring exclusively to physical objects, such as books, letters etc. (e.g. pakiet
listów, banknotów, książek; cf. SJP). The English counterparts (package,
bundle), on the other hand, do not seem to have such a restriction, cf.
the generality of one of the definitions given in OALD: package — ‘a set of
items or ideas that must be bought or accepted together’.
It appears that nowadays the Polish word is sometimes used in a wider
variety of contexts as well. There were three occurrences of the word in
the corpus:
(1) [Recording 3]
M6: je# jest taka wersja wprawdzie / mmm eee tego pakietu Office dla
studentów uczniów nauczycieli
(2) [Recording 6]
(3) [Recording 18]

M6: i tak jak mmm mówię no w Medii już niestare gry / to takie pakiety są
po cztery pięć i to kosztuje trzydzieści złotych / i to jest jeszcze niestare
The new meaning of the word is best illustrated by Examples 1 and 2, used
by two different speakers (M6, M7) in two recordings (number 3 and 6,
respectively). Here the word pakiet refers to a collection of computer programs
issued on a single CD-ROM sold in one box (cf. also WITALISZ, 2007: 274). It
23 A different new meaning of operować was mentioned by WITALISZ (2007: 272—273).

is thus no longer a collection of physical objects. The word is used in the same
sense as its English counterpart package, cf. one of the definitions given in
OALD: ‘a set of related programs for a particular type of task such as word
processing, sold and used as a single unit’.
The Example 3, on the other hand, refers to a collection of computer
games, sold in the form of CD-ROMs packed in cardboard boxes, which are
tied together to form one package. Consequently, the word is used here in
the more traditional sense referring to collection of physical objects.
The extended sense of the word has been noted in USJP.
6.4.22 Partner
According to USJP, the word partner is used in the following main senses:
(1) ‘a person that one is dancing, playing a game, or talking with’, (2) ‘one of
the people who owns a business and shares the profits’, (3) ‘a person with
the same status, rights, etc. as another; an equal’, (4) ‘a country, institution etc.
that another country, institution etc. is cooperating or doing business with’, and
(5) ‘an actor playing with another actor’. In addition, the dictionary in question
gives a set phrase partner życiowy ‘literally: a life partner’, defined as
‘a spouse’.
However, nowadays the word partner/partnerka is often used (without any
specifying adjectives) in the meaning of ‘a spouse’. What is more, the context
in which the lexeme is used in the corpus reveals that the meaning of the word
has been extended even further: partner/partnerka may refer not only to
a spouse, but also to a common-law husband/wife (a cohabitee).
The word was used twice in the corpus. Both occurrences refer to the new
meaning:
(1) [Recording 9]
F25: {name} tam nie były ja ci mówię tam byli rodzice / rodzeństwo / czyli
jego brat i {name}
M6: mhm
F25: z partnerami / i chrzestni / i to było wszystko / i dziadkowie / tam nie
było nikogo / chrzestni byli akurat myśmy byli i te
(2) [Recording 9]
F25: ale {name} co by się nie powiedziało to wiesz / te {name-genitive}
dziewczyny / są ładne zgrabne / yyy partnerów mają przystojnych / bo
i jedna i druga starszych ma
In both examples, the word is not used in the above-mentioned sense of

‘a spouse’, but ‘a common-law husband/wife, a cohabitee’. The women
referred to by the speaker F25 (see Example 2) have children and men they live
with, but nevertheless they are both formally unmarried.
It appears that such an extension results from the influence of English
partner. The first meaning of the word (ergo, the most common) given by
OALD reads as follows: ‘the person that you are married to or having a sexual
relationship with’.
In Polish, the word partner in the sense of ‘a spouse’, ‘a common-law
husband’ or even ‘a lover’ appears often in popular talk shows emitted in
Polish television. As one can see, the new sense of the word has already
penetrated into informal spoken Polish.
It is thus possible to talk about two phases of the semantic extension of
the word partner. First, the word began to be used in the meaning of ‘a spouse’
(without any further specifying or restricting words, such as życiowy). Second,
the above-mentioned new meaning was extended even further, as the word may
now refer not only to a husband, but also to a cohabitee or a lover (cf. also
ZABAWA, 2004c: 64; WITALISZ, 2007: 275).
The new meanings of the word partner have not so far been noted in USJP.
6.4.23 Piractwo, piracki, pirat
Piractwo
In the 1980s the word piractwo was chiefly used to refer to ‘the practice of
attacking and robbing ships at sea’ and, additionally, to ‘hijacking’ (cf. SJP).
Nowadays the word is frequently used in connection with music, films and
computer software to indicate ‘a process of making and selling illegal copies of
various products, usually music cassettes/CDs, films on DVDs/video tapes or
computer programs/games on CD-ROMs/DVDs’. It seems probable that the new
sense of the word was influenced by English piracy (cf. also WITALISZ, 2007: 277).
The word in question was used five times in the corpus by two speakers
(M6, M7). All the instances of its use refer to computer software:

M6: no no [pause 2 sec.] no i to potem też to całe piractwo akurat nie z tego
ale całe piractwo też / dlatego się tak rozwija / jak to pisali / no bo jednak te
wszystkie / ten cały sprzęt hi-fi no to to tanieje / nagrywarki DVD do

komputera tanieją / tanieją te jakieś różne programy do obróbki i tak dalej^
M7: no / obiektywnie^
M6: i piractwo się rozwija
(4) [Recording 18]

M6: że to nie jest jakaś stała cena bo ta stała cena to już jest koło
osiemdziesiąt złotych
M7: więc ale o to chodzi że obniżone generalnie są [pause 3 sec.] jest
to moim zdaniem / drobny krok w yyy w yyy w celu zmniejszenia yyy
piractwa
(5) [Recording 18]

M7: powiem że / jedyny sposób w jaki idzie mmm no nie powiem mmm
zlikwidować ale bardzo / zmniejszyć piractwo głównie to jest / obniżka cen
As one can see, the word is used in a completely new meaning, but no new
collocation has appeared: in Example 1 piractwo is used with no verb; in
Examples 2 and 3 piractwo is used in the construction piractwo się rozwija ‘the
piracy is developing / develops’, and in Examples 4 and 5 in zmniejszanie
piractwa/zmniejszyć piractwo ‘to reduce / curb the piracy’. Both
the constructions (piractwo się rozwija/zmniejsza) do not seem to be strictly
connected with the new meaning of the word, but can also be used with
piractwo in the traditional sense (that is, attacking a ship/plane). In other
words, the semantic extension has not influenced possible collocations of
the word.
The new meaning of the word in question has been noted in USJP.
Piracki
The new meaning of piracki is interrelated with the new sense of piractwo,
described in the previous section. The adjective piracki is nowadays frequently
used in the meaning of ‘sold illegally’, referring chiefly to music, film and
computer software (cf. also WITALISZ, 2007: 276). Such a usage seems to be
influenced by the English form pirate/pirated. The word in question was used
in the corpus once; it appeared in a new collocation, not attested in the 1980s:
(sprzedawać) pirackie gry ‘(to sell) pirated (computer) games’. What is more,
further derivatives, although non-existent in the corpus, can occasionally be
heard, e.g. spiracony, as in ten program miał spiracony ‘he had this program
pirated; he had a pirate program’ (heard in a conversation).
Interestingly enough, no other word describing computer software, films, etc.

sold illegally (such as for example nielegalny ‘illegal’) was used in the corpus.
The new sense of the adjective in question has been included in USJP.
Pirat
The new meaning of the lexeme pirat is closely related to both piractwo and
piracki, discussed in the previous sections. In the past, the word referred to
‘a person attacking ships at sea or airplanes during flight’. Nowadays the word
is often used, probably under the influence of English pirate, to denote
‘a person who makes illegal copies of video cassettes, film DVDs, music CDs
and computer software and then sells them’.
What is more, there has recently appeared a new meaning of pirat,
referring not to a person, but to products, such as computer software, sold
illegally (cf. also WITALISZ, 2007: 276).
Altogether, the word pirat was used seven times in the corpus by two
speakers (M6, M7):
M6: no no [pause 2 sec.] no całkowicie się nigdy nie zlikwiduje / bo są osoby
które są tak przyzwyczajone na przykład gry komputerowe tak
przyzwyczajone do kupowania do piratów że im by wręcz / nie przyszło do
głowy kupić oryginał
M7: a po drugie dużo osób *
M6: i jest też grupa osób / które pójdą do pirata / nawet jak będzie miał /
pięć procent taniej
M7: no bo^
M6: bo taka grupa osób tyż jest
M7: bardzo dużo osób mo yyy *
M6: że jak będzie oryginał trzydzieści złotych / jak będzie oryginał
trzydzieści złotych / a u pirata dwajścia pięć / to są osoby które by i tak
wtedy poszły do pirata
M7: aaa / kto teroz^
M6: takie osoby też są
M7: kupuje gry u pirata
(6) [Recording 18]

M7: mało osób no już kupuje typowo u pirata
(7) [Recording 18]

M6: to on i tak zawsze załatwi pirata choćby ten oryginał / był / nie
wiadomo jak tani
In Examples 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, pirat refers to a person selling illegal

software, whereas in Examples 1 and 7 the same word refers to computer
games sold illegally.
When the word pirat is used with reference to a person, no new collocation
has appeared: by far the most common collocations are pójść do pirata ‘to go
to a pirate’, which was used twice (by one speaker, namely M6), and kupić
(gry) u pirata ‘to buy (games) at the pirate’s; to buy pirate games’, which was
used twice as well (also by one speaker, namely M7).
As for the lexeme pirat used with reference to computer software, two new
constructions were found: być przyzwyczajonym do (kupowania) piratów
(=kupować piraty) ‘to be used to (buying) pirate software; to buy pirate
software’ (see Example 1) and załatwić pirata ‘to get/buy a pirate computer
game/program’ (see Example 7).
Only the first of the new meanings (referring to a person) has been
included in USJP; the second one (referring to a product) has not so far been
noted in the dictionary in question.
It must be noted that all the three forms (piractwo, piracki, pirat) are
common in the language of computer and computer game magazines, the only
exception being the word pirat used with reference to a product sold illegally.
This sense has not (yet) penetrated into the above-mentioned variety of
the Polish language. It is, however, occasionally used in general magazines,
e.g. Nie zamierzamy wzywać, by z dnia na dzień każdy komputerowiec wyrzucił
wszystkie „piraty” (Wprost, 1/2005, p. 12). As one can see, the word is written
in quotation marks, which shows that it is still perceived as somehow
inappropriate in more formal contexts.
Additionally, the meanings of two other words, namely oryginalny and
oryginał, have recently been extended and the words are now antonyms of
piracki and pirat (used in the new sense), respectively. Here the semantic
extension is probably a result of the internal development of Polish, rather than
of the direct influence of English. Nevertheless, oryginalny and oryginał will
be briefly discussed in the section on other semantic extensions (see section
6.4.40).
6.4.24 Poczta
Traditionally, the word poczta was used in three main senses: (1) ‘an institution
which delivers letters, packages, etc.’, (2) ‘the building used by this institution’
and (3) ‘letters, packages etc. that are sent and delivered’ (cf. USJP).
Nowadays, when one talks about computers and the Internet, the word is often
used in the sense of ‘electronic mail’ or ‘a web page where one can access and
read one’s e-mail’, a change that can be attributed to the influence of
the English word mail, which can also be used in the sense of ‘e-mail’ (cf.
OALD and OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 97).
Altogether, the word in question was used six times in the corpus; only two
instances, however, refer to the new meaning (used by one speaker only, but in
two different recordings):
(1) [Recording 4]
F29: a kiedy to wysłałeś
M14: a / z tydzień temu
F29: no żartujesz / nie mam ich / no ja / ja teraz wchodzę codziennie na moją
pocztę
(2) [Recording 7]
F29: więc jednak się udało bo ja wczoraj się bawiłam / byłam wiesz kurczę to
już by tak / tak trzeba by coś wysłać / a / potem nagle mi nie wiem zawiesił /
że w ogóle tak jakbym nie mogła wejść sobie yyy / u siebie na pocztę na
wysłane
Apart from the new meaning, a new collocation has also appeared: wejść
na pocztę ‘literally: to enter (into) a post/mail’ (in the meaning of ‘to access
a website and log on in order to read one’s e-mail’), whereas it has so far been
possible to say only iść na pocztę/być na poczcie, ‘to go to a post office/to be
at the post office’.
Additionally, the word poczta was used three times in the ‘old’ meaning to
refer to ‘traditional mail’. Interestingly enough, in two out of three cases, there
was a potential ambiguity (poczta as traditional or electronic mail) and hence
the speakers (M6, F29) felt it necessary to add a clarifying adjective (zwykła
poczta ‘literally: an ordinary mail’) or an adverb (wysłać pocztą... normalnie
‘to send by post... normally’) to make the meaning clear to the interlocutor:
(3) [Recording 7]
F29: no / nie / ja sądze że ona mi jednak pocztą wysłała / normalnie wiesz
zdjęcia
(4) [Recording 11]

M6: to w ostateczności możesz jej po prostu / yyy zwykłą tą
F29: mhm
M6: dać to zwykłą pocztą / nie
Consequently, the word poczta can be said to be, at least in certain

contexts, potentially ambiguous. What is more, when the Internet and
computers are discussed, poczta in the meaning of ‘electronic mail’ appears to
be an unmarked form (used without any specifying adjectives), whereas poczta

in the regular meaning needs some further explanatory words, for example
zwykła.
Furthermore, the word in question was used once more in connection with
the Internet. This instance was not included above, because the word was used
as a part of someone’s e-mail address. Nevertheless, one can still treat it as
a semantic neologism:
(5) [Recording 4]
M6: yyy / {name, surname} / razem pisane
[pause 3 sec.]
F29: {name, surname}
M6: jednym ciągiem
F29: mhm
M6: małpa / poczta [pause 3 sec.] kropka
The new meaning of poczta has been included in USJP only in the set
phrase poczta elektroniczna, not poczta in general. The word appeared also in
the corpus gathered by OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000: 97). In the present
corpus, however, the word appeared in a new collocation. In general,
nevertheless, it appears that the new meaning of the word is still far from
assimilated, at least in informal spoken Polish, the sign of which is the fact that
the word in the new sense was used by one speaker only.
6.4.25 Profesjonalnie
Traditionally, the word profesjonalnie was used in the meaning of zawodowo

‘in the way that is connected with a person’s job; done as a paid job, not as
a hobby’. Nowadays the word in question is also used, probably under
the influence of the English form professionally, in the sense of fachowo,
kompetentnie ‘done competently, in a way that shows skill and experience’ (cf.
also WITALISZ, 2007: 281). Thus the change here is, as in the case of some
other words (e.g. globalny), quite subtle. The word was used once in the corpus
(in the extended sense), in the phrase mógłby ktoś jakaś firma zrobić to tak
profesjonalnie.
The analogous extension, non-existent in the corpus, but nevertheless fairly
common, is visible in the case of the corresponding adjective (profesjonalny),
the new meaning of which has been noted in USJP. What is more, this
extended meaning of the adjective profesjonalny is noted as overused in NSPP.
By contrast, the extended meaning of the word discussed in the present

section (i.e. of the adverb profesjonalnie) has not been noted so far in USJP or
NSPP.
6.4.26 Promocja
The word promocja is a relatively old semantic borrowing. Traditionally,

the word was used in the meaning of (1) ‘the act of moving (especially a pupil)
up to the next class’ and (2) ‘the graduation ceremony for the doctoral degree’
(cf. SJP). Nowadays the word is often used, probably under the influence of
English promotion, in the meaning of ‘a set of advertisements for a particular
product’ and ‘an act of selling a new product at a reduced price’ (cf. also
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 91; WITALISZ, 2007: 282—283; ZABAWA,
2008: 37—38). It seems that it is the second new meaning that is particularly
frequent in spoken Polish.
The word was used three times in the corpus by two speakers (M7 and
M8). All the uses of the word refer to ‘the act of selling a product or service at
a reduced price in order to attract potential customers’:
(1) [Recording 5]
F22: tam mo wszystko sery jajka masło
M8: no no właśnie nie no [unclear 1 sec.] jeszcze coś tam było takie nawet
się zastanawiałem co to jest nie / jako promocja tym razem była / jo godom
to była piekarnia a tu teraz takie rzeczy
(2) [Recording 18]

M7: ale bardzo często / z prawie nowych / pojawiają się takie promocje /
choćby wtedy Matrix Reaktywacje co on kosztuje te yyy te
(3) [Recording 18]

M7: ino ino ino w to [pause 2 sec.] żech z tym synkiem godoł ostatnio
[unclear 1 sec.] Chello wziął
M6: a tego Chello
M7: ja / tylko to
M6: to jest te UPC całe?
M7: tak / tylko tylko nie wiem jak to jest / czy to wziął już tak na stałe / czy
na dwa miesiące / no bo promocja jest dwa miesiące po złotówce
Interestingly enough, NSPP states explicitly that the word promocja, when
used in the new meaning, can only be used to describe recently launched
products. Consequently, using the word in the sense of ‘any price reduction or
sale at reduced price’ is explicitly marked as incorrect. It seems, however, that

this restriction is no longer in operation. For example, the word promocja in
Example 1 refers to groceries present long at the market, whose prices are
temporarily reduced. This additional extension is probably due to the enormous
popularity of the word promocja in the contemporary Polish language of
the trade. However, it may also be caused, or at least intensified, by
the English promotion, which does not seem to have such a restriction
(cf. the definition given by OALD: ‘activities done in order to increase
the sales of a product or service; a set of advertisements for a particular
product or service’).
The new sense has only partly been included in USJP, as the definitions
and the examples suggest that the word refers only to new products. The word
appeared also in the corpus gathered by OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000: 91),
but she gives no further information (apart from citations from the corpus)
about the products the word referred to.
6.4.27 Rozpakować
Traditionally, the word rozpakować was used in the sense of (1) ‘to unwrap
(e.g. a present)’ and (2) ‘to empty a bag, suitcase, rucksack, etc. by taking
the things out of it’ (cf. SJP). However, there has recently appeared a new
meaning of the word. It is very probable that the extension is a result of
the influence of the English lexeme unpack, which can also be used, according
to ODE, in the area of computer science, in the meaning of ‘to convert data
from a compressed form to a usable form’.
The word in question was used in the corpus once:
(1) [Recording 14]

M6: bo kiedyś yyy jak żech tam jakieś próbował właśnie na dysku to mi coś
tam napisał / kiedyś jak miałem na twardym dysku / jakiś zip file / że tam
coś / no nie wiem czemu nie może go właśnie yyy rozpakować żeby tam
ściągnąć to jeszcze raz
Apart from the new meaning, the doer of the action has also changed. In
the example above, the process denoted by the verb rozpakować is done by
a computer.
6.4.28 Sieć
According to USJP, the word sieć has the following meanings: (1) ‘a piece of
net used for catching fish, birds or other small animals’, (2) ‘a trap’,
(3) ‘a spider’s web’, (4) ‘a group of people working together, esp. illegally or
secretly; a ring’, (5) ‘a group of shops, stores etc. run by the same company;
a chain’, (6) ‘a system of roads, tracks, lines, wires, cables; a network’.
Moreover, USJP gives a number of compounds containing the lexeme in
question, including sieć komputerowa ‘a computer network’, defined as
‘a number of computers and other devices that are connected together so that
equipment and information can be shared’ (cf. OALD). One may thus say that
the Internet is a kind of a computer network, or, in other words, Internet is
a hyponym of sieć komputerowa.
Nowadays, however, the word sieć is often used informally in the meaning
of ‘the Internet’ (cf. also ZABAWA, 2004c: 61—62; WITALISZ, 2007: 291).
The extension may result from the internal development of the Polish language,
but it may also be caused (or at least intensified) by English net (which is
a primary counterpart of Polish sieć) and the Net (that is, informally,
the Internet) (see also Diagram 6.4, section 6.3).
Altogether, the form sieć was used six times in the corpus by four speakers
(M6, M7, M14 and F29):
(1) [Recording 3]
M6: ale był taki moment że / tam / w tej takiej sieci lokalnej / w tej takiej
osiedlowej / że tam / właśnie piszą te takie różne
M6: no no więc właśnie tam ta właścicielka / ta# tej sieci ostatnio coś tam
pozamykała
[...]
M14: gdy i tak średnio ponad tysiąc ludzi na sieci siedzi
(4) [Recording 4]
M14: Gadu Gadu to jest podstawowy program
F29: no / ale wiesz *
M6: a ja go w ogóle nie używam / nawet nawet nie wiem jak to działa /
znaczy wiem że to jest coś takiego do rozmowy ale
F29: yyy jak mam jakiś komunikat to od kogoś / że coś / że oni to mają widzą
mnie w sieci czy coś więc się cieszę że / że mogę sobie porozmawiać / nie
(5) [Recording 6]
M7: najpierw koło czterech użytkowników on-line
M6: a że to nie jest tylko z tej naszej sieci ale to jest w ogóle
(6) [Recording 18]

M7: coraz więcej osób mo jednak sieć
The word sieć occurred six times in four recordings; however, three
instances of its use (Examples 1, 2 and 5) refer to ‘a local computer network’.
The remaining three occurrences (Examples 3, 4 and 6) refer to
the above-discussed sense of ‘the Internet’.
Still, the form Internet, being an internationalism, is much more common
than sieć. The frequency of the use of both words is presented in Table 6.11.
Table 6.11 The frequency of the use of sieć and Internet

Number of speakers
that used the word
the word appeared
Sieć (in the sense of 3 3 3
‘the Internet’)
Internet 10 5 7
The word sieć is nowadays very popular in written Polish, too; it was used,
for example, in the title of a popular book (Samotność w sieci by Janusz
L. Wiśniewski, published by Prószyński i S-ka). What is more, the word is
sometimes capitalized (in the same way as English the Net), which may suggest
that it begins to be used as a proper noun (similar to Internet), e.g. W Sieci
krążą ciekawe plotki, dotyczące kolejnej zmienionej wersji „Gwiezdnych wojen”
(Fantasy, 2/2004, p. 6), Tymczasem Sieć, jak prawie każde dzieło człowieka,
może być również niebezpieczna. [...]. Również uzależnienie od Sieci nie jest
wymysłem psychologów, lecz realnym zjawiskiem [...] (Gambler, 12/1998,
p. 57), Gry na PC do pobrania z Sieci [...]. W Sieci są dostępne spore zbiory
starszych gier, ustępujące nowym tytułom pod względem grafiki i dźwięku, ale
nadal wywołujące dreszczyk emocji (Enter, 8/2004, p. 134).
In spite of its widespread use, in both written and spoken Polish, the new
meaning has not so far been noted in USJP.
6.4.29 Słownik
According to USJP, the word słownik may refer to (1) ‘a list of words of
a language, usually arranged alphabetically, with the explanation of their
meanings and examples of use’ and (2) ‘all the words known or used by
an individual person’.
It seems, however, that nowadays the meaning of the word has been
extended and the word can be used in a completely new sense of ‘the list of
word forms (and some grammatical rules) stored in a computer memory, used
in word processing programs to check the spelling of the words as well as
some syntactic and stylistic points’. It appears that the new meaning of
the word results from a direct translation of English dictionary, which,
according to OALD, can be used to indicate ‘a list of words in electronic form,
for example stored in a computer’s spellchecker’.
In the corpus, the word słownik is used five times altogether:
(1) [Recording 11]

F29: trzeba się trochę pilnować żeby właśnie / ale potem wymyśliłam że
mówię jaka ja jestem bezmyślna / przecież ja sobie mogę to w ogóle
sprawdzić / w tym słowniku / nie / przenieść do Worda / wiesz sobie
skopiowałam nie wiem czy dobrze zro# czy tak mmm powiedzmy jest
łatwiejsza^
(2) [Recording 11]

F29: i fajnie mi tam na przykład popodkreślał jakiś rodzajnik czyli wiesz że /
że nie użyłam odpowiednio
M6: aha
F29: wiesz na przykład tam miał być biernik albo coś / nie
M6: i on to też / i on to też poprawia po niemiecku jak jest słownik
niemiecki
(3) [Recording 11]

M6: to słowniki ortograficzne^
F29: mmm chciałam napisać coś że
M6: w odstawkę
(4) [Recording 11]

F29: ale generalnie u mnie z tą pisownią / to byłam zaskoczona że właśnie /
idzie to mmm powiedzmy tam pisze a# angielska niemiecka i polska / nie /
czyli te podstawowe / mmm mogą być sprawdzone
M6: aha aha aha / no nie to to jest fajne
[together 1 sec.]
(5) [Recording 11]

M6: a ona ta / babka jak odpisuje to raczej takie widać że raczej takie
słownictwo jest stara się raczej takie proste się stara czy
F29: wiesz co / yyy dość proste chociaż teraz na przykład yyy
M6: czy musisz do słownika zerkać
F29: nie nie / raczej takie wiesz / że^
As one can see, the word słownik was used by two speakers (M6 and F29).
However, some of its uses (namely in Examples 3 and 5) refer to an ‘old’ sense
of słownik, that is, ‘a book giving a list of words in an alphabetical order’.
The remaining three uses (see Examples 1, 2 and 4), on the other hand, refer to
the above-discussed extended sense. All of them were used in the same
recording (number 11), when the word processing program was discussed. As
was mentioned before, it was used by two speakers, but it appears that one of
the instances of its use (by M6; see Example 2) is probably only a mere
repetition of the construction used earlier by another speaker (F29).
Despite the fact that the word słownik is used in a new context, no new
collocation has emerged: in Example 1, słownik is used in the construction
sprawdzić w (tym) słowniku ‘to check in (this) dictionary’; in Example 2 słownik
is used in the existential construction jest słownik niemiecki ‘there is a German
dictionary’; finally, in Example 4 it is used in the phrases nie mam takiego
słownika, słownik jest za ubogi ‘I don’t have such a dictionary’, ‘the dictionary is
too limited’. In other words, all the constructions with the word słownik in
the extended meaning can also be used with the word in the traditional sense.
The new meaning of the word słownik has not so far been noted in USJP.
6.4.30 Strona
The word strona is a relatively well-known semantic borrowing. Traditionally,

the word was used to refer to (1) ‘a page, e.g. of a book or a magazine’,
(2) ‘a side, e.g. the north side of a building’, (3) ‘a point, side, e.g. the dark
side of someone’s character’, (4) ‘a direction, way, e.g. go into the opposite
direction’, (5) ‘a side, party, e.g. in a conflict’, (6) ‘parts, surroundings,
a region’ and (7) ‘a voice, e.g. the passive voice’ (cf. SJP, USJP). In
the semantic field of computers, the word is nowadays often used in
the meaning of ‘an Internet page; a website’, possibly under the influence of
English page (cf. also OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 92).
Altogether, the word strona was used 60 times in the corpus, out of which
13 occurrences refer to the above-quoted new meaning. All the new uses are
presented below:
(1) [Recording 3]
M14: może na stronie internetowej jest napisane że na tej ulicy UPC już /
yyy te Chello zakłada
(2) [Recording 3]
M14: nie jest aktualizowana
M6: no to mmm yyy / tak trochę z przymrużeniem oka trzeba traktować / bo

to często firma też zrobiła stronę / dwa lata temu / i od tego czasu nikt nie
uzupełnia
(3) [Recording 4]
F29: no to wiem / albo mi się coś schrzaniło / ale ostatnio wysyłałam / tak że
no / no chyba
M6: nie / no to raczej jakby / na stronę wchodzi / to raczej / yyy chyba nie
ma możliwości żebyś nie odebrała jak jak jest tam / to raczej nie
(4) [Recording 4]
F29: dobra / a to teraz ty mi podaj / yyy i {name} też / to ja wam spróbuję
coś / i zobaczymy czy od mojej strony dojdzie do was
(5) [Recording 6]
strona
(6) [Recording 6]
M7: no po prostu nowy / nowy hip-hop bo jo tak żech mioł tam je# tam je#
tam jest według piosenek wchodzę na jakoś strona no gdzie jest opisane no
jakie piosenki są
(7) [Recording 6]
M7: i żech się ściągnął [...] tam z jakiejś ich oficjalnej strony jakoś bajka
Wormsy
M6: też kilka miesięcy coś takiego miałem że w ogóle na stronę chyba przez
tydzień nie dało się coś wejść [...] znaczy no nie wiem czy u nich coś ale no
tak myślę no u mnie chyba nie no bo inne strony się bez kłopotu wczytywały
(10) [Recording 7]
F29: no ja kurczę żałuję że nie mam żadnych tych / właśnie yyy satelita ani
nic / bo mówię dobrze że teraz chociaż te / można coś tam wejść na jakieś
strony / pooglądać / a

F29: no / dla niego hobby on tam czyta wiesz / nawet się ostatnio yyy
właśnie o Internet też coś tam pytał / nie / dzięki za tą stronę / yyy
M14: doszło?
F29: no doszło doszło / yyy ten / i jeszcze od wczoraj to z kolei jeden od /
koleżanki mąż przysłał / tą stronę / tego TELC-a / wiesz tego właśnie
(13) [Recording 17]

M6: ale to są takie jakieś strony chyba w PDF-ie takie jakieś
As one can see, in Example 1 the word is accompanied by the adjacent

adjective internetowy ‘(of) the Internet’. In all the remaining contexts, however,
the form is used on its own, with reference to the Internet. However, there
exists some variation in meaning, for instance in Examples 11 and 12 strona is
used in the meaning of ‘a website address’. Consequently, a completely new
collocation has appeared: przysłać stronę ‘literally: to send a page’, meaning
przysłać adres strony internetowej ‘to send a website address’.
Moreover, the word in the extended sense appeared in some other new
collocations: zrobić stronę ‘to create a (web) page; literally: to make a page’,
wchodzić na stronę ‘to access a website; literally: to enter (on) a page’,
ładować stronę ‘to load a (web) page’, ściągnąć ze strony ‘to download
(something); literally: to take something (down) from the page’, wczytywać
stronę ‘to load a (web) page; literally: to read a page in’, oficjalna strona
‘an official (web) page’.
There is an interesting situation in Example 4: here the word strona (in
the construction od mojej strony) can refer to either a website (that is z mojej
strony internetowej ‘from my website’) or a side (that is z mojej strony ‘from
my side’). The use of the preposition od rather than z suggests that the word
refers here to a website (the construction z mojej strony functions almost like
a fixed phrase in Polish and is rather unlikely to be rendered as od mojej
strony).
The word strona used in the sense of ‘a website’ is, as was mentioned at
the beginning of the present subsection, a fairly well-known semantic loan. It
was noted in USJP and discussed by some authors, for example by
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000: 92—94). Moreover, it is worth noting that
the possible collocations of the word are already quite firmly established, as
three of the collocations presented above (out of six) have appeared in
the corpus gathered by OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000) as well. This is true
in the following cases: zrobić stronę (in the corpus gathered by
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC the verb was used in the imperfective aspect, i.e.
robić stronę), wchodzić/wejść na stronę and ładować stronę/strona się ładuje.
The new meaning of strona has already become quite common.
The frequency of the different senses of the word is presented in Table 6.12.
Table 6.12 The frequency of the different senses of the word strona found in the corpus
Number of Number of speakers Number of recordings
Meaning of
occurrences of that used the word in in which the meaning
the word strona
a given meaning a given meaning appeared
1 2 3 4
A side (e.g. of a lake, 25 5 4

a building, etc.), e.g. po drugiej
stronie jeziora
cont. tab. 6.12

1 2 3 4
An Internet website, strona 13 4 5

internetowa
Used in the sense of ‘on one 13 4 7
hand/on the other hand’, z jednej
strony/z drugiej strony
A page (e.g. of a book, 5 3 3
a magazine, etc.), e.g. na której
stronie?
A side (when talking about 2 1 1
family connections), e.g. goście
ze strony panny młodej
A side (e.g. in a conflict), 1 1 1
e.g. strona w sporze
A section of data shown at 1 1 1
a given time (see the discussion
below)
In addition to the well-assimilated new sense, it appears that the meaning

of the word has been extended even further. In the dictionaries of Polish (e.g.
USJP), the word in the above-discussed meaning is associated with the Internet,
not computers in general. It must be noted here that the English equivalent
(page) does not have such limitations, cf. one of the definitions given by
OALD: ‘a section of data or information that can be shown on a computer
screen at any one time’.
The word in this sense (that is, connected with computers, but not with
the Internet) was used in the corpus once:
(1) [Recording 18]

M6: to tam była kwestia jakichś sterowników tak samo jak potem w tym
Train Symulatorze tam Microsoft / yyy ten początkowy działał / pamiętasz ta
strona tytułowa
The phrase strona tytułowa ‘a title page’, commonly used with reference to
books, refers here to an introductory screen (presenting the name of
the company) that is displayed on a computer screen while a computer game is
being loaded. This sense is, therefore, a new extension and the word here no
longer refers to the Internet (cf. also OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 93).
This sense has not so far been noted in USJP.
6.4.31 Super
The morpheme super, originally coming from Latin, was traditionally used in
Polish in (1) technical contexts, e.g. superarbiter, superheterodyna,
superrewizja and — to a limited extent — in (2) more general contexts in
the meaning of ‘larger, better, etc. than the standard type’, usually with nouns,
e.g. superfilm, supermocarstwo, supersam (cf. SJP). Additionally, it was
sometimes used with adjectives in the meaning of ‘extremely, very’.24
Nowadays, however, the usage of super has been extended in contemporary
Polish under the influence of English semantics, morphology and syntax.
Firstly, super has become a fashionable word, used more often and in a wider
variety of contexts (especially in the language of advertisements and
commercials). Secondly, it tends to add a flavour of approval to the modified
words. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly (though beyond the scope of
semantics), super is nowadays used in Polish not only as a bound morpheme,
but as a free morpheme as well (cf. also OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000:
110—111; ZABAWA 2002).
The morpheme super was used eight times in the corpus:
(1) [Recording 1]
M11: ale pierwsza nagroda jest tam jakaś super kuźwa zajebista
(2) [Recording 2]
F6: fajna taka całodzienna wycieczka a nie taka droga bo to jest bliziutko do
do {city} / superwycieczka ale najlepsze to było że potem w powrotnej trasie
do McDonald’sa
(3) [Recording 5]
F24: bardzo fajnie wyglądocie / super
F29: mój brat też właśnie ma / i kiedyś był u mnie / i też podłączył / i śmy to
oglądali / tośmy mmm no super / nie [pause 2 sec.] no bo wiesz to jednak
technika to jest / super / eee do przodu
(6) [Recording 8]
F29: chciałam / chciałam to powiedzieć że ja / chodziłam do liceum /
z takimi dziewczynami które miały w podstawówce / yyy rosyjski / yyy / i ci
powiem one miały taki poziom jak one przyszły do liceum / one były tak
24 SJP gives three such compounds; only one of them, however, belongs to non-specialized
language, namely supernowoczesny, the other two being superfosfatowy and supersoniczny.
super przygotowane one po prostu miały akcent / yyy mówiły / dosłownie /

wiesz wszystkich zaginały
(7) [Recording 10]

F13: trzy miesiące czekałam na termin u okulisty dla moich dzieci i miałam
na dziewiątą rano / pogoda super / nie / pozbierałam te dzieciaki jedno
ubrałam^
(8) [Recording 15]

F29: Skandynawia super tylko mówię że trochę droga
As one can see, the form super was used (1) once with a noun, thus
playing a similar role to an adjective, replacing such expressions as fajny,
przyjemny etc. ‘nice, pleasant etc.’ (superwycieczka ‘literally: super excursion’,
see Example 2), (2) twice with an adjective, thus playing a similar role to
an adverb, replacing such expressions as bardzo, ogromnie etc. ‘extremely, very
etc.’ (super [...] zajebista ‘literally: super shit-hot’, see Example 1, super
przygotowane ‘literally: super prepared’, see Example 6) and (3) five times in
the postpositive position, as a free morpheme (bardzo fajnie wyglądocie, super
‘literally: you look very good, super’, see Example 3; i śmy to oglądali [...]
super ‘literally: and we were watching it [...] super’, see Example 4; to jednak
technika to jest [...] super ‘literally: yet the technology is [...] super’, see
Example 5; pogoda super ‘literally: weather super; weather was super’, see
Example 7; Skandynawia super ‘literally: Scandinavia super; Scandinavia is
super’, see Example 8).
To judge from the corpus, the use of super as a free morpheme has already
become more common than as a bound morpheme. Such a change can possibly
be attributed to the influence of English syntax.
In addition, the meaning of super in Polish has also changed: originally, as
was mentioned before, the form was used in (1) technical contexts and in
(2) general contexts to intensify a feature, usually an approving one, denoted by
the adjacent word, as in supernowoczesny ‘literally: super modern’. Nowadays,
the word itself has gained an approving flavour, as in the examples from
the corpus: Skandynawia super, pogoda super (cf. also PRZYBYLSKA, 1995: 105;
SZUPRYCZYŃSKA, 1995: 170). It seems that this extension can be attributed to
the influence of English super, cf. two of the definitions given by ODE: (1)
‘very good or pleasant’, (2) ‘(of a manufactured product) very good, superfine’.
What follows, is that it is possible to treat super as a semantic (or
grammatico-semantic, to be more precise) loan of English origin.
The new meaning of super has been noted in USJP. Furthermore, according
to NSPP, the word is overused in contemporary Polish. The present findings,
however, do not support such a view, as the form was used only eight times in
the entire corpus.25 What is more, most speakers used the form in question
only once, as Table 6.13 shows.
Table 6.13 The relation between individual speakers and the frequency of the use of
the morpheme super
Speakers F6 F13 F24 F29 M11 Total
Number of occurrences of super (as a bound or free 1 1 1 4 1 8
morpheme)
Table 6.13 shows that the use of super depends to a certain extent on
the idiolect of a given speaker. This is evident in the case of the speaker F29,
who used the form four times altogether (in three recordings).
Moreover, the form was usually used only once during a given recording,
which points to the fact that other speakers did not tend to echo it in their
utterances, as Table 6.14 shows.
Table 6.14 The use of super in individual recordings

Number of the recording 1 2 5 7 8 10 15 Total
Number of occurrences of super (as 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 8
a bound or free morpheme)
To sum up, one can say that the morpheme super is occasionally used in
informal spoken Polish, but, contrary to what is claimed in NSPP, does not
seem to be overused.
6.4.32 Test
According to USJP, the word test, which is an assimilated borrowing from

English itself, can be used in the following senses: (1) ‘a procedure intended to
establish the quality, reliability or performance of something, especially before
it is taken into widespread use’, (2) ‘a kind of examination; a multiple-choice
test’, (3) ‘an examination of a body fluid or part of the body for medical
purposes’, (4) ‘a psychological examination of someone’s personality trails,
intelligence, etc.’, (5) (in television) ‘a test pattern’ (cf. also ODE).
25 This is generally in line with the findings of OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000: 110—111),
who also reports the infrequency of the use of super; in her corpus, the morpheme was used ten
times.
It must be noted that the first meaning given by USJP is a semantic

extension itself (modelled on English test), as such meaning was not noted in
SJP. The word in this meaning was used once in the corpus:
(1) [Recording 6]
konkretnie wiedziołech o czym no porównanie procesorów wszystko
Today the word in the above-discussed new meaning is commonly used in

the language of the press, particularly the one dealing with computers, e.g. Jak
testowaliśmy? / Wyniki testów (about notebooks, Enter, 8/2004, p. 50). To
illustrate the frequency of the use of this word, it is enough to say that the form
test or testy ‘test, tests’ was used (as headings) as many as 28 times in a single
issue of Enter, 8/2004, e.g. TESTY Oprogramowanie (p. 64), TESTY Sprzęt
(p. 52), TESTY Tłumacze elektroniczni (p. 46), CYFROWY ŚWIAT Testy (p. 91),
CYFROWY ŚWIAT Test przenośnych urządzeń z twardym dyskiem (p. 89).
Moreover, another meaning of the word (see sense 2) has also been
extended. In the school and academic contexts, the word test was always used
to denote a special kind of examination, consisting of a set of short questions,
with several possible answers to choose from or with blank spaces to provide
short and precise answers. The Polish word test is thus roughly synonymous
with English multiple-choice test. In other words, the meaning of Polish test
was narrowed during the process of borrowing from English and the word
became more specialized.
Nowadays, however, the meaning of Polish test has been extended, probably
under the influence of English (cf. also ZABAWA, 2004c: 62; WITALISZ, 2007:
295). The English test, as was mentioned earlier, has much wider meaning: it
may refer to practically any kind of examination, including orals (cf.
the definition given by ODE: ‘a short written or spoken examination of
a person’s proficiency or knowledge’).
Altogether, the word in question was used eleven times in the corpus by
five speakers. Eight instances of its use refer to multiple-choice tests, cloze
tests, foreign language tests (consisting mainly of the translation of phrases and
sentences) and to the examination taken at the end of the junior high school
(egzamin gimnazjalny26). In general, such a use conforms to the old meaning of
the word. Furthermore, one of its occurrences refers to the test of computer
peripherals (see Example 1). The remaining two occurrences of test can be said
to be the examples of the use of the word in the extended meaning:
26 Such an examination resembles more a multiple-choice or cloze test, rather than, say,
the old-type examination taken at the end of the secondary school (‘stara matura’).
(2) [Recording 10]

F3: trudne te testy masz
M2: co?
F3: trudne
M2: jakie trudne / co może być trudnego w zadaniu^
F3: no
M2: napisz list w którym będąc władcą Polski informujesz władcę Rusi
o wynikach zjazdu gnieźnieńskiego / proste
(3) [Recording 4]
M6: tak że to / mmm no tam się po prostu nie da / mmm za bardzo mmm /
no bo to masz po prostu ćwiczenia no i jakieś tam ćwiczenia masz na teście
czy na egzaminie / ale to no mmm
It is Example 2 that best illustrates the extended meaning of the word:

writing a letter does not conform to the traditional understanding of test in
Polish. In Example 3, on the other hand, test is used instead of kolokwium.
Generally speaking, it seems that test is nowadays becoming a fashionable word
replacing other expressions, such as sprawdzian. However, contrary to its
English counterpart, Polish test still refers only to a written examination (cf.
also ZABAWA, 2004c: 62).
The extended meaning of test has not so far been noted in USJP. It was,
however, explicitly noted as overused in NSPP.
6.4.33 Transfer
Originally, the word transfer denoted ‘an act of moving something or someone
to another place, organization, team, country, system, etc.’; it was used in
the areas of economics, law, psychology and sport (cf. USJP, cf. also OALD).
Nowadays the word is also used (in the semantic field of computers and
the Internet) in the related meaning of ‘the action of copying data from one
medium or device to another’. Such an extension should probably be attributed
to the influence of the English form transfer.
The word in question was used only once in the corpus, but in
the above-mentioned new meaning: no trzeba przyznać że jak na razie ten
transfer ten przepływ jest taki całkiem raczej przyzwoity. As one can see,
transfer used in the new meaning is synonymous with another semantic
neologism, namely przepływ ‘flow’ (used in the same utterance). In the above
example, transfer refers not only to the process of copying data (i.e.
downloading data from the Internet), but to the speed of the process as well
(ten transfer [...] jest [...] przyzwoity ‘literally: the transfer is decent’, being
roughly synonymous with ‘the speed of copying data is all right’).
The new meaning of transfer has not been noted so far in USJP.
6.4.34 Wczytać, wczytywać
According to USJP, the word wczytać/wczytywać is used in the sense of ‘to

enter data onto a computer (from memory or input devices)’. In the corpus,
however, the word is used in the extended sense, referring not to data from
memory or input devices (such as e.g. floppy disks), but to Internet sites. Thus,
a computer can read data or a file not only from memory or from input devices
(as in e.g. wczytać plik z dyskietki), but it can also read (in) a web page
(wczytać stronę internetową).
The form was used four times in the corpus (in the new sense). Besides its
new shade of meaning, the word was also used in a new collocation (derived
directly from the new sense of the word): wczytać stronę ‘literally: to read (in)
a (web) page’. Moreover, it is also a website that can be read in (strona się
wczytuje ‘literally: a page is reading (in) itself’). Nevertheless, the core meaning
of the word has remained the same (‘to enter data onto a computer; to read data
into a computer’) and the change can be said to be extremely subtle here.
The construction wczytać stronę is used probably on the model on such
well-assimilated phrases as wczytać dane (z dyskietki), ‘to read (in) data (from
a floppy disk)’. It is worth noting, however, that English may have intensified
the process of extending the meaning of the Polish word, as English read can
be used in a wider variety of contexts, cf. the generality of the definition
provided by ODE: ‘(of a computer) copy or transfer (data)’. The meaning of
the Polish form has become even broader: it is not only a computer that reads
(or transfers) data, but also data (e.g. in the form of an Internet page) that can
‘load itself’.
The new shade of meaning of the word wczytać has not so far been noted
in USJP.
6.4.35 Wejść, wchodzić
Traditionally, the word wchodzić was used in the meaning of ‘to enter’, both
literally, e.g. wejść do pokoju ‘to enter the room’ and figuratively, e.g. wejść na
rynek ‘to enter the market’ (cf. SJP). Nowadays the word is also used in
connection with the Internet in the meaning of ‘to access a website’ (cf. also
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 95).
Altogether, the word in question was used 41 times in the corpus, out of
which 15 occurrences refer to the above-mentioned new sense:
(1) [Recording 4]
F29: no żartujesz / nie mam ich / no ja / ja teraz wchodzę codziennie na moją
pocztę
(2) [Recording 4]
M6: no to raczej jakby / na stronę wchodzi / to raczej / yyy chyba nie ma
możliwości żebyś nie odebrała jak jak jest tam
(3) [Recording 4]
F29: yyy jak mam jakiś komunikat to od kogoś / że coś / że oni to mają
widzą mnie w sieci czy coś więc się cieszę że / że mogę sobie porozmawiać /
nie / ale tak to też nie za bardzo / nie włączam żeby wiesz^
M6: aha
F29: przyjść do domu i od razu wejść na to / nie
M6: ło na początku to przecież na to stacja gower pl to on wchodził /
wchodził / wchodził i nie umiał wejść
(8) [Recording 6]
M7: tam jest według piosenek wchodzę na jakoś strona no gdzie jest opisane
no jakie piosenki są
(9) [Recording 6]
M7: to na ta Kazaa wchodzisz że^
(10) [Recording 7]
F29: bo ja myślałam najpierw że ten / i ja mówię / to kurczę gdzie te zdjęcia /
wchodzę nie ma żadnych załączników / nie
(11) [Recording 7]
już by tak / tak trzeba by coś wysłać / a / potem nagle mi nie wiem zawiesił /
że w ogóle tak jakbym nie mogła wejść sobie yyy / u siebie na pocztę na
wysłane
(12) [Recording 7]
M6: też kilka miesięcy coś takiego miałem że w ogóle na stronę chyba przez
tydzień nie dało się coś wejść / jakoś awaria była
(13) [Recording 7]
F29: no ja kurczę żałuję że nie mam żadnych tych / właśnie yyy satelita ani
nic / bo mówię dobrze że teraz chociaż te / można coś tam wejść na jakieś
strony / pooglądać / a
(14) [Recording 17]

F29: no doszło doszło / yyy ten / i jeszcze od wczoraj to z kolei jeden od /
koleżanki mąż przysłał / tą stronę / tego TELC-a / wiesz tego właśnie co jest^
M14: no
F29: ten certy# certyfikat że mówi / chcesz se poćwicz yyy bo tam są^
M6: tak / tam są testy
F29: różne testy i tak dalej^
M6: mhm
F29: nie / ja mówię że / jeszcze tam mmm tylko tak weszłam
(15) [Recording 18]

M7: yyy on to on to on mmm codziennie gra / w tego Counter Strike’a / no
to wchodzisz sobie / [unclear 1 sec.] i wybierasz sobie in# informacje
o osobie / on ci wypisuje ile użytkowników gra / i kto dokładnie gra po / po /
yyy danej stronie
As one can see, several new collocations have emerged: wchodzić na pocztę
‘literally: to enter (on) mail; to access e-mail’ (Examples 1 and 11), wchodzić
na stronę ‘literally: to enter (on) a page’ (Examples 2, 8, 12 and 13), wejść na
to ‘literally: to enter (on) it’ (Example 3), wchodzić na Kazaa27 ‘literally: to
enter (on) Kazaa’ (Example 9), wchodzić na to stacja gower pl [=a website
address] ‘literally: to enter (on) stacja gower pl [=a website address]’
(Example 4 and possibly 5, 6 and 7). Some of the collocations seem to be
highly idiolect-dependent, e.g. wchodzić na pocztę, which was used in two
recordings (number 4 and 7), but by one speaker only (F29); others are, on
the other hand, quite common, e.g. wchodzić na stronę, used in three
recordings (number 4, 6 and 7) by three different speakers, namely M6, M7
and F29. It is interesting to note that such constructions, whether accidental or
not, are always used with the preposition na.
In other cases, the word wchodzić was used on its own, that is without
adjacent nouns (Examples 10, 15 and possibly 5, 6 and 7). This may indicate
that the new meaning of the word in question is already well assimilated, at
least in computer jargon.
What is more, wchodzić is now not only used in a new meaning, but there
is a greater range of possible agents as well, for example it is not only a person
that ‘enters a mail/webpage’ (wchodzę na pocztę/stronę, cf. Examples 1 and 8),
but also a computer that ‘enters a website’ (wchodzi na stronę, cf. Example 2;
27 Kazaa is a name of the program used for exchanging files in the Internet.
on [=komputer] wchodził, wchodził, wchodził i nie umiał wejść, cf. Examples

4, 5, 6 and 7). It must be added, however, that the latter constructions were
used by one speaker only (M6) and hence they should be classified as typical
for the idiolect of a given speaker.
The frequency of the different senses of the word in question is
summarized in Table 6.15. As the table shows, the new meaning has already
become quite common in spoken Polish.
Table 6.15 The frequency of the different senses of the word wejść found in the corpus
Number of Number of speakers Number of recordings
Meaning of the word
occurrences of that used the word in in which the meaning
wchodzić/wejść
a given meaning a given meaning appeared
Literal meaning, e.g. wejść do 16 6 6
pokoju, na działkę
Figurative meaning, e.g. wejść 10 3 5
do Unii, na egzamin, na rynek,
do głowy, w umowę
New meaning, e.g. wejść na 15 3 5
stronę
The new meaning of the word was noted in the literature (cf.
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 95—97). What is more, in her corpus
the word in the new sense also appeared with high frequency (24 times) but it
was used by only three speakers. Both corpora (gathered (1) by
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC and (2) by the present author) confirm thus
the hypothesis that the use of the word wchodzić in the new sense depends to
a great extent on the topic of the conversation and possibly on the idiolect of
a given speaker.
The new sense of the word wchodzić has not so far been noted in USJP.
6.4.36 Wirus
Traditionally, the word wirus was used in the field of biology and medicine in
the meaning of ‘an infective agent, typically consisting of a nucleic acid
molecule in a protein coat, able to multiply within the living cells of a host’
(cf. SJP, cf. also ODE). Nowadays the word wirus is a well-known semantic
loan (from English virus), used to denote, besides its regular meaning, ‘a piece
of computer code able to copy itself, typically having a harmful effect, such as
destroying data’.
The word in question was non-existent in the corpus in the traditional

sense, but it was used once in the extended sense:
(1) [Recording 7]
F29: i ona wiesz bo / coś mi tam z tymi wirusami ja nie wiem
As one can see, despite the new meaning, no new collocation has emerged.
The extended meaning of the word was noted in USJP under the heading
wirus komputerowy ‘a computer virus’, not wirus in general. This phrase is
probably a direct translation of English computer virus. In English, however,
the word virus (with no classifying noun or adjective, such as e.g. computer)
belongs to the semantic fields of both medicine and computing, as the word is
also defined as ‘a piece of computer code’ (cf. e.g. OALD, ODE).
6.4.37 Wyjść, wychodzić
The word wyjść, besides its numerous other meanings, can be used with
reference to newspapers, magazines and books in the sense of ‘to be published’
(cf. the examples of the use of the word provided by USJP: Książka wyszła
w małym nakładzie ‘The book came out in a limited edition’, Zbiór szkiców
wyszedł nakładem małego prywatnego wydawnictwa ‘The collection of sketches
was published by a small private publisher’, Pismo wychodzi co miesiąc ‘The
magazine is published monthly’).
It seems, however, that nowadays the word in question can be used in
a wider variety of contexts. Such an extension can be noticed in the corpus (the
word was used six times in the above-mentioned meaning):
(1) [Recording 18]

M7: będzie tak / ale jeżeli wyjdzie procesor tańszy / to one nie że stopniowo
to one mogą zaro# zaroz spaść o / o / do tysiąc czterysta
M6: chociaż to też są podobno różne wersje / że jest podobno już taka wersja
obrazkowa / tak? / taka jak w Windowsie podobno jest coś takiego
M14: no tak / wyszła teraz taka wersja która wygląda identycznie jak
w Windowsie
M6: i to jest całkowicie darmowe?
M14: całkowicie / na razie tak
M6: no / wychodzi powiedzmy / znaczy wygląda jak Windows ale pytanie /
z jakimiś programami / już nie mówię tam gry bo już nie gram / ale
M6: no czy jeszcze jakaś gazeta wychodzi w ogóle komputerowa nie nie
konsolowa / no tam te CyberMychy tam to to jest takie bardziej dla dzieci /
CyberMycha / Play
M7: no i tym podobne no to
M6: znaczy no już chyba więcej nie wychodzi
[together 1 sec.]
M7: kilku redaktorów / dwóch redaktorów [unclear 2 sec.] to to yyy dwie
osoby prowadzą
M6: mhm i to jeszcze wychodzi
As one can see, in Examples 4, 5 and 6 the word is used in the traditional
sense, namely referring to magazines, in the case here — to computer ones; in
the remaining examples (number 1, 2 and 3), by contrast, the word is used in
the extended sense, referring either to a central processing unit of a computer
(Example 1) or an operating system (Examples 2 and 3). Such usage hardly
conforms to the traditional understanding of the word wyjść.
The extended meaning results probably from the internal development of
Polish, but the English language may intensify the process, as the English
equivalent of wyjść in this context (i.e. come out) can be used in a wider
variety of contexts, c.f. the generality of one of the definitions given by OALD:
‘to be produced or published’.
The extended meaning of wyjść has not been included in USJP so far.
6.4.38 Zainstalować, zainstalowany, instalacja
Zainstalować, zainstalowany
According to SJP, the word zainstalować is used in two main senses: (1) ‘to
install’, referring to concrete objects, usually some technical devices, e.g.
zainstalować czujniki dymu ‘to install smoke detectors’ and, figuratively, (2) ‘to
house somebody, especially temporarily’, e.g. zainstalować pogorzelców
w koszarach ‘to house fire victims in barracks’ (cf. also USJP).
It seems, however, that nowadays the word is chiefly used with reference
to computer programs in the sense of ‘to install new software’. The new
meaning appears to be influenced by the English word to install, commonly
used in computer software, for example in windows appearing on a computer
screen.
The words in question were used eight times in the corpus by four speakers
(M6, M7, M14 and F29). All the instances of their use refer to computer
programs:
(1) [Recording 3]
M14: trzeba sobie Linuksa zainstalować
(2) [Recording 3]
M6: no bo ten Open Office właśnie teraz mam zainstalowany
(3) [Recording 3]
F29: ja mam ten / Windows ik# XP właśnie / to znaczy^
M6: tak?
F29: był problem / że jak myśmy go zainstalowali na początku / jakoś to tak
/ mało co chodziło
(4) [Recording 4]
F29: a ja ostatnio właśnie też / yyy Gadu Gadu sobie zainstalowałam
(5) [Recording 4]
M6: a ja / ja nie używam w ogóle / tego Gadu Gadu
F29: ja też w sumie / yyy miałam kiedyś jak nie miałam / miałam tylko
modem / no to wtedy też miałam zainstalowane ale to wtedy w ogóle tego
nie używałam
M14: nic dziwnego
(6) [Recording 11]

[...]
M14: to ja kiedyś zainstalowałem sobie słowiański
(7) [Recording 14]

M6: no / także to jak mi to zainstalujesz jak potem mi po prostu pokażesz
(8) [Recording 18]

M7: potem potem się to nie wiem / yyy przy nowej instalacji systemu /
zainstalowane *
Two points seem to be worth mentioning here: firstly, it appears that only
zainstalować, and not instalować, is commonly used in the above-mentioned
new context. The prefix za- has numerous meanings in Polish; with verbs of
foreign origin (such as e.g. atakować ‘attack’, deklarować ‘declare’, and
instalować ‘install’ in the old sense) it adds a flavour of perfective aspect
(® zaatakować, zadeklarować, zainstalować) (USJP). In the new context,
however, it seems that the verb sounds unnatural when used in imperfective
aspect (instalować). This view is corroborated by two sources: (1) the corpus
(when the informants were talking about computers, always zainstalować, and
not instalować, was used) and (2) USJP, where the new sense is included in
the definition of the word zainstalować, but is left out in the case of the word
instalować. One can of course imagine a form instalować used with reference
to computer software (e.g. Wczoraj instalowałem Linuksa ‘I was installing
Linux yesterday’), but it seems rather uncommon in comparison with the form
zainstalować. Moreover, using the form in imperfective aspect suggests failure
on the part of the computer user.
Secondly, it appears that the word zainstalować is nowadays more
frequently used, at least in the speech of the younger generation of Poles, with
respect to software, than in the older senses quoted at the beginning of
the present subsection. This conjecture is again corroborated by the corpus: as
was mentioned before, all the instances of the use of the form in question refer
to computer programs. As a consequence, the process observed here is not
a clear case of an extension of meaning, but it has certain characteristics of
a semantic shift as well.
Instalacja
The new meaning of the word instalacja is closely related to zainstalować,

discussed in the previous section. Instalacja was used in the corpus once, in
the meaning of ‘the process of installing new software on a computer’:
(1) [Recording 18]

M7: potem potem się to nie wiem / yyy przy nowej instalacji systemu /
zainstalowane *
The new meaning of the word instalacja has not so far been noted in USJP.
6.4.39 Zawiesić
Traditionally, the word zawiesić was used in two main senses: (1) ‘to hang (e.g.
a picture on a hook)’ and (2) ‘to suspend (e.g. a court sentence or a student
from school)’ (cf. SJP).
Nowadays the word belongs also to the semantic field of computers and
computer software, as it can be used in the sense of ‘to crash; to stop working
suddenly’. It is very probable that the extension is another example of
the influence of English in the sphere of semantics, as one of the meanings of
the English word hang, according to ODE, reads as follows: ‘(computing) come
or cause to come unexpectedly to a state in which no further operations can be
carried out’.
The word in question was used in the corpus twice (by two speakers,
namely F4 and F29). However, only one instance of its use refers to computers:
(1) [Recording 7]
już by tak / tak trzeba by coś wysłać / a / potem nagle mi się nie wiem
zawiesił / że w ogóle tak jakbym nie mogła wejść sobie yyy / u siebie na
pocztę na wysłane
As one can see, the word is used in the reflexive construction (zawiesić
się). The new sense of the word has been included in USJP.
6.4.40 Other semantic neologisms
Apart from the semantic loans discussed in the previous sections, the corpus
contains some other semantic extensions. Most of them do not seem to result
from the influence of English, but rather from the internal development of
Polish.28 The English language may, however, intensify the process.
The words in question are briefly presented below in order to give
a complete picture of semantic extensions found in the corpus.
First, there are four well-assimilated semantic borrowings connected with
the sphere of computers:
• program, used ten times in the sense of ‘a computer program’ (cf. also
WITALISZ, 2007: 281); moreover, certain derivatives were used, such as
programik (used once), programowy (used once), programowanie (used
twice), programować (used nine times) and oprogramowanie (used five
times), e.g. zależy od programu jaki masz / gry [...] programy [...] filmy też
generalnie tanieją / ale to jest sprzętowe czy programowe? / Gadu-Gadu to
jest podstawowy program. What is more, the word program is used only
three times in the meaning different from the one relating to computers.
28This is the reason why they are not discussed separately (as semantic loans), but only
mentioned together in the present section.
• dysk, used twice in the sense of ‘a hard disk’, twice in the sense of
‘a CD-ROM’ and seven times in the expression dysk twardy / twardy dysk
‘a hard disk’, e.g. i to bych też tam wszystko chcioł dać na dysk / załóżmy że
kupisz to z twardym dyskiem.
• grać, used 15 times in either traditional literal meaning (‘to play a particular
sport or a musical instrument’) or figurative one (used to say that something
is all right or wrong, e.g. wszystko gra, coś nie gra) and as many as 31 times
in the meaning relating to computer games (similar to English play), e.g. już
nie mówię tam gry bo już nie gram to jo bych musioł no na bardzo słabej
rozdzielczości grać [...] może kiedyś sobie pogrom / to on gra też w Counter
Strike’a.
• gra, used three times as a part of proper names (viz. the titles of computer
game magazines) and as many as 29 times in two relatively new senses:
(1) ‘a game played on a computer screen’ and (2) ‘a computer program that
enables such a game’, e.g. ale generalnie gra w bardzo dużo gier / gry na
PC taki przeżyją jakby renesans / a pracy to by było nieporównanie mniej niż
zrobienie jakiejkolwiek gry. The change itself is most probably a result of
the internal development of the Polish language, but it could have been
reinforced by English (computer) game.
Second, the corpus contains a group of words, previously related to the post
office and letters, that are now also used with reference to electronic
communication:
• dojść/dochodzić/doszło, used 14 times with reference to e-mail, e.g.
zobaczymy czy od mojej strony dojdzie do was / no to się raczej chyba nie
zdarza żeby nie doszły.
• wysłać/wysyłać/wysłane/wysyłacz, used eight times in the traditional meaning
and 12 times with reference to e-mail and SMS, e.g. a kiedy to wysłałeś /
wysłać chciałech maila nie pamiętom po co / to jest mania każdego
początkującego wysyłacza maili.
• przysłać/przysyłać/przesłać/przesyłać, used eight times in the traditional
meaning and eight times with reference to e-mail, e.g. przesłać mailem.
Third, the corpus contains some other semantic extensions:
• kawiarenka, used in the phrase kawiarenka internetowa, to denote ‘a room
with computers on which customers can use the Internet, play computer
games, etc.’, used on the model of English cybercafe and Internet café
(cf. OALD). Interestingly enough, most Polish cybercafes have nothing in
common with cafes (i.e. no drinks or meals are served in them). The form
was used once in the corpus.
• oryginalny/oryginał, used in the meaning of ‘sold legally; not pirated’ and
‘a product sold legally’, respectively. The words in this meaning refer chiefly
to software, films and music recorded on CD-ROMs, DVDs, CDs or
cassettes (cf. also ZABAWA, 2004c: 59—60). The word oryginalny was used
three times in the traditional meaning (‘new, interesting or strange’) and

once in the new meaning; oryginał was used six times, only in the new
meaning, e.g. oryginalny Windows / jednak oryginały poszły bardzo w dół /
choćby ten oryginał był nie wiadomo jak tani [...] / że jak będzie oryginał
trzydzieści złotych [...] / kupić oryginał.
• system, used three times in the traditional meaning and seven times in
the new meaning of ‘an operating system of a computer’, e.g. że można
kupić ten [...] ten system / to musisz kupić nowy system / przy nowej instalacji
systemu [...] / co ten Microsoft wymyśla [...] co on wymyśla z tymi systemami.
• ściągać/ściąganie, used nine times in the traditional meaning of ‘to cheat
during an exam’ and as many as 33 times in the new meaning of ‘to
download something (from the Internet)’, e.g. no ja akurat nic nie ściągałem
/ pięć mega ściągnął w dwie minuty / dwa przecinek dziewięć miliona
ściągnięć tego programu w ciągu ostatniego roku.
• stacjonarny, used previously mainly in connection with abstract nouns, e.g.
niż stacjonarny ‘a stationary low’, studia stacjonarne ‘full-time studies’,
nowadays also used to describe technical devices and appliances, e.g.
a CD/DVD recorder (i.e. not connected to a computer, but operating on its
own), e.g. stacjonarne nagrywarki DVD. The word was used four times in
the corpus, only in the new meaning.
• gazeta, used ten times in the traditional meaning, i.e. ‘a (daily) newspaper’,
five times as a part of a proper name, e.g. Gazeta Wyborcza, and six times in
the extended meaning, referring to monthlies or even a quarterly.
• mega, used five times in20 the meaning of ‘a megabyte’ (functioning as
a noun), i.e. 1,048,576 (=2 ) bytes, e.g. pięć mega ściągnął w dwie minuty.
• kilo, used twice10in the meaning of ‘a kilobyte’ (thus functioning as a noun),
i.e. 1,024 (=2 ) bytes, e.g. to od ciebie ściąga dwajścia cztery kilo.
Additionally, the word was used informally ten times in the traditional
meaning of ‘a kilogram’.
• chodzić, used seven times in relation to computer programs and games in
the meaning of ‘to function properly under a given operating system or
hardware configuration’, e.g. teraz jakaś firma wypuściła Open Office’a [...]
i to chodzi [pod kontrolą systemu Linux] / był problem [...] że jak myśmy go
zainstalowali na początku [...] jakoś to tak [...] mało co chodziło / ale u mnie
w każdym razie niepłynnie chodzi.
• komórka, a merged form of the two words telefon + komórkowy, modelled on
English cellular phone and cellphone, used once in the corpus: przedwczoraj
mam telefon na komórkę.
• plik, used 11 times in the corpus in the new meaning of ‘a piece or
collection of information stored in computer memory, or on a floppy disk,
under a particular name; a file’, e.g. ile użytkowników ma dany plik / jo już
generalnie wiem jak pliki łączyć. What is more, the word did not appear at
all in the traditional meaning of ‘a collection of something, especially pieces

of paper or paper money; a wad’ (cf. SJP). The word was used in some new
collocations, unheard of before, for example ściągać plik ‘to download
a file’ (used twice) or łączyć pliki ‘to merge files’ (used twice). What is
more, the word in the new sense is ‘semantically independent’, i.e.
the meaning is conveyed solely by the word, whereas plik in the traditional
sense usually requires a further noun in the genitive, e.g. plik zeszytów,
gazet, listów, pieniędzy.
• załącznik, used once in the new meaning of ‘a computer file appended to
an e-mail; an attachment’: to kurczę gdzie te zdjęcia [...] wchodzę nie ma
żadnych załączników. The word was not used at all in the traditional meaning
of ‘a document added to a letter or a report; an annex; an enclosure’.
6.5 Statistical analysis
The aim of the current section is to present some concluding figures

concerning the semantic influence of English on contemporary spoken Polish.29
The frequency of the occurrence of the semantic loans discussed in
the present chapter is summarized in Table 6.16.
Table 6.16 The use of semantic borrowings in the corpus

Number of occurrences of Number of speakers that Number of recordings in
Semantic loana the word in the new used the word in the new which the word in
meaning meaning the new meaning appeared
1 2 3 4
absolutnie 1 1 1
adres 5 3 3
adresat 1 1 1
album 3 2 1
cyfrowy 6 2 2
dinozaur 1 1 1
dokładnie 12 7 7
globalny 4 2 1
ikona 1 1 1
instalacja 1 1 1
29 The semantic neologisms discussed briefly in section 6.4.40 are not taken into account in
any of the tables in this section. For the sake of clarity, derivatives are listed as separate entries.
cont. tab. 6.16

1 2 3 4
inteligentny 1 1 1
karta 1 1 1
kasa 8 7 3
klawiatura 4 2 1
konsola 2 1 1
konsolowy 1 1 1
konto 4 3 2
list 1 1 1
ładować 1 1 1
obrazek 5 2 3
opcja 4 4 4
operować 2 1 1
pakiet 2 2 2
partner 2 1 1
piracki 1 1 1
piractwo 5 2 1
pirat 7 2 1
poczta 3 2 2
profesjonalnie 1 1 1
promocja 3 2 2
rozpakować 1 1 1
sieć 3 3 3
słownik 3 2 1
strona 14 4 6
super 8 5 7
test 3 3 3
transfer 1 1 1
wczytać/wczytywać 4 1 1
wejść/wchodzić 15 3 5
wirus 1 1 1
wyjść/wychodzić 3 3 2
zainstalować 5 3 4
zainstalowany 3 3 3
zawiesić 1 1 1
a Cf. also the analogous table compiled by OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000).
As one can see, some of the loans were used either only once in the corpus
or by one speaker, but many others appear to be quite common. It seems thus
surprising that some of the commoner new meanings, such as of the word sieć
(used three times in the corpus and commonly appearing in the language of
the press, cf. section 6.4.28) or konsola (not frequent in the corpus, but
commonly used in computer magazines, cf. section 6.4.14), have not been
included in USJP, which is one of the biggest and newest dictionaries of
contemporary Polish (published in 2003).
When one compares the data in Table 6.16 with the analogous table based
on the corpus gathered by OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000: 99), it is apparent
that the number of semantic loans (types) has rapidly grown in recent years.
A considerable number of new loans (belonging both to general Polish and to
the semantic field of computers and the Internet), not described before, were
used in the present corpus. It may suggest that there is a certain preference
among some of the speakers for the use of Polish words in the new meaning
over the use of unassimilated or partly-assimilated loans of English origin.
This, in turn, seems to be a result of the translation (usually done by somebody
else and published) using the primary counterpart, i.e. the most ‘obvious’
counterpart, often resembling the original word in spelling. The Polish
translation of various documents, instruction manuals, etc., is nowadays
required by the law concerning the use of the Polish language (Ustawa o języku
polskim, cf. Chapter 3, footnote 4). It must be added that such translations (e.g.
of instruction manuals) are sometimes hasty and, as a result, not very careful.
Furthermore, many people criticize the use, let alone overuse, of words of
foreign origin (cf. Chapter 3). As a result, translators (especially the ones
dealing with technical texts, such as manuals) and journalists often make
conscious attempts to polonize a given word. Usually only then does such
a word begin to be used by ordinary speakers (cf. also Diagrams 6.2, 6.3 and
6.4 in section 6.3).
As one can see (cf. Table 6.16), some of the semantic loans detected in
the corpus belong to the group of momentary or nonce borrowings (a term
used by POPLACK et al., 1988: 52 with respect to lexical loans), i.e. they were
used only once, probably to ‘satisfy a momentary linguistic need’ (cf. Chapter
2). Others, by contrast, were repeated relatively frequently and thus belong to
the group of recurrent borrowings (POPLACK et al., 1988: 57). Following these
criteria, it is possible to divide the semantic loans found in the corpus into five
groups30 (as in the case of lexical loans, cf. section 5.3): nonce borrowings
(that occurred once in the corpus), idiosyncratic borrowings (used by one
30 Some loans belong simultaneously to more than one group, e.g. wczytać/wczytywać
belongs to the group of both idiosyncratic and recurrent borrowings (the word was used four
times by one speaker).
speaker), recurrent borrowings (that occurred at least four times in

the corpus), widespread borrowings (used by at least four speakers31) and
mid-frequent borrowings (the author’s own term), i.e. the ones which do not
belong to any of the previous four groups. The results of the classification are
presented in Table 6.17.32
As in the case of lexical borrowings (cf. section 5.3), the group of
widespread loans is the smallest in terms of the number of loan types (5).
However, as all of the loans from this group were used by at least four
speakers, it constitutes a large group in terms of loan tokens (46).
The group of nonce borrowings comprises 16 loan types, whereas the group
of widespread borrowings (used by no fewer than four speakers) consists of 5
types. The former group is thus more than three times as big in terms of loan
types as the group of widespread borrowings. However, the picture looks
completely different when the groups are compared with respect to the number
of loan tokens. The former comprises 16 loan tokens whereas the latter as many
as 46 ones. In other words, the types belonging to nonce group constitute
36.36% of the loan types from the entire corpus,33 whereas the types belonging
to widespread group constitute only 11.36%. However, when it comes to loan
tokens, the situation looks different: the nonce group forms only 10.13% of
the tokens from the entire corpus while the widespread group constitutes as
many as 29.11% of the tokens found in the corpus. What follows is the fact
that, statistically, an average speaker (particularly the one that has not taken
part in the conversations about computers) uses more widespread than nonce
types (the group of mid-frequent borrowings being somehow in between).
Consequently, the nonce and idiosyncratic groups, although large in terms of
loan types, are in fact not very significant when it comes to loan tokens.
As for individual loans, the words wejść/wchodzić, strona and dokładnie
were used most frequently in the corpus (15, 14 and 12 tokens respectively);34
furthermore, they were used by a relatively large number of speakers (3, 4 and
7 respectively). When the number of informants is taken into consideration,
then dokładnie and kasa are among the most widespread, as both of them were
used by seven speakers.
It may be therefore generally stated that the new meanings of words
belonging to the group of widespread borrowings are known to a relatively
31 The number of speakers (four) is roughly 10% of the informants taking part in
the conversations that constitute the present corpus.
32 This is an extended and revised version of the classification used by POPLACK et al. (1988:
57) with respect to lexical loans. As they note, nonce borrowings are by definition idiosyncratic
and widespread loans are by definition recurrent.
33 The entire corpus includes 44 loan types and 158 loan tokens (including derivatives).
34 When one is to include derivatives, then piracki/pirat/piractwo would also be included
here, as they were used 13 times altogether.

Table 6.17. The classification of the semantic loans found in the corpus according to their frequency
Widespread Mid-frequent
Nonce borrowings Idiosyncratic borrowings Recurrent borrowings
borrowings borrowings
Loans
absolutnie, adresat, dinozaur, absolutnie, adresat, dinozaur, ikona, instalacja, adres, cyfrowy, dokładnie, album, pakiet,
ikona, instalacja, inteligentny, inteligentny, karta, konsola, konsolowy, list, dokładnie, globalny, kasa, kasa, opcja, poczta,
karta, konsolowy, list, ładować, operować, partner, piracki, klawiatura, konto, strona, super promocja, sieć,
ładować, piracki, profesjonalnie, rozpakować, transfer, wczytać obrazek, opcja, pirat, słownik, test,
profesjonalnie, rozpakować, (wczytywać), wirus, zawiesić piractwo, strona, super, wyjść
transfer, wirus, zawiesić wczytać (wczytywać), (wychodzić),
wejść (wchodzić), zainstalowany
zainstalować
Types (N)
16 20 16 5 9
Tokens (N)
16 26 110 46 26
Tokens:types ratio
1.00 1.30 6.88 9.20 2.89

large percentage of speakers and are hence quite well assimilated. It is thus
slightly surprising that some of the extensions, for example the new function of
dokładnie (see section 6.4.7 for details), have not yet been officially accepted,
at least in spoken language, by the dictionaries of contemporary Polish, such as
NSPP or USJP.
Table 6.18 illustrates the relation between the number of semantic loans
found in the corpus (types and tokens) and the topic of a given conversation.
Table 6.18 The use of semantic loans in particular recordings

a List of loans (number of occurrences of a given loan
Recording Topic of the conversation
in the new meaning)b
1 2 3
1 dogs, holidays, sport super (1)

contests, fishing
2 school, teachers, pupils dokładnie (4), obrazek (1), opcja (1), super (1)
3*** computers, the Internet, *adres (1), *ikona (1), *inteligentny (1), *pakiet (1),
computer programs *piracki (1), *sieć (1), *strona (2), *wyjść/wychodzić
(2), *zainstalować (2), *zainstalowany (1)
4** student exchange, *adres (2), *adresat (1), dinozaur (1), *konto (3), obrazki
computers and e-mail, (2), *opcja (1), *poczta (2), *sieć (1), *strona (2), test
exams and cheating (1), *wejść/wchodzić (3), *zainstalować (1),
*zainstalowany (1)
5 acquaintances, family absolutnie (1), promocja (1), super (1)
matters, working,
excursions, holidays
6*** computers, computer album (3), dokładnie (1), globalny (4), *karta (1),
games, computer *konsola (2), *konsolowy (1), *konto (1), *ładować (1),
magazines, the Internet *obrazek (2), *opcja (1), *pakiet (1), profesjonalnie (1),
*strona (3), test (1), *transfer (1), *wejść/wchodzić (6)
7** computers and e-mail, *adres (2), cyfrowy (4), *opcja (1), *poczta (1), *strona
student exchange, (3), super (2), *wczytać/wczytywać (4), *wejść/wchodzić
learning German (4), *wirus (1), *zawiesić (1)
8 teaching and learning super (1)
foreign languages
9 a wedding, doing dokładnie (2), kasa (2), partner (2)
shopping, business
matters
10 school, pupils and dokładnie (2), super (1), test (1)
teaching, doctors and
health-care
11** correspondence, cyfrowy (2), dokładnie (1), *klawiatura (4), *list (1),
computers (esp. using *słownik (3), *zainstalować (1)
a text processor)
cont. tab. 6.18

1 2 3
12 family matters, —
acquaintances, keeping
dogs at home
13 films, teaching and giving —
grades, marriages
14* looking for work, doing operować (2), *rozpakować (1), *zainstalować (1)
business, computers and
the Internet
15 weather, holidays super (1)
16 looking for work, —
learning abroad, moving
to another country
17* learning foreign dokładnie (1), *strona (3), *wejść/wchodzić (1)
languages, taking exams
18** birthdays, films, new dokładnie (1), *instalacja (1), *piractwo (5), *pirat (7),
technologies, software promocja (2), *sieć (1), *strona (1), *wejść/wchodzić
piracy (1), *wyjść/wychodzić (1), *zainstalowany (1)
19 grilling and smoking kasa (5)
food, working in the
garden, ticks and other
insects
20 everyday life, cooking kasa (1)
and eating, family, taking
care of a baby
a An asterisk (*) after the number of the recording indicates that the Internet and/or computers were very briefly mentioned
during a given conversation. However, such a recording cannot really be said to deal with the topic of computers. Two
asterisks (**) indicate that the Internet and/or computers (among other topics) were discussed during the conversation in
question; three asterisks (***) indicate that the entire conversation was about computers and/or the Internet.
b The loans preceded by an asterisk belong to the semantic field of computers and the Internet.
As Table 6.18 shows, most semantic loans, as in the case of lexical ones
(cf. section 5.3), seem to depend on the topic of the conversation. This is
particularly evident in the case of the loans belonging to the semantic field of
computers and the Internet; many other loans are, however, also
topic-dependent (although to a much lesser extent), e.g. partner is likely to
appear when marriages are discussed (cf. Recording 9), album — when music
is talked about (cf. Recording 6), cyfrowy — when technical devices are
discussed (cf. Recordings 7 and 11). Other loans are connected with a given
profession, e.g. test appears mainly, albeit not exclusively, in the conversations
between teachers in a school (cf. Recording 10).
Some loans, by contrast, do not appear to depend on the topic of
the conversation. This is true in the case of (1) the loans appearing in various
recordings, e.g. dokładnie, kasa, promocja, super and (2) the loans which were
used accidentally in a given conversation and could have possibly been used in
any other recording, e.g. absolutnie, dinozaur, opcja. However, these loans are
clearly in the minority when compared with the ones depending on the topic of
the conversation.
The next table (6.19) summarizes the number of types and tokens of
semantic loans found in particular recordings. The loans are divided into two
groups: Group A, which is comprised of the loans belonging to no specific
semantic field (or to various semantic fields, with the exception of computers)
and Group B, which consists of the loans belonging to the area of computers
and the Internet.
Table 6.19 The number of types and tokens of semantic loans in particular recordings
Number of Group A Group B Both groups combined

the recordinga types tokens types tokens types tokens
1 1 1 0 0 1 1
2 4 7 0 0 4 7
3*** 0 0 10 13 10 13
4** 3 4 10 17 13 21
5 3 3 0 0 3 3
6*** 5 10 11 20 16 30
7** 2 6 8 17 10 23
8 1 1 0 0 1 1
9 3 6 0 0 3 6
10 3 4 0 0 3 4
11** 2 3 4 9 6 12
12 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0
14* 1 2 2 2 3 4
15 1 1 0 0 1 1
16 0 0 0 0 0 0
17* 1 1 2 4 3 5
18** 2 3 8 18 10 21
19 1 5 0 0 1 5
20 1 1 0 0 1 1
In general, as Table 6.19 shows, the number of the semantic loans (in terms
of both types and tokens) is much larger in the recordings where the Internet
and/or computers were discussed. However, the difference is visible only in
Group B (and thus in A+B). As for the loans belonging to general Polish
(Group A), there does not seem to exist any connection between the topic of
a conversation and the number of such loans. The situation is thus very similar
to the one referring to lexical loans (cf. section 5.3).
Table 6.20 shows the number of semantic loans (tokens) as the percentage
of the total number of words. The percentage is counted separately for each
recording.
Table 6.20 The number of semantic loans (tokens) shown as the percentage of the total number
of words
Number of Total number of words Number of semantic Semantic loans as % of
the recordinga (tokens) loans (tokens) the total number of words
1 3,966 1 0.03
2 2,868 7 0.24
3*** 1,620 13 0.80
4** 2,027 21 1.04
5 3,290 3 0.09
6*** 3,654 30 0.82
7** 2,348 23 0.98
8 3,144 1 0.03
9 3,327 6 0.18
10 2,178 4 0.18
11** 2,393 12 0.50
12 3,848 0 0.00
13 1,535 0 0.00
14* 4,060 4 0.10
15 2,229 1 0.04
16 3,895 0 0.00
17* 2,329 5 0.21
18** 3,807 21 0.55
19 3,162 5 0.16
20 4,884 1 0.02
Total 60,564 158 0.26
The next table (6.21) shows the same data as Table 6.20, but is arranged
according to the percentage of semantic loans in particular recordings.
Consequently, Table 6.21 better illustrates the relation between the percentage
of semantic loans and the individual recordings.
Table 6.21 The percentage of semantic loans in particular

recordings
% of the semantic loans Number of the recording
0.00 12
0.00 13
0.00 16
0.02 20
0.03 8
0.03 1
0.04 15
0.09 5
0.10 14*
0.16 19
0.18 9
0.18 10
0.21 17*
0.24 2
0.26 average
0.50 11**
0.55 18**
0.80 3***
0.82 6***
0.98 7**
1.04 4**
As in the case of lexical loans (cf. section 5.3), it is apparent that there is
a close correspondence between the topic of the conversation (in particular
when the Internet and/or computers were discussed) and the number of
semantic loans (tokens), expressed as the percentage of the total number of
words of a given recording (cf. also Tables 6.18 and 6.19). As for such
percentage, almost all conversations during which the Internet and/or
computers were discussed are above the average. The only exceptions are
Recordings 14 and 17, but during these conversations the Internet and
computers were only very briefly mentioned. As a consequence, Recordings 14
and 17 cannot really be said to deal with the topic of computers or the Internet.
By contrast, all the conversations during which the Internet or computers

were not mentioned are below the average. However, it must be underlined
once again that the topic of the conversation does not seem to have a great
influence on the number of semantic loans belonging to general Polish or to
other semantic fields (i.e. not connected with computers and the Internet)
(cf. Table 6.19).
To sum up, the number of semantic loans (types) has considerably grown in
recent years (which can be proved by the comparison of the present findings
with those of OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000 and WITALISZ, 2007).
The increase can be noticed in both groups of semantic loans: (1) belonging to
general Polish (or to some semantic fields different from the one connected
with computers) and (2) belonging to the semantic area of computers and
the Internet. It must be added that the growth is particularly visible in the latter.
7.2 Lexical loans found in the corpus ½ 177
Chapter 7
CONCLUSIONS
7.1 Introduction
The aim of the book was to discuss lexical and semantic borrowings,
particularly the newest ones, taken from English. As the influence of English
upon the written variety of Polish, particularly the one of the press, has been
researched relatively thoroughly, it was decided to concentrate on the spoken
variety. With this end in view, a corpus of informal spontaneous conversations,
consisting of over 60,000 words in total, was gathered, transcribed and
carefully analysed. The aim of this chapter is to present the conclusions of
the study.
7.2 Lexical loans found in the corpus
Altogether, 78 types (including derivatives) of English lexical loans have been

found in the corpus (225 tokens). They have been divided into four groups.
The first one comprises the loans introduced before 1990, most of which are
well assimilated on some or all the levels (pronunciation, morphology,
semantics and spelling). The second group consists of the loanwords introduced
in the 1990s or later, noted in USJP and/or WSWO. The third one comprises
the new borrowings, introduced only recently and not yet noted in
the aforementioned dictionaries, but noted in the newest dictionary of English
lexical loans in Polish, i.e. SZA. The fourth one consists of the newest loans,
not noted in SZA. Additionally, the corpus contains some forms which are not
typical loanwords, but which seem, nevertheless, to have been modelled on
English (or sometimes also German). Moreover, some English constructions
178 ½ Chapter 7: Conclusions
used metalinguistically or quoted verbatim as well as a relatively large group

of proper names modelled on or taken from English were also found in
the corpus.
The number of English loanwords (225 tokens) may seem relatively large at
first glance, but when this number is contrasted with the number of running
words of the entire corpus, it becomes evident that English loanwords
constitute a very small percentage of the corpus, namely 0.3715%.
Thus, the study has revealed that, contrary to popular belief, Polish
speakers do not seem to overuse the borrowings from English. While it may be
the case that the borrowings of English origin are used excessively in
the language of the mass media, particularly in commercials and press
advertisements, they are not overused in spontaneous everyday conversations.
This corroborates OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC’S finding that the speech of Poles
is in fact quite conservative in terms of the use of English words.
On the other hand, a number of the loanwords that appeared in the present
corpus have not so far been discussed in the literature on the subject or noted
in the dictionaries of foreign terms. Most of them, however, were used only
once or twice in the corpus and, consequently, can be classified as momentary
or idiosyncratic borrowings (cf. Chapter 5). They seem to depend on
the idiolect of a given speaker, at least to a certain extent. This indicates that
new vocabulary items are entering Polish all the time but many of such loans,
although they may gain some temporary appeal, will probably never become
assimilated and will not become a part of the Polish lexis. What is more, it
appears that most of the newest loans have not been borrowed by the speakers
directly from English, but rather they were first used in the Polish of the mass
media, as most of the loans from this group can also be found on the Internet
or in the magazines, particularly the ones dealing with computers, the Internet
and modern technology.
Furthermore, the corpus contains a few loanwords noted in WSWO and/or
USJP, but used in the corpus in a slightly or completely different meaning from
the one or ones noted in the dictionaries. A phenomenon of this type can be
noticed in the case of such words as camping, DVD (in one of its uses) or van.
Some other loans appeared in the corpus in the same meaning as the one noted
in USJP or WSWO. Many of them are, nevertheless, still not widely known and
can therefore be regarded as novelties in contemporary Polish. The group in
question includes such words as interaktywny, kartridż, on-line or subwoofer.
Other borrowings, on the other hand, while having been introduced into Polish
a relatively long time ago, are still far from fully assimilated, e.g. dubbing or
weekend.
Interestingly but perhaps not surprisingly, nouns predominate in the group
of loanwords (57.89% in terms of types, 68.61% in terms of tokens). This
predominance becomes even more striking when one is to take account of
7.2 Lexical loans found in the corpus ½ 179
the fact that the nouns in general (i.e. all nouns, not only borrowed ones) do
not predominate in the corpus, as was shown on the basis of 2,000-word
corpus sample. What seems to be more interesting, however, is (1) a high
percentage of abbreviations/acronyms in the group of lexical loans (13.16% in
terms of types, 13.45% in terms of tokens) and (2) a very rare use of English
exclamations or interjections.
The number of lexical loans, in terms of both types and tokens, seem to
depend on the topic of a conversation. To be more precise, the number of
lexical loans is larger in the conversations in which the Internet and computers
were discussed. It must be highlighted, however, that the difference is visible
only among the loans belonging to the semantic field of computers and
the Internet. In other words, the number of the loans belonging to general
Polish does not seem to depend on the topic of the conversation.
To sum up, Poles do not appear to overuse English loanwords. What is
more, the majority of the newer loanwords belong to the semantic field of
computers, the Internet or modern technology. They denote new concepts,
objects, devices or features (e.g. hand-held, subwoofer, OEM, interaktywny,
on-line). Admittedly, they sometimes have Polish counterparts, but it seems that
English borrowings are often preferred because of their brevity. Some examples
are presented in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1 English borrowings and their possible Polish counterparts

English borrowing or word modelled on English a
Possible Polish counterpart
(found in the corpus)
1 2
subwoofer głośnik niskotonowy
(użytkownicy) on-line (użytkownicy) korzystający z Internetu or
podłączeni do Internetu
(wersja) OEM wersja dla konkretnego komputera
interaktywny odbierający informacje od użytkownika
i reagujący na nie
multiplayer gra komputerowa (or wersja gry
komputerowej) przeznaczona dla jednoczesnej
gry kilku osób; gra wieloosobowa
e-mail, mail poczta elektroniczna or wiadomość przesłana
pocztą elektroniczną or adres internetowy
użytkownika poczty elektronicznej
screen zrzut ekranowy
single, singleplayer gra komputerowa (or wersja gry
komputerowej) przeznaczona dla jednej osoby;
gra jednoosobowa
hand-held (mały) komputer (or konsola do gier)
mieszczący się w dłoni
cont. tab. 7.1

1 2
serwer komputer (or program komputerowy)
udostępniający użytkownikom swoje zasoby
(or wykonujący otrzymane polecenia)
PC, pecet komputer osobisty
hi-fi (sprzęt audio) wysokiej jakości
weekend sobota i niedziela; koniec tygodnia; okres od
piątkowego popołudnia do niedzieli włącznie
a Some of the possible Polish counterparts are quoted from or formulated on the basis of WSWO.
Naturally, in some cases Polish constructions are as brief as their English

counterparts, e.g. download a file from the Internet — ściągać (or pobrać) plik
z Internetu. On the whole, however, it seems that the majority of the English
constructions, at least belonging to the semantic field of computers, are shorter
than their possible Polish counterparts.
It appears that most of the English loans used in the corpus either belong to
the group of old and relatively well-assimilated borrowings (e.g. film, biznes,
standard, komputer) or can be classified as necessary borrowings (cf.
the aforementioned examples: hand-held, subwoofer, interaktywny, on-line,
OEM).
Consequently, most of the loans in the corpus were used not because of
linguistic snobbery but because of either linguistic necessity or linguistic
economy. Naturally, a few forms can perhaps be classified as unnecessary
borrowings, e.g. boksowy (boxowy), impossible, net, non-stop, pass, pub and zip
file. On the whole, however, such loans were relatively infrequent in
the corpus, as the majority of them appeared only once or were used by one
speaker. Moreover, some of them, such as pass or zip file, should be classified
as single-word code switches rather than borrowings.
7.3 Semantic loans found in the corpus
Altogether, 44 types of English semantic loans (including derivatives) were

found in the corpus (158 tokens). The vast majority of the semantic loans found
in the corpus belong to the group of semantic extensions, i.e. their meaning
has been extended, probably under the influence of English. Some words,
however, have also certain features of a semantic shift understood in the present
study as an extension of meaning followed by a gradual disappearance of
the traditional sense (cf. Chapter 6). Such a process can clearly be seen in
7.4 Final comments ½ 181
the case of some semantic loans connected with the area of computers, e.g.
konsola or piracki.
As might have been expected, the group of English semantic loans (158
tokens) constitutes a small percentage of the entire corpus, smaller than in
the case of lexical loans, namely 0.26088%.
However, a considerable number of new semantic loans (not noted in
dictionaries), have appeared in the corpus, cf. e.g. adresat, cyfrowy, instalacja,
klawiatura, konsola, konsolowy, list, ładować, obrazek, rozpakować, słownik,
super (discussed as a semantic loan, not a lexical, morphological or syntactic
one), transfer, wczytać/wczytywać, wyjść/wychodzić, zainstalować and
zainstalowany. What is more, the book aimed at not only describing
the individual semantic loans, but at forming some hypotheses about
the possible ways of introducing semantic borrowings into spoken informal
Polish as well. Furthermore, some general rules governing the process in
question were inferred.
As in the case of lexical loans, the number of semantic borrowings seems
to depend on the topic of the conversation. In general, the number of semantic
loans was much larger in the conversations in which the Internet, modern
technology or computers were discussed. Again, however, the number of
the loans belonging to general Polish does not appear to be topic-dependent.
7.4 Final comments
There seems to be a certain tendency among the speakers of Polish to use not
only new vocabulary items borrowed from English (lexical borrowings), but to
assign new meanings to already existing native Polish words or older borrowings
as well (semantic borrowings, which usually seem to result from the translation
using the primary counterpart). As a consequence, there have appeared pairs of
synonyms, where the first word is a lexical borrowing from English, whereas
the second — a semantic one. Some examples are presented in Table 7.2.1
Table 7.2 Pairs of lexical and semantic loans in Polish

English lexical borrowing English semantic borrowing
~Internet, ~net ~Sieć (sieć)
~e-mail, ~mail ~list, ~poczta
digitalny (dygitalny) ~cyfrowy
engine [of a computer game] silnik
1 The forms actually found in the corpus are preceded by the sign ~.
As one can see, such pairs of loans (lexical and semantic) are particularly
often encountered in the semantic area of computers, the Internet and modern
technology. This is fairly predictable, as there is a constant need to invent new
names for various devices, objects and concepts in the semantic field in
question. In such a situation, users of Polish have two options: either borrowing
the word directly from a foreign language, mostly English (e.g. Internet,
engine) or assigning a new meaning to an already existing Polish native word
or older borrowing (e.g. Sieć, silnik). The present study has revealed that both
methods are used, the former one being more common.
Curiously enough, some words are simultaneously lexical and semantic
borrowings from English. Most probably, such words were first borrowed from
English, but their meaning was somehow restricted in Polish. In other words,
a given loan in Polish had a narrower range of meanings than its English
counterpart. Next, a new meaning, existing in English, was assigned to
the borrowing already used in Polish. This is the case of such words as test or
partner, both of which appeared in the corpus.
In conclusion, it can be stated that lexical borrowings do not seem to pose
a serious danger to contemporary Polish. On the contrary, the Polish language
keeps developing and the emergence of new lexical items is one of the signs of
such development. The study has revealed that users of Polish do not seem to
overuse the words of English origin. What is more, most of the new loans
found in the corpus appeared in the semantic field of computers and modern
technology, which suggests indirectly that the majority of them can be
classified as necessary. Furthermore, the vast proportion of the loanwords in
question will either be assimilated, as happened before to such loans as
komputer, film and sport or will disappear.
A more serious problem, however, is posed by the emergence of semantic
borrowings. They can be labelled as insidious, since most of them, in contrast
to lexical ones, are noticed only by the people trained in linguistics (cf. also
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000). What is more, their number (in terms of
types) seems to be constantly rising. Naturally, the phenomenon is not
detrimental in itself and thus cannot be blindly criticized. Nevertheless, such
changes are not always desirable, especially when the meaning of a given word
becomes vague or imprecise as the result of the process. As was argued in
the book, it is highly probable that the emergence of most of the semantic
loans is a result of hasty and careless translations of English texts, mostly
articles published in popular magazines, scripts used in American films and
series commonly broadcast by the Polish television and, perhaps most
importantly, texts appearing in commercials and advertisements. Consequently,
it would seem apt to appeal to translators, particularly the ones dealing with (1)
commercials, films and series broadcast by the television and (2)
advertisements and articles published in popular magazines, to pay more
7.4 Final comments ½ 183
attention to the language they use in their work. The semantic loans they use
(often unwittingly) in their translations are highly likely to be repeated by other
translators and writers and finally such loans start to appear in spontaneous
spoken language as well. The situation is not likely to be changed by
prescriptive rules. Rather, as OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC (2000) has rightly
noted in connection with grammatical borrowings, it can be improved by
raising the language awareness among the speakers of Polish, particularly
the ones belonging to the younger generation. This, in turn, can be achieved
with the help of people working in the mass media, translators, teachers
(mainly of Polish and English), and public figures, who are often heard on
the television or radio. In other words, the people from the aforementioned
groups should pay attention not only to the content of their articles, speeches,
etc., but to the language they use as well.
To sum up, it appears that we need not be worried about the lexical
borrowings taken from English and used in spoken language, but rather about
‘linguistic carelessness’ of Polish speakers, particularly public figures and
celebrities, heard frequently on the television or radio. Furthermore, we should
be concerned about more and more frequent use of swear words, obscenities
and vulgarities in everyday language as well as about hasty and careless
translations of English texts appearing frequently in low quality newspapers
and magazines or on the television, particularly in serials and commercials.
Appendices ½ 185
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
The knowledge of foreign languages among Poles
Source: Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej (CBOS), available online at:

http://www.cbos.pl/SPISKOM.POL/2009/K_111_09.PDF (data edited by
B. WCIÓRKA, 2009). The poll was conducted between 2nd and 8th July 2009.
A random representative sample of 1,125 adult Poles was interviewed.
The declared knowledge of foreign languages in 1997, 2001, 2004, 2006
and 2009 is shown in the Table 1. The percentages do not add up to 100% as
some of the respondents declared the knowledge of more than one foreign
language.
Table 1 The declared knowledge of foreign languages among Poles (%)

Language November 1997 June 2001 May 2004 November 2006 July 2009
English 9 16 17 20 24
Russian 24 23 23 22 20
German 9 14 14 14 12
French 2 2 2 2 2
Other 2 1 4 4 4
None 63 58 56 55 54
186 ½ Appendices
Appendix 2
List of proper names of English origin found in the corpus
The list comprises names of companies, products, titles of newspapers and

magazines, etc., modelled on or taken from English. Some of the names (e.g.
CyberMycha) are examples of loan blends, i.e. words composed of both foreign
and native elements. The number of occurrences of a particular form is given
in brackets:
Adidas Team (1) Off (1)

Battle.net (2) Office/Office XP (4)
CD Action (5) Open Office (3)
Chello (4) Outlook/Outlook Express (3)
Chip (12) PC Format (1)
Click (2) PC World Komputer (1)
Counter Strike (7) Play (1)
CyberMycha (2) Play Station (7)
EuroSport (1) Snickers (4)
Flash (1) Splinter’s Cell (1)
Game Boy (1) TELC (1)
Game Cube (2) Top Secret (2)
IMDB (1) Train Symulator (2)
Johnny English (2) Virtual Cop (1)
Komputerland (1) Warcraft (4)
Linux (1) Windows (7)
Matrix (4) Wizards and Warriors (3)
McDonald’s (1) Word (5)
Microsoft (2) Wormsy (4)
National Geographic (1) X-Box (4)
Appendices ½ 187
Appendix 3
Lexical loans in the dictionaries of foreign words
Table 2 indicates the existence or non-existence of the lexical loans (found in

the corpus) in the following Polish dictionaries of foreign words: Wielki
słownik wyrazów obcych PWN (2003, ed. by M. BAŃKO, abbreviated to
WSWO), Wielki słownik wyrazów obcych i trudnych (2001, ed. by
A. MARKOWSKI and R. PAWELEC, abbreviated to WSWOIT) and Słownik
wyrazów obcych i zwrotów obcojęzycznych z almanachem (2000, by
W. KOPALIŃSKI, abbreviated to SWOIZO).
As for the signs used in the table, ‘+’ indicates the existence of a given
loan in a given dictionary, whereas ‘–’ indicates the non-existence; the third
symbol, i.e. ‘±’, indicates the intermediate situation, in the case of which an
additional explanation is normally given. When a given word has been noted in
a dictionary, but in the meaning different from the one in which the word was
used in the corpus, a ‘–’ sign was used. Additional comments and explanations
are given in square brackets.
It must be noted that certain older and fully assimilated borrowings (e.g.
film) may not be noted in some dictionaries of foreign terms, as the aim of
most of the dictionaries of this type is to present the newest layer of
vocabulary; hence, film may no longer be treated as a typical borrowing.
Table 2 Occurrence of the lexical loans found in the corpus in the Polish dictionaries of foreign
words
Word WSWO WSWOIT SWOIZO
1 2 3 4
anglikański + + –
[only anglikanin and
anglikanizm]
biznes (business) + + +
boksowy (boxowy) – – –
[=a version of
a computer program]
camping [=a small, – – –
single-storey house]
CD + + +
CD-ROM + + –
CV + + –
[only as curriculum
vitae]
disc jockey + + +
(dyskdżokej)
188 ½ Appendices
cont. tab. 2
1 2 3 4
dolar + – +
dubbing + + +
DVD + + –
edytor [= a word + + ±
processor] [only as edytor tekstu]
e-mail + + –
film – + –
firewall + – –
gadżet + + +
[only as gadget]
grill + + +
hand-held – – –
hi-fi + + +
hip hop + – –
hipis (hippis) + + +
hobby + – +
HTML + – –
impossible – – –
interaktywny + – –
Internet + + +
internetowy + – –
IP – – –
jacuzzi + – –
kartridż (cartridge) + + –
[only as cartridge] [only as cartridge]
klikać + + –
komfort + + +
kompakt + + –
komputer + + +
komputerowy + + ±
[not as a separate entry,
only in the phrase
wirus komputerowy]
komputeryzacja + + –
mail + – –
mailowo – – –
microsoftowy – – –
modem + + +
multimedialny + + ±
[only as an example in
the entry multimedia]
multiplayer – – –
net [=the Internet] – – –
Appendices ½ 189
cont. tab. 2
1 2 3 4
non stop + + +
OEM + – –
OK + ± +
[not as a separate entry,
only in the entry Okay]
on-line + – –
parking + – +
parkować + – –
partner + + +
pass – – –
PC + + –
PDF – – –
przetrenować ± – –
[only as trenować]
pub + + +
screen – – –
serial + – +
serwer + + +
single [=a computer – – –
game for one player]
SMS + + –
sponsorować + + –
[only sponsor]
standard + + +
standardowo – – –
startować – + –
strongman (strongmen) – – –
subwoofer + – –
szok + – +
test + + +
top [‘na topie’] + + –
trener + – –
trening + – +
van [=a car used for – – –
carrying goods, e.g.
Seicento Van]
weekend + + +
wow – – –
wysportowany – – –
zdopingować + + –
[as dopingować] [only doping]
zip file – – –
zoo + – +
190 ½ Appendices
Appendix 4
Lexical loans in the dictionaries of Polish
Table 3 indicates the existence or non-existence of the lexical loans (found in

the corpus) in the following dictionaries of Polish: Uniwersalny słownik języka
polskiego (2003, ed. by S. DUBISZ, abbreviated to USJP), Inny słownik języka
polskiego (2000, ed. by M. BAŃKO, abbreviated to ISJP) and Słownik
współczesnego języka polskiego (1999, ed. by B. DUNAJ, abbreviated to SWJP).
The signs used in the table are the same as in Appendix 3: ‘+’ indicates
the existence of a given loan in a given dictionary, whereas ‘–’ indicates
the non-existence; the third symbol, i.e. ‘±’, indicates the intermediate
situation, in the case of which an additional explanation is normally given.
When a given word has been noted in a dictionary, but in the meaning different
from the one in which the word was used in the corpus, a ‘–’ sign was used.
Additional comments and explanations are given in square brackets.
Table 3 Occurrence of the lexical loans found in the corpus in the dictionaries of Polish
Word USJP ISJP SWJP
1 2 3 4
anglikański + + +
biznes (business) + + +
boksowy (boxowy) [=a version – – –
of a computer program]
camping [=a small, single-storey – – –
house]
CD + + –
CD-ROM + + –
CV ± + –
[not as a separate
entry]
disc jockey (dyskdżokej) + + +
dolar + + +
dubbing + + +
DVD + + –
edytor [= a word processor] + + +
e-mail + + –
film + + +
firewall – – –
gadżet + + +
Appendices ½ 191
cont. tab. 3
1 2 3 4
grill + + +
hand-held – – –
hi-fi + + +
hip hop + – –
hipis (hippis) + + +
hobby + + +
HTML – – –
impossible – – –
interaktywny + – –
Internet + + –
internetowy + + –
IP – – –
jacuzzi + + –
kartridż (cartridge) – – –
klikać + + +
komfort + + +
kompakt + + +
komputer + + +
komputerowy + + +
komputeryzacja + + +
mail + – –
mailowo – – –
microsoftowy – – –
modem + + +
multimedialny + + +
multiplayer – – –
net [=the Internet] – – –
non stop + + +
OEM – – –
OK + + –
on-line + – –
parking + + +
parkować + + +
partner + + +
pass – – –
PC – + –
PDF – – –
192 ½ Appendices
cont. tab. 3
1 2 3 4
przetrenować + ± +
[only as trenować]
pub + + +
screen – – –
serial + + +
serwer + – +
single [=a computer game for – – –
one player]
SMS + – –
sponsorować + + +
standard + + +
standardowo + + –
startować + + +
strongman (strongmen) – – –
subwoofer – – –
szok + + +
test + + +
top [‘na topie’] + + +
trener + + +
trening + + +
van [=a car used for carrying – – –
goods, e.g. Seicento Van]
weekend + + +
wow – – –
wysportowany + + +
zdopingować + + +
zip file – – –
zoo + + +
Appendices ½ 193
Appendix 5
Lexical loans in context
This appendix gives the examples of the use of some of the loans (in
alphabetical order) from the corpus. The forms modelled on English (but not
loanwords proper) are given in square brackets.
1. Camping
(1) [Recording 19]
M11: pęseta momy / w kampingu
2. CD
M7: no może być radio za pięćdziesiąt złotych
M11: z CD mówili
M7: jakie?
M11: że jest z CD
M7: aaa to to już cztery bańki
M6: no to z CD już jest no to lepiej
(4) [Recording 6]
M6: no CD Action się chyba trzyma najlepiej / Click się też trzyma w miarę
dobrze no te Gry Komputerowe to to już są tam są głównie takie CD i taki
dodatek
(5) [Recording 18]

M7: stacjonarne nagrywarki DVD / dyski twarde / yyy CD płyty najtańsze po
ile są / yyy filmy na DVD obejrzeć co
3. CD-ROM
F29: wiesz co / ja na przykład moi moi znajomi / yyy byli / na na wakacjach
w zeszłym roku / mieli też cyfrowy / to nam zgrali na płycie / nie / na
CD-ROM-ie^
M6: też można / no
F29: i mamy to wiesz / zamiast / wiadomo tak do oglądania to mamy / na
CD-ROM-ie tak że / mówię zawsze jakaś pamiątka jest / nie
(3) [Recording 18]

M7: jeżeli nagrywarka yyy jest od CD-ROM-u zwykłego / droższa o jakieś
pięć# czy czterdzieści złotych / no to ila tego jest *
194 ½ Appendices
4. CV
(1) [Recording 20]
F31: obudzę cię o dziewiątej [pause 2 sec.] bo muszę przygotować
M7: obudziłabyś go
F31: po angielsku CV i list motywacyjny
(2) [Recording 20]

F31: no muszę napisać yyy
M6: po angielsku?
F31: ale wymyślić / mmm fikcyjny / fikcyjny mój yyy CV i mój mmm list
motywacyjny
5. DVD
M6: a jedziesz do tej Medii / ja?
M7: no ja / jada / obo# obowiązkowo obejrzę / jakie są te nagrywarki DVD
M6: takie / stacjonarne
M7: stacjonarne nagrywarki DVD / dyski twarde / yyy CD płyty najtańsze po
ile są / yyy filmy na DVD obejrzeć co

M6: te subwoofery nie / to po co jedziesz głównie obejrzeć / te kina nie nie
kina domowe [pause 2 sec.] odtwarzacze DVD
M7: nagrywarki
M6: aha nagrywarki
M7: nagrywarki stacjonarne DVD po ile są
(6) [Recording 18]

M6: to dla nich / generalnie nawet te nowości DVD / czy na Zachodzie czy
w Stanach / to będą tak jak dla nas te po dziewiętnaście złotych

M7: jeżeli tam to ma kosztować około dwieście dolarów czyli osiemset
złotych / to na polskie realia taka stacjonarna nagry# nagrywarka DVD to już
by była tania / o# osiemset złotych
[...]
M6: nagrywarki DVD do komputera tanieją
(9) [Recording 18]

M6: no to filmy DVD nowości / to ciągle / rzadko kiedy są / poniżej /
osiemdziesiąt dziewięć
(10) [Recording 18]

M6: chociaż biorąc pod uwagę nasze zarobki / to nowości na DVD^
M7: tak
M6: powinny kosztować góra trzydzieści złotych
Appendices ½ 195
(11) [Recording 18]

M7: ponagrywom na DVD
6. [Foluwa]
(1) [Recording 1]
M11: zanim się zaczęła^
M6: tych widzów
M11: ta konkurencja^
M7: no
M11: to była taka foluwa że ja^
M6: dużo
M11: ja ino słyszałem że ryczą ale co oni robią / ale nie wolno nogami wiesz
jak / kuźwa a ja przy tym moim wzroście tak
7. HTML
(1) [Recording 10]
F10: ale ja też się nie orientuję w językach
M2: następnym razem
F10: jakimś się HTML programuje^
M6: aha
F10: i jak on by mnie zapytał to ja bym też leżała i ja mówię ale najpierw mi
zrób lekcję na ten temat^
8. [Integrale]
(1) [Recording 15]
M14: jak to było w umowie to się nazywa / integrale
F29: mhm
M14: czyli sprzedaje się sprzęt
F29: no
M14: komputerowy
F29: mhm
M14: a do tego / mmm oprogramowanie
9. IP
(1) [Recording 3]
M14: no oni / czepiają się w firmach / nie takich prywatnych / no to /
prywatnych to się czepiają jeżeli ktoś / udostępnia na przykład jakieś filmy
adresy IP / coś takiego
10. Jacuzzi
(1) [Recording 20]
M16: nie / coś ty te / łoni mają chopie / te / sauna mają do dyspozycji kurde /
mają te / jak to sie teroz nazywo / wanny takie / jak to się nazywało / te
M17: jacuzzi
M16: o / jacuzzi mają
196 ½ Appendices
11. Kartridż
(1) [Recording 6]
M6: zupełnie nie wiem jak wygląda programowanie na te hand-heldy typu
Game Boy bo tam chyba to
M7: wiem że
M6: znaczy te / te programy są na tych jakiś kartridżach
12. Kompakt
(1) [Recording 6]
(2) [Recording 6]
M6: to już tako typowo gazeta jak te Gry Komputerowe czyli dużo
kompaktów a samej gazety to nie wiem czy krótko opis tych pełnych wersji
i to wszystko
13. [Menago]
(1) [Recording 16]
M6: no ale wydaje mi się / że chyba no mmm no w sensie że jest dobrym
dyrektorem / chodzi mi o to że że
M8: jest menago
M6: potrafi tak trochę tam zadbać o tą szkołę
14. Multimedialny
15. Multiplayer
(1) [Recording 18]
M7: nieporównywalne jest wręcz / wyobraź sie że mosz no na przykład / yyy
ten ten symulator gra tak czasem więcej użytkowników że no jakieś takie /
ściganie się że musisz przewieźć tym podobne / taki à la multiplayer
16. Non stop

(1) [Recording 9]
F25: no / ale sama widziałam kiedyś jak ten nasz stary ksiądz podlewa sobie
pelargonie [unclear 1 sec.] a ten to kuchnia non stop jeździ
Appendices ½ 197
(2) [Recording 12]

F22: łon lubi chodzić / tak chodzi non stop wiesz
(3) [Recording 18]

M7: no i non stop tym się wymieniali
17. On-line
(1) [Recording 6]
M7: pisze średnio koło czterech milionów użytkowników on-line
(2) [Recording 6]
M7: najpierw koło czterech użytkowników on-line
(3) [Recording 6]
M7: no i to jest globalne że że na przykład średnio jest koło czterech
milionów użytkowników on-line^
18. Pub
M8: na przykład {surname} co mo ten pub na dole / nie
F24: szybko to leci
M8: ten no wiesz który / nie [together 1 sec.] co mo ten pub tu
M9: no no no
M8: łon teroz taki ogródek piwny się zrobił nie wiem czy żeś widzioł
(3) [Recording 6]
M7: ja ja ja tam cały cały ten {company} / pub
19. Single
(1) [Recording 18]
M7: to to jest / jest chyba Virtual Cop 2 czy coś takiego i tym podobne
[pause 4 sec.] co tam jest jeszcze
M6: mnie już gry / znudziły kompletnie
M7: mmm mnie takie single też / znudziły
20. Strongman, strongmen

(1) [Recording 1]
M7: co było co było w tych w tych tych strongmenach
M11: to nie ma szans
M7: poczekaj / dźwignąłeś pięćdziesiąt razy i co
M11: ale [together 6 sec.] mistrz uniwersum wyszedł taki kuźwa jak jak
{name} / jeszcze szczuplej# mniejszy
198 ½ Appendices
(2) [Recording 1]
M11: nasi Polacy / jeszcze trzy lata temu nikt nie słyszał kuźwa o polskich
strongmenach no może trzy lata nie^

M7: a tutej ci przyjechali / strongmeni
M8: a jo dzwonił *
M6: strongmeny / ja?
21. Van
(1) [Recording 20]
M7: no ale ja mało jeżdżę / no ja / ja [together 2 sec.] no ja / ja mam tego
vana kilka lat
22. Wow
(1) [Recording 2]
M2: a jak wyście w ogóle wypadli
M4: pierwsze miejsce
M2: wow
(2) [Recording 10]

F1: że ktoś ma dziecko no jest słabszy i musi poświęcić mnóstwo energii na
to żeby tam miało lepsze oceny a i tak ma je nie wiem na poziomie właśnie
czwórek i trójek no i przychodzi potem matka i płacze no bo co ona więcej
ma zrobić i nie pomagają tłumaczenia że już nie da no nie da się nic więcej
zrobić / ona nie będzie miała piątki bo jej możliwości na to nie pozwalają /
a trzeba ją chwalić i zachęcać za to co robi żeby ona / nie / po prostu nie
rezygnowała z tego / żeby się nie okazało że więcej nic nie będzie robiła bo
i tak się nie uda
M2: wow
Bibliography ½ 199
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Sources (dictionaries)
CCED (2001). Collins Cobuild English Dictionary for Advanced Learners, 3rd edition.
Ed. by J. SINCLAIR. Glasgow: HarperCollins Publishers.
ESJP (2000). Etymologiczny słownik języka polskiego, vol. 1—2. Ed. by A. BAŃKOWSKI.
Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
ISJP (2000). Inny słownik języka polskiego PWN. Ed. by M. BAŃKO. Warszawa: Wy-
dawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
NSEJP (2003). Nowy słownik etymologiczny języka polskiego. Ed. by K. DŁUGOSZ-
-KURCZABOWA. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
NSPP (2002). Nowy słownik poprawnej polszczyzny PWN. Ed. by A. MARKOWSKI. War-
szawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
OALD (2000). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English by
A.S. HORNBY, 6th edition. Ed. by S. WEHMEIER. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
ODE (2003). Oxford Dictionary of English, 2nd edition. Ed. by C. SOANES and
A. STEVENSON. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
OED (1989). Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition. Ed. by J. SIMPSON and E. WEINER.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
SJP (1982—1983). Słownik języka polskiego. Ed. by M. SZYMCZAK. Warszawa: Pań-
stwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
SWJP (1999). Słownik współczesnego języka polskiego. Ed. by B. DUNAJ. Warszawa:
Wydawnictwo Wilga.
SWOIZO (2000). Słownik wyrazów obcych i zwrotów obcojęzycznych z almanachem.
Ed. by W. KOPALIŃSKI. Warszawa: Muza.
SZA (2010). Słownik zapożyczeń angielskich w polszczyźnie. Ed. by E. MAŃCZAK-
-WOHLFELD. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
USJP (2003). Uniwersalny słownik języka polskiego, vol. 1—4. Ed. by S. DUBISZ. War-
szawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
WID (1961). Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language.
Ed. by P. GOVE. Springfield.
200 ½ Bibliography
WSAP (2004a). Wielki słownik angielsko-polski PWN-Oxford. Ed. by J. LINDE-

-USIEKNIEWICZ. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
WSO (2003). Wielki słownik ortograficzny PWN. Ed. by E. POLAŃSKI. Warszawa: Wy-
dawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
WSPA (2004b). Wielki słownik polsko-angielski PWN-Oxford. Ed. by J. LINDE-
-USIEKNIEWICZ. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
WSWO (2003). Wielki słownik wyrazów obcych PWN. Ed. by M. BAŃKO. Warszawa:
Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
WSWOIT (2001). Wielki słownik wyrazów obcych i trudnych. Ed. by A. MARKOWSKI
and R. PAWELEC. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Wilga.
References
ADAMISZYN, Z. (1995). “Styl potoczny”. In: S. GAJDA (ed.), Przewodnik po stylistyce

polskiej. Opole: Uniwersytet Opolski, pp. 183—217.
AKINNASO, F.N. (1982). “On the differences between spoken and written language”.
Language and Speech 25, part 2: 97—125.
A.M. (1991). “Językowe kłopoty z AIDS”. Poradnik Językowy 7—8: 338—339.
A.M. (1994). “Adaptacja nowszych zapożyczeń do polskiego systemu językowego.
Puzzle”. Poradnik Językowy 8: 75—78.
ANUSIEWICZ, J. (1992). “Potoczność jako sposób doświadczania świata i jako postawa
wobec świata”. In: J. ANUSIEWICZ and F. NIECKULA (eds.), Język a kultura, vol. 5:
Potoczność w języku i kulturze. Wrocław: Wiedza o Kulturze, pp. 9—20.
ARABSKI, J. (1979). “Contrastive studies and interlanguage”. Papers and Studies in
Contrastive Linguistics, vol. 10. Poznań: Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza,
pp. 135—143.
ARABSKI, J. (1997). Przyswajanie języka obcego i pamięć werbalna. Katowice: Śląsk.
ARABSKI, J., and A. ŁYDA (1997). Czasowniki angielskie. Słownik. Katowice: Wydaw-
nictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
BAJEROWA, I. (2001). “Język ogólnopolski XX wieku”. In: J. BARTMIŃSKI (ed.),
Współczesny język polski. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-
-Skłodowskiej, pp. 23—48.
BARTŁOMIEJCZYK, M. (2006). “Dragi po polsku: wpływ języka angielskiego na rozwój
polskiego slangu narkotykowego”. Poradnik Językowy 7: 29—39.
BARTŁOMIEJCZYK, M. (2008). “The influence of English on the language of young Poles
as manifest in recent hip-hop lyrics”. Linguistica Silesiana 29: 175—186.
BARTMIŃSKI, J. (1991). “Styl potoczny jako centrum systemu stylowego języka”. Porad-
nik Językowy 1—2: 10—24.
BARTMIŃSKI, J. (2001). “Styl potoczny”. In: J. BARTMIŃSKI (ed.), Współczesny język pol-
ski. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, pp. 115—134.
BENTAHILA, A. (1995). A review of Duelling Languages: Grammatical Structure in Co-
deswitching by C. MYERS-SCOTTON. Language, vol. 71, no. 1: 135—140.
Bibliography ½ 201
BEREZOWSKI, L. (1994). “Graphophonemics of recent Polish borrowings from English”.

In: J. ARABSKI (ed.), Papers in Linguistics and Language Acquisition. Katowice:
Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, pp. 9—19.
BEREZOWSKI, L. (1997). Dialect in Translation. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu
Wrocławskiego.
BIBER, D. (1988). Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
BLASS, T., and A. W. SIEGMAN (1975). “A psycholinguistic comparison of speech,
dictation and writing”. Language and Speech 18: 20—34.
BLOOMFIELD, L. (1961 [1933]). Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
BLOUNT, B.G., and M. SANCHES (eds.) (1977). Sociocultural Dimensions of Language
Change. New York: Academic Press.
BOGUSŁAWSKA, E. (1994). “Adaptacja fonetyczna i graficzna pożyczek angielskich w ję-
zyku polskim i czeskim”. Poradnik Językowy 8: 1—15.
BOREJSZO, M. (1990). “Współczesne ogólnopolskie słownictwo odzieżowe”. Poradnik
Językowy 5: 356—365.
BRALCZYK, J. (1999). “O językowych zwyczajach polskiej reklamy”. In: W. PISAREK
(ed.), Polszczyzna 2000. Orędzie o stanie języka na przełomie tysiącleci. Kraków:
Ośrodek Badań Prasoznawczych, Uniwersytet Jagielloński, pp. 218—226.
BUGAJSKI, M. (1995). “Przejawy snobizmu w komunikacji językowej”. Poradnik Języko-
wy 3: 30—34.
BUSSMAN, H. (1998). Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Translated by
G. TRAUTH and K. KAZZAZI. London and New York: Routledge.
BUTTLER, D. (1976). Innowacje składniowe współczesnej polszczyzny: walencja wyra-
zów. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
BUTTLER, D. (1981). “Tendencje rozwojowe w zasobie słownym powojennej polszczy-
zny”. In: H. KURKOWSKA (ed.), Współczesna polszczyzna. Wybór zagadnień. War-
szawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
BUTTLER, D. (1982). “Miejsce języka potocznego wśród odmian współczesnej polszczy-
zny”. In: S. URBAŃCZYK (ed.), Język literacki i jego warianty. Księga Referatów
VIII Sesji Międzynarodowej Komisji Słowiańskich Języków Literackich. Wrocław,
pp. 17—28.
BUTTLER, D. (1990). “O pidżinie i tolerancji”. Poradnik Językowy 2: 134—135.
BUTTLER, D., H. KURKOWSKA and H. SATKIEWICZ (1971). Kultura języka polskiego. War-
szawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
BUTTLER, D., and A. MARKOWSKI (1991). “Słownictwo współodmianowe, książkowe
i potoczne współczesnej polszczyzny”. In: J. ANUSIEWICZ and J. BARTMIŃSKI (eds.),
Język a kultura, vol. 1: Podstawowe pojęcia i problemy. Wrocław: Wiedza o Kultu-
rze, pp. 107—121.
CARSTENSEN, B. (1980). “The gender of English loan-words in German”. Studia Anglica
Posnaniensia 12: 3—25.
CHALKER, S., and E. WEINER (1994). The Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
CHŁOPICKI, W., and J. ŚWIĄTEK (2000). Angielski w polskiej reklamie. Warszawa—Kra-
ków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
202 ½ Bibliography
CHRUŚCIŃSKA, K. (1977). “Nowe wyrazy złożone w języku polskiej prasy”. Poradnik Ję-
zykowy 1: 19—27.
CLARK, E.V. (1995). The Lexicon in Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
CRYSTAL, D. (1997). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, 4th edition. Oxford:
Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
CUDAK, R., and J. TAMBOR (1995). “O języku «komputerowców»”. Język Polski LXXV
3: 197—204.
CYRAN, W. (1974). “Mechanizm zapożyczania wyrazów w języku polskim”. Rozprawy
Komisji Językowej ŁTN 20: 23—37.
CYRAN, W. (1975). “Krakersy”. Język Polski LV: 239—240.
CZAJKOWSKI, A., I. CZAJKOWSKA, A. KLUKOWSKI and D. KLUKOWSKA (eds.) (1996).
Słownik gwary śląskiej. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Kolumb.
CZĄSTKA-SZYMON, B., J. LUDWIG and H. SYNOWIEC (1999). Mały słownik gwary Górne-
go Śląska, vol. 1. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Leksykonia.
DALEWSKA-GREŃ, H. (1994). “Warszawscy studenci o kulturze języka”. In:
H. DALEWSKA-GREŃ and K. HANDKE (eds.), Polszczyzna a/i Polacy u schyłku XX
wieku. Warszawa: Slawistyczny Ośrodek Wydawniczy, pp. 27—35.
DALEWSKA-GREŃ, H., and K. HANDKE (eds.) (1994). Polszczyzna a/i Polacy u schyłku
XX wieku. Warszawa: Slawistyczny Ośrodek Wydawniczy.
DAMBORSKÝ, J. (1974). “Wyrazy obce w języku polskim (próba klasyfikacji)”. Poradnik
DANCHEV, A. (1986). “The English element in Bulgarian”. In: W. VIERECK and
W.D. BALD (eds.), English in Contact with Other Languages. Studies in Honour of
Broder Carstensen on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday. Budapest: Akadémiai
Kiadó, pp. 7—24.
DĄBROWSKA, A. (2000). “Sampling, vanselling, merchandising. O słownictwie pracow-
ników marketingu”. In: J. MAZUR (ed.), Słownictwo współczesnej polszczyzny
w okresie przemian. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodow-
skiej, pp. 131—140.
DĄBROWSKI, J. (1962). Polacy w Anglii i o Anglii. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie.
D.B. (1990). “Hybrydy w nowym słownictwie polskim”. Poradnik Językowy 2:
145—150.
DILLER, K.C. (1972). “Bilingualism and the lexicon”. In: E.S. FIRCHOW, K. GRIMSTAD,
N. HASSELMO and W.A. O’NEIL (eds.), Studies for Einar Haugen Presented by
Friends and Colleagues. The Hague—Paris: Mouton, pp. 145—150.
DORIAN, N.C. (1996). Review of Multilingualism by J. EDWARDS. Language 72.2:
399—403.
DOROSZEWSKI, W. (1971). “Parę uwag o wyrazie handicap”. Poradnik Językowy:
259—260.
DULIAN, R. (2004). “Disneyland, Bajland, Bzikoland, Lekoland ...”. Język Polski
LXXXIV 3: 232—233.
DUNAJ, B. (ed.) (1979). Wybór tekstów języka mówionego mieszkańców Krakowa. Kra-
ków.
DUNAJ, B. (1983). “O wymowie spikerów i lektorów radiowych”. Język Polski LXII:
7—26.
Bibliography ½ 203
DUNAJ, B. (2000). “Nowe słownictwo w leksykografii”. In: J. MAZUR (ed.), Słownictwo

współczesnej polszczyzny w okresie przemian. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu
Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, pp. 33—38.
DUNAJ, B. (2001). “Tendencje rozwojowe najnowszej leksyki polskiej”. In:
K. MICHALEWSKI (ed.), Wspólczesna leksyka I. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu
Łódzkiego, pp. 76—84.
DUNAJ, B., R. PRZYBYLSKA and K. SIKORA (1999). “Język polski na co dzień”. In:
W. PISAREK (ed.), Polszczyzna 2000. Orędzie o stanie języka na przełomie tysiącle-
ci. Kraków: Ośrodek Badań Prasoznawczych, Uniwersytet Jagielloński,
pp. 227—251.
DZIKIEWICZ, A., and J. MIODEK (1991). “Co robi mysz informatyczna, czyli o proble-
mach z tłumaczeniem angielskich słów w literaturze informatycznej”. Poradnik Ję-
zykowy 9—10: 376—381.
FILIPOVIĆ, R. (1972). “Some problems in studying the English elements in the main
European languages”. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 4: 141—158.
FILIPOVIĆ, R. (1986). “Research guidelines for analyzing Anglicisms in Serbo-Croatian”.
In: W. VIERECK and W.D. BALD (eds.), English in Contact with Other Languages.
Studies in Honour of Broder Carstensen on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday.
Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, pp. 333—344.
FINEGAN, E. (1980). Attitudes Toward English Usage: The History of a War of Words.
New York: Teachers College Press.
FIRCHOW, E.S., K. GRIMSTAD, N. HASSELMO and W.A. O’NEIL (eds.) (1972a). Studies
for Einar Haugen Presented by Friends and Colleagues. The Hague—Paris:
Mouton.
FIRCHOW, E.S., K. GRIMSTAD et al. (eds.) (1972b). Studies by Einar Haugen. Presented
on the Occasion of His 65th birthday — April 19, 1971. The Hague: Mouton.
FISIAK, J. (1961). “Zjawisko depluralizacji niektórych rzeczowników angielskich zapoży-
czonych przez język polski”. Język Polski XLI: 138—139.
FISIAK, J. (1962). “Złożony kontakt językowy w procesie zapożyczania z języka angiel-
skiego do polskiego”. Język Polski XLII: 286—294.
FISIAK, J. (1963). “Kategoria rodzaju rzeczowników zapożyczonych z języka angielskie-
go”. Rozprawy Komisji Językowej ŁTN 9: 63—68.
FISIAK, J. (1964). “English sport terms in modern Polish”. English Studies 45:
230—236.
FISIAK, J. (1968). “Phonemics of English loanwords in Polish”. Biuletyn Fonograficzny
9: 69—79.
FISIAK, J. (1970). “The semantics of English loanwords in Polish”. Studia Anglica Po-
snaniensia 2: 41—49.
FISIAK, J. (1975). “Some remarks concerning the noun gender assignment of
loanwords”. Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego XXXIII: 59—63.
FISIAK, J. (1985). “A note on the adaptation of English loanwords in Polish”. ITL
Review of Applied Linguistics 67—68: 69—75.
FISIAK, J. (1986). “The word-formation of English loanwords in Polish”. In: W. VIERECK
and W.D. BALD (eds.), English in Contact with Other Languages. Studies in
Honour of Broder Carstensen on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday. Budapest:
Akadémiai Kiadó.
204 ½ Bibliography
FISIAK, J., M. LIPIŃSKA-GRZEGOREK and T. ZABROCKI (1978). An Introductory

English-Polish Contrastive Grammar. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Nauko-
we.
FOX, B.A. (1987). Discourse Structure and Anaphora. Written and Conversational
English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
GAJDA, S. (1982). Podstawy badań stylistycznych nad językiem naukowym. Warsza-
wa—Wrocław.
GAJDA, S. (2001a). “Współczesna polska sytuacja językowa”. In: S. GAJDA (ed.), Naj-
nowsze dzieje języków słowiańskich. Język polski. Opole: Uniwersytet Opolski,
pp. 17—63.
GAJDA, S. (2001b). “System odmian i jego dynamika rozwojowa”. In: S. GAJDA (ed.),
Najnowsze dzieje języków słowiańskich. Język polski. Opole: Uniwersytet Opolski,
pp. 207—219.
GÓRNICZ, M. (2000). “Elementy anglojęzyczne w tekstach medycznych (na podstawie
tekstów z dziedziny immunologii opublikowanych w miesięczniku «Problemy»)”.
Poradnik Językowy 2: 17—26.
GRABOWSKA, I. (1972). “Nowsze zapożyczenia angielskie w języku polskim”. Prace Fi-
lologiczne XXIII: 221—233.
GRAMLEY, S., and K.-M. PÄTZOLD (1992). A Survey of Modern English. London and
New York: Routledge.
GROSJEAN, F. (1982). Life with Two Languages. Cambridge, MA and London, England:
Harvard University Press.
GRYBOSIOWA, A. (1994). “Dlaczego mówimy «Dokładnie tak»?”. Poradnik Językowy:
64—69.
GRYBOSIOWA, A. (1998). “Przyczyny zmian w polskim systemie adresatywnym”. In:
K. MICHALEWSKI (ed.), Język w mieście. Problemy kultury i poprawności. Łódź:
Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, pp. 57—61.
GRYBOSIOWA, A. (2000). “Modern Polish?” Poradnik Językowy 8: 70—73.
GRYBOSIOWA, A. (2001). “Składnia”. In: S. GAJDA (ed.), Najnowsze dzieje języków
słowiańskich. Język polski. Opole: Uniwersytet Opolski, pp. 108—118.
HÄCKER, M. (no date). “And him no more than a minister’s man: the English
subordinating and-construction in cross linguistic perspective”. Available online at:
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/linguistics/WPL/WP1999/hacker.pdf (accessed 5 June 2011).
HASPELMATH, M. (2003). Loanword Typology: Steps Towards a Systematic Cross-
-linguistic Study of Lexical Borrowability. Available online at:
http://www.eva.mpg.de/~haspelmt/LWT-text.pdf (accessed 5 June 2011).
HATCH, E., and CH. BROWN (1995). Vocabulary, Semantics, and Language Education.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
HAUGEN, E. (1950). “The analysis of linguistic borrowing”. In: E.S. FIRCHOW,
K. GRIMSTAD et al. (eds.) (1972). Studies by Einar Haugen. Presented on the
Occasion of His 65th Birthday — April 19, 1971 (reprinted from Language 26:
210—231). The Hague: Mouton, pp. 161—185.
HOCKETT, CH.F. (1958). A Course in Modern Linguistics. New York: The Macmillan
Company.
HOPE, T.E. (1963). “Loanwords as cultural and lexical symbols”. Archivum Linguisticum
15.1: 29—42.
Bibliography ½ 205
HORNBY, A.S. (2000). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English, 6th
edition. Ed. by S. WEHMEIER. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
HUTTAR, G. (2002). “Borrowing of verbs versus nouns”. The Internet discussion list;
available online at: http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/13/13-588.html (accessed 5
June 2011).
JESPERSEN, O. (1964). Language. Its Nature, Development and Origin. New York:
W.W. Norton & Company Inc.
KAJETANOWICZ, H. (1993). “Adaptacja zapożyczeń w terminologii fizyki ciała stałego”.
Poradnik Językowy: 446—455.
KAMIŃSKA, M. (ed.) (1989). Wybór tekstów języka mówionego mieszkańców Łodzi i re-
gionu łódzkiego. Generacja najstarsza. Łódź.
KAMIŃSKA, M. (ed.) (1992). Wybór tekstów języka mówionego mieszkańców Łodzi i re-
gionu łódzkiego. Generacja starsza, średnia i najmłodsza. Łódź.
KANIA, S. (1975). “Zapożyczenia angielskie w polskiej gwarze żołnierskiej”. Język Pol-
ski LV 3: 212—216.
KANIA, S. (1978). “O UFO czyli o latających talerzach”. Język Polski LVIII: 306—307.
KODURA, M. (2002). “The knowledge of English loanwords in youth culture”. Kwartal-
nik Neofilologiczny 1 (XLIX): 89—97.
KOŁODZIEJEK, E. (1990). “Zapożyczenia w gwarze marynarzy (typy i funkcje)”. Porad-
nik Językowy 2: 112—118.
KONOPCZYŃSKI, W. (1947). “Anglia a Polska w XVIII w.”. Pamiętnik Biblioteki Kórnic-
kiej IV: 93—129.
KORNASZEWSKI, M. (1994). “Hybrydalne nazwy poznańskich przedsiębiorstw”. Pozna-
ńskie Studia Polonistyczne. Seria Językoznawcza I (XXI): 85—91.
KRAMSCH, C. (1998). Language and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
KREJA, B. (1993). “O formie -gate ‘afera, skandal’”. Język Polski LXXIII 1—2: 63—68.
KREJA, B. (2001). Mówię, więc jestem. Rozmowy o współczesnej polszczyźnie. Vol. II.
Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego.
LABOV, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. University of Pennsylvania Press.
LATKOWSKA, J. (2002). “The phenomenon of borrowing in bilingual speech”. Linguisti-
ca Silesiana 23: 85—93.
LEHNERT, M. (1986). “The Anglo-American influence on the language of the German
Democratic Republic”. In: W. VIERECK and W.D. BALD (eds.), English in Contact
with Other Languages. Studies in Honour of Broder Carstensen on the Occasion of
His 60th Birthday. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, pp. 129—157.
LIPOŃSKI, W. (1978). Polska a Brytania 1801—1830. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Uniwersy-
tetu Adama Mickiewicza.
LUBAŚ, W. (ed.) (1976). Miejska polszczyzna mówiona. Metodologia badań. Katowice.
LUBAŚ, W. (ed.) (1978). Teksty języka mówionego mieszkańców miast Górnego Śląska
i Zagłębia. Vol. 1. Katowice.
LUBAŚ, W. (1979). Społeczne uwarunkowania współczesnej polszczyzny. Szkice socjolin-
gwistyczne. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie.
LUBAŚ, W. (ed.) (1980). Teksty języka mówionego mieszkańców miast Górnego Śląska
i Zagłębia. Vol. 2. Katowice.
206 ½ Bibliography
LUBAŚ, W. (1999). “Potoczna odmiana polszczyzny”. In: B. WYDERKA (ed.), O kształcie

języka. Studia i rozprawy. Opole: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Opolskiego,
pp. 145—151.
LUBAŚ, W. (2000). “Rola słownictwa potocznego w polszczyźnie ostatniego dziesięcio-
lecia”. In: J. MAZUR (ed.), Słownictwo współczesnej polszczyzny w okresie prze-
mian. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, pp. 59—68.
LUBAŚ, W. (2001). “Język potoczny”. In: S. GAJDA (ed.), Najnowsze dzieje języków
słowiańskich. Język polski. Opole: Uniwersytet Opolski, pp. 220—242.
LUBAŚ, W. (2003). Polskie gadanie. Podstawowe cechy i funkcje potocznej odmiany pol-
szczyzny. Opole: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Opolskiego.
MACSWAN, J. (1997). A Minimalist Approach to Intrasentential Code Switching:
Spanish-Nahuatl Bilingualism in Central Mexico. PhD dissertation. Los Angeles:
University of California. Available online at: http://www.public.asu.edu/~macswan
/diss.html (accessed 7 June 2011).
MAĆKIEWICZ, J. (2001). “Wyrazy międzynarodowe (internacjonalizmy) we współcze-
snym języku polskim”. In: J. BARTMIŃSKI (ed.), Współczesny język polski. Lublin:
Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, pp. 555—562.
MAJKOWSKA, G., and H. SATKIEWICZ (1999). “Język w mediach”. In: W. PISAREK (ed.),
Polszczyzna 2000. Orędzie o stanie języka na przełomie tysiącleci. Kraków: Ośro-
dek Badań Prasoznawczych, Uniwersytet Jagielloński, pp. 181—196.
MALMKRJÆR, K. (ed.) (1996 [1991]). The Linguistics Encyclopedia. London and New
York: Routledge.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1987a). “Najstarsze zapożyczenia angielskie w polszczyźnie”.
Język Polski LXVII (1—2): 25—31.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1987b). “Efemerydy pochodzenia angielskiego w Słowniku
wileńskim”. Poradnik Językowy 2: 100—103.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1988a). “Anglicyzmy w Słowniku warszawskim”. Język Polski
LXVIII: 24—29.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1988b). “Liczba mnoga zapożyczeń angielskich”. Poradnik
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1988c). “Semantic fields of English loanwords in Polish”.
Kwartalnik Neofilologiczny 35.1: 45—54.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1991a). “Tamersi — nowa tendencja w języku polskim”. Po-
radnik Językowy 9—10: 429—431.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1991b). “Dopełniacz niektórych zapożyczeń angielskich w ję-
zyku polskim”. Poradnik Językowy 9—10: 431—432.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1992). “Analiza dekompozycyjna zapożyczeń angielskich
w języku polskim”. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego: Prace Języko-
znawcze, vol. 235. Kraków.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1993). “Uwagi o wpływie języka angielskiego na polszczyznę
końca XX w.” Język Polski LXXIII 4—5: 279—281.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1994a). Angielskie elementy leksykalne w języku polskim.
Kraków: Universitas.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1994b). “English loanwords in Amszejewicz’s dictionary”.
Kwartalnik Neofilologiczny 41.3: 251—254.
Bibliography ½ 207
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1995). Tendencje rozwojowe współczesnych zapożyczeń an-

gielskich w języku polskim. Kraków: Universitas.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1997a). “Czy rzeczywiście nadużywamy zapożyczeń angiel-
skich w polszczyźnie pisanej?”. Język Polski LXXVII 4—5: 292—297.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (1997b). “Najnowsze zapożyczenia angielskie w polskiej pra-
sie”. Poradnik Językowy 3: 84—86.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (2000). “Jeszcze o najnowszych zapożyczeniach w języku pol-
skim”. Poradnik Językowy 2: 74—76.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (2004). “Fonetyka zapożyczeń angielskich w polszczyźnie
XXI wieku”. Poradnik Językowy 3: 3—7.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (2006). Angielsko-polskie kontakty językowe. Kraków: Wydaw-
nictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
MAŃCZAK-WOHLFELD, E. (ed.) (2010). Słownik zapożyczeń angielskich w polszczyźnie.
Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
MARKOWSKI, A. (1992a). “Nowsze anglicyzmy semantyczne w polszczyźnie”. Poradnik
MARKOWSKI, A. (1992b). “Nowsze zapożyczenia w polszczyźnie: anglicyzmy grama-
tyczne i leksykalne”. Poradnik Językowy 3: 237—241.
MARKOWSKI, A. (1995). Tyle trudnych słów. Praktyczny słownik wyrazów obcych używa-
nych w prasie, radiu i telewizji. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Twój Styl.
MARKOWSKI, A. (1999). “Najnowsze zjawiska zachodzące w polszczyźnie”. In: Nowa
Encyklopedia Powszechna PWN. Suplement. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe
PWN, pp. 703—704.
MARKOWSKI, A. (2000). “Jawne i ukryte nowsze zapożyczenia leksykalne w mediach”.
In: J. BRALCZYK and K. MOSIOŁEK-KŁOSIŃSKA (eds.), Język w mediach masowych.
Warszawa: Oświata UN-O, pp. 96—111.
MARKOWSKI, A. (ed.) (2002). Nowy słownik poprawnej polszczyzny PWN. Warszawa:
Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
MARKOWSKI, A. (2004). “O pojęciu i typach internacjonalizmów semantycznych”. Po-
radnik Językowy 2: 39—50.
MARKOWSKI, A., and R. PAWELEC (eds.) (2001). Wielki słownik wyrazów obcych i trud-
nych. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Wilga.
MARKOWSKI, A., and J. PUZYNINA (2001). “Kultura języka”. In: J. BARTMIŃSKI (ed.),
Współczesny język polski. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-
-Skłodowskiej, pp. 49—71.
MATUSIAK, J. (1997). “Polskie słownictwo komputerowe”. Poradnik Językowy 1:
24—28.
MAZUR, J. (2001). “Dialekty”. In: S. GAJDA (ed.), Najnowsze dzieje języków słowia-
ńskich. Język polski. Opole: Uniwersytet Opolski, pp. 403—421.
MCENERY, T., and A. WILSON (1998). Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.
MCGOVERN, M. (1992). “Wyrażenia anglojęzyczne nacechowane ekspresywnie w gwa-
rze studentów polskich”. In: J. MAĆKIEWICZ and J. SIATKOWSKI (eds.), Język a kul-
tura, vol. 7: Kontakty języka polskiego z innymi językami na tle kontaktów kulturo-
wych. Wrocław: Wiedza o Kulturze, pp. 31—40.
208 ½ Bibliography
MCMAHON, A.M.S. (1995 [1994]). Understanding Language Change. Cambridge: Cam-

bridge University Press.
MINDAK, J. (1983). “O bilingwizmie i interferencji w opracowaniach polonistycznych
ostatnich lat”. Język Polski LXIII 3: 204—209.
MIODEK, J. (1980). “A klasa i test-mecz”. Język Polski LX 2—3: 180—181.
MIODEK, J. (1993). Odpowiednie dać rzeczy słowo: szkice o współczesnej polszczyźnie.
Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy.
MIODEK, J. (1999). “Salon szampon dwa w jednym”. Wiedza i życie 8. Available online
at: http://www.wiedzaizycie.pl/99084000.htm (accessed 12 September 2010).
MIODEK, J. (2000). Polszczyzna po roku 1989. Uniwersytet Śląski: Biuro Rektora UŚ.
MIODEK, J. (2004). “Aktualna alternatywa”. Dziennik Zachodni z 2.07.2004, p. 17.
MIODEK, J. (2005). “O różnych ikonach”. Dziennik Zachodni 47/2005, p. 19.
MOLENCKI, R. (1997). “Dlaczego polszczyzna nie może być politycznie poprawna?”. In:
J. ARABSKI (ed.), Języki specjalistyczne — język biznesu. Katowice: Wyższa Szkoła
Zarządzania Marketingowego i Języków Obcych, pp. 137—147.
MOLENCKI, R. (2003). “What must needs be explained about Must Needs”. In: D. HART
(ed.), Linguistic Insights. Studies in Language and Communication: English Moda-
lity in Context. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 71—87.
MORAWSKI, W. (1992). Angielskie elementy leksykalne w języku polskich emigrantów
w Stanach Zjednoczonych i w Kanadzie. Kraków: Secesja.
MOSIOŁEK-KŁOSIŃSKA, K. (2000). “Polskie słownictwo okresu 1989—1999 na tle
współczesnych zjawisk kulturowych”. In: J. MAZUR (ed), Słownictwo współczesnej
polszczyzny w okresie przemian. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Cu-
rie-Skłodowskiej, pp. 75—86.
MYCAWKA, M. (2000). “Derywaty z mega- we współczesnej polszczyźnie”. Język Polski
LXXX 1—2: 15—22.
MYCAWKA, M. (2001). “Produktywne formanty słowotwórcze we współczesnej polsz-
czyźnie (wybrane zagadnienia)”. In: K. MICHALEWSKI (ed.), Współczesna leksyka.
Vol. II. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, pp. 16—23.
MYRCZEK, E. (2000). “Corpus — its definition, compilation, taxonomy and future”.
Linguistica Silesiana 21: 43—62.
MYSONA, M., and E. MARCINKOWSKA (1977). “O zapożyczonych w języku polskim
w nazwach wyrobów skórzanych”. Przegląd Skórzany 32.3: 77—81.
NASH, R. (1970). “Spanglish: Language contact in Puerto Rico”. American Speech 45
(3/4): 223—233.
NETTMANN-MULTANOWSKA, U. (2003). English Loanwords in Polish and German After
1945: Orthography and Morphology. Frankfurt am Main.
OCHMANN, D. (2000). “Złożenia z cyber- we współczesnym języku polskim”. Język Pol-
ski LXXX 1—2: 23—34.
OCHMANN, D. (2004). Nowe wyrazy złożone o podstawie zdezintegrowanej w języku pol-
skim. Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka.
OCIEPA, R. (2001). “O współczesnych anglicyzmach w nazewnictwie zawodów i stano-
wisk służbowych”. Poradnik Językowy 6: 49—55.
OTWINOWSKA, A. (1997). “Uwagi o kilku anglicyzmach gramatycznych, semantycznych
i frazeologicznych w polszczyźnie”. Poradnik Językowy 2: 48—53.
Bibliography ½ 209
OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, A. (2000). A Study of the Lexico-Semantic and Grammati-

cal Influence of English on the Polish of the Younger Generation of Poles (19—35
Years of Age). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Akademickie Dialog.
OŻDŻYŃSKI, J. (1970). Polskie słownictwo sportowe. Wrocław: Ossolineum.
OŻÓG, K. (2000). “Wyrazy modne i nadużywane w polszczyźnie lat osiemdziesiątych
i dziewięćdziesiątych XX wieku”. In: J. MAZUR (ed.), Słownictwo współczesnej
OŻÓG, K. (2001). Polszczyzna przełomu XX i XXI wieku. Wybrane zagadnienia. Rze-
szów: Biblioteka Frazy.
PARAFINOWICZ, Z. (1972). “Niektóre obcojęzyczne nazwy rodzajów odzieży występujące
w słownictwie odzieżowym”. Odzież XXIII: 373—376.
PARAFINOWICZ, Z. (1974). “Niektóre obcojęzyczne nazwy rodzajów odzieży występujące
w słownictwie odzieżowym”. Odzież XXV: 42—45.
PARAFINOWICZ, Z. (1975). “Obcojęzyczne nazwy rodzajów odzieży występujące w słow-
nictwie odzieżowym”. Odzież XXVI: 353—357.
PEPŁOWSKI, E. (1957). “W sprawie budżetu”. Język Polski XXXVII: 202—204.
PIĘCIŃSKA, A. (2001). “Nowe zjawiska w polskiej rzeczywistości widziane przez pry-
zmat języka: grill, pager, notebook”. Poradnik Językowy 1: 71—78.
PIOTROWSKI, T. (1998). “O anglicyzmach — a może germanizmach? — w języku pol-
skim”. Język polski LXXVIII 3—4: 271—273.
PIOTROWSKI, T. (2009). Relacje kulturowe w świetle zapożyczeń leksykalnych. Paper
presented at LXVII Zjazd Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego, Olsztyn.
PISARKOWA, K. (1975). Składnia rozmowy telefonicznej. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im.
Ossolińskich.
PODHAJECKA, M. (2002). “Zapożyczenia polskie w języku angielskim na materiale
Oxford English Dictionary (OED)”. Język Polski LXXXII 5: 330—337.
POLAŃSKI, K. (ed.) (1999). Encyklopedia językoznawstwa ogólnego, 2nd edition.
Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.
POOLE, M.E., and T.W. FIELD (1976). “A comparison of oral and written code elabora-
tion”. Language and Speech 19: 305—312.
POPLACK, S., and D. SANKOFF (1984). “Borrowing: the synchrony of integration”.
Linguistics 22: 99—135.
POPLACK, S., D. SANKOFF and CH. MILLER (1988). “The social correlates and linguistic
processes of lexical borrowing and assimilation”. Linguistics 26: 47—104.
POSNER, R. (1995). “Contact, social variants, parameter setting, and pragmatic function:
An example from the history of French syntax”. In: J. FISIAK (ed.), Linguistic
Change Under Contact Conditions. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
PRATT, CH. (1986). “Anglicisms in contemporary European Spanish”. In: W. VIERECK
Akadémiai Kiadó, pp. 345—368.
PREYZNER, M. (1990). “Nie da rady?” Poradnik Językowy 2: 129—133.
PRZYBYLSKA, R. (1995). “Super”. Język Polski LXXV 2: 104—107.
RECZEK, J. (1968). Bohemizmy leksykalne w języku polskim do końca XV wieku.
Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.
210 ½ Bibliography
ROPA, A. (1974). “O najnowszych zapożyczeniach w języku polskim”. Poradnik Języko-

wy: 518—526.
ROSZKO, R. (1997). “Videokamera, kamwid, a może palmkorder”. In: H. POPOWSKA-
-TABORSKA (ed.), Leksyka słowiańska na warsztacie językoznawcy. Warszawa: Sla-
wistyczny Ośrodek Wydawniczy, pp. 223—231.
ROT, S. (1986). “English in contact with Hungarian”. In: W. VIERECK and W.D. BALD
(eds.), English in Contact with Other Languages. Studies in Honour of Broder
Carstensen on the Occasion of His 60th birthday. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó,
pp. 207—230.
R.S. (1988a). “Wpływy obce (1). Zapożyczać czy nie zapożyczać?” Poradnik Językowy
1: 77—80.
R.S. (1988b). “Wpływy obce (2). Obrońcy czystości języka”. Poradnik Językowy 2:
154—158.
R.S. (1995). “Co piszą o języku. Leasing, marketing, monitoring”. Poradnik Językowy
1: 75—81.
R.S. (1998). “Co piszą o języku. Jeszcze o czasownikach”. Poradnik Językowy 8—9:
52—57.
R.S. (2001). “Postawy Polaków wobec własnego języka”. Poradnik Językowy 1:
65—70.
RUSIECKI, J. (1980). “Latent bilingualism”. Papers and Studies in Contrastive
Linguistics 12: 79—98.
RYBICKA, H. (1967). “W sprawie wyrazów obcych w języku polskim”. Poradnik Języko-
wy 2: 93—98.
RYBICKA, H. (1976). Losy wyrazów obcych w języku polskim. Warszawa: Państwowe
Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
RZESZUTEK, M. (2000). “Słownictwo środowisk młodzieżowych w okresie polskiej
transformacji”. In: J. MAZUR (ed.), Słownictwo współczesnej polszczyzny w okresie
przemian. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej,
pp. 171—178.
RZETELSKA-FELESZKO, E. (1994). “Najnowsze nazwy sklepów”. In: E. WROCŁAWSKA
(ed.), Uwarunkowania i przyczyny zmian językowych. Warszawa, pp. 133—142.
RZETELSKA-FELESZKO, E. (1997). “Nazwy sklepów a preferencje kulturowe w stosunku
do kultur obcych”. Kultura i Społeczeństwo XLI 1: 169—173.
RZETELSKA-FELESZKO, E. (1998a). “Zmiany cywilizacyjne a zmiany nazewnicze”. In:
E. JAKUS-BORKOWA and K. NOWIK (eds.), Najnowsze przemiany nazewnicze. War-
szawa, pp. 33—38.
RZETELSKA-FELESZKO, E. (1998b). “Obecne nazwy firmowe w Polsce i w Europie”.
Onomastica 43: 267—282.
RZETELSKA-FELESZKO, E. (2001). “Nazwy własne”. In: S. GAJDA (ed.), Najnowsze dzieje
języków słowiańskich. Język polski. Opole: Uniwersytet Opolski, pp. 152—177.
SANKOFF, G. (2001). “Linguistic outcomes of language contact”. In: P. TRUDGILL,
J. CHAMBERS and N. SCHILLING-ESTES (eds.), Handbook of Sociolinguistics.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 638—668.
SAPIR, E. (1949 [1921]). Language. An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York:
Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc.
Bibliography ½ 211
SATKIEWICZ, H. (1994a). “Z badań ankietowych nad normą współczesnego języka pol-

skiego”. In: H. DALEWSKA-GREŃ and K. HANDKE (eds.), Polszczyzna a/i Polacy
u schyłku XX wieku. Warszawa: Slawistyczny Ośrodek Wydawniczy, pp. 17—25.
SATKIEWICZ, H. (1994b). “Typy zmian w zasobie leksykalnym współczesnej polszczy-
zny”. In: H. DALEWSKA-GREŃ and K. HANDKE (eds.), Polszczyzna a/i Polacy
u schyłku XX wieku. Warszawa: Slawistyczny Ośrodek Wydawniczy, pp. 123—127.
SAWICKA, A. (1995a). “Kłopoty z nowym autem”. Poradnik Językowy 1: 38—49.
SAWICKA, A. (1995b). “Norma a problem tak zwanych zapożyczeń”. Poradnik Językowy
9—10: 78—86.
SĘKOWSKA, E. (1993). “Funkcjonowanie nowszych zapożyczeń angielskich we współcze-
snej polszczyźnie. Wybrane zagadnienia”. Poradnik Językowy: 242—248.
SILVA-CORVALÁN, C. (1995). “Lexico-syntactic modeling across the bilingual
continuum”. In: J. FISIAK (ed.), Linguistic Change Under Contact Conditions.
Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
SINCLAIR, J. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
SKAWIŃSKI, J. (1992). “Polszczyzna potoczna w funkcji interdialektu”. In: J. ANUSIEWICZ
and F. NIECKULA (eds.), Język a kultura, vol. 5: Potoczność w języku i kulturze.
Wrocław: Wiedza o Kulturze, pp. 81—86.
SKUBALANKA, T. (1978). “Fleksja potoczna i metody jej badania”. In: T. SKUBALANKA
(ed.), Studia nad składnią polszczyzny mówionej. Wrocław.
SKUBALANKA, T. (2000). “Zmienność współczesnego słownictwa polskiego (na przy-
kładzie słownictwa mody i kuchni)”. In: J. MAZUR (ed.), Słownictwo współczesnej
SKUDRZYKOWA, A., J. TAMBOR, K. URBAN and O. WOLIŃSKA (2001). Gwara śląska —
świadectwo kultury, narzędzie komunikacji. Sytuacja językowa w miastach Górne-
go Śląska. Katowice: Śląsk.
SMÓŁKOWA, T. (1997). “Metodologiczne aspekty opisu współczesnych neologizmów
i neosemantyzmów polskich”. In: H. POPOWSKA-TABORSKA (ed.), Leksyka słowia-
ńska na warsztacie językoznawcy. Warszawa: Slawistyczny Ośrodek Wydawniczy,
pp. 257—267.
SMÓŁKOWA, T. (2000). “Leksyka w początkowym okresie przemian ustrojowych. Rodza-
je zmian”. In: J. MAZUR (ed.), Słownictwo współczesnej polszczyzny w okresie prze-
mian. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, pp. 51—58.
SMÓŁKOWA, T. (2001a). “Leksyka ogólna — neologizmy”. In: S. GAJDA (ed.), Najnowsze
dzieje języków słowiańskich. Język polski. Opole: Uniwersytet Opolski,
pp. 119—151.
SMÓŁKOWA, T. (2001b). “Nowe słownictwo polskie”. In: J. BARTMIŃSKI (ed.), Współcze-
sny język polski. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej,
pp. 397—404.
SOBCZAK, B. (2000). “Słownictwo wprowadzone do polszczyzny w drugiej połowie XX
wieku. Na podstawie porównania Słownika języka polskiego pod red. W. Doro-
szewskiego i Praktycznego słownika współczesnej polszczyzny pod red. H. Zgółko-
wej”. In: J. MAZUR (ed.), Słownictwo współczesnej polszczyzny w okresie przemian.
Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, pp. 39—50.
212 ½ Bibliography
SOBOCIŃSKA, M. (1994). “Kultura słowa w rozumieniu i praktyce językowej uczniów

szkół średnich”. In: H. DALEWSKA-GREŃ and K. HANDKE (eds.), Polszczyzna a/i Po-
lacy u schyłku XX wieku. Warszawa: Slawistyczny Ośrodek Wydawniczy,
pp. 37—53.
SPOLSKY, B. (1998). Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
SZMAŃDA, E. (1979). “Język narodowy czy międzynarodowy?” Język Polski LIX 1:
26—35.
SZUPRYCZYŃSKA, M. (1995). “Funkcje leksykalne jednostki super we współczesnym ję-
zyku polskim”. Polonica XVII: 167—172.
TAMBOR, J. (ed.) (2002). Gwara śląska — świadectwo kultury, narzędzie komunikacji.
Teksty. Katowice: Śląsk.
TANNEN, D. (1982). “Oral and literate strategies in spoken and written narratives”.
Language 58 (1): 1—21.
TEKIEL, D. (ed.) (1988). Nowe słownictwo polskie. Materiały z prasy lat 1972—1981.
Vol. I. Wrocław: Ossolineum.
TEKIEL, D. (ed.) (1989). Nowe słownictwo polskie. Materiały z prasy lat 1972—1981.
Vol. II. Wrocław: Ossolineum.
URBAŃCZYK, S., and M. KUCAŁA (eds.) (1999). Encyklopedia języka polskiego, 3rd
edition. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.
VIERECK, K. (1986). “The influence of English on Austrian German”. In: W. VIERECK
Akadémiai Kiadó, pp. 159—177.
VIERECK, W. (1986). “The influence of English on German in the past and in the
Federal Republic of Germany”. In: W. VIERECK and W.D. BALD (eds.), English in
Contact with Other Languages. Studies in Honour of Broder Carstensen on the
Occasion of his 60th birthday. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, pp. 107—128.
WALCZAK, B. (1983). “The earliest borrowings from English into Polish”. Studia
Anglica Posnaniensa 16: 121—131.
WALCZAK, B. (1984). “Rola elementu obcojęzycznego w rozwoju leksyki współczesnej
polszczyzny”. Sprawozdania Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk Wydziału
Filologiczno-Filozoficznego 100: 19—29, Poznań.
WALCZAK, B. (1987). Między snobizmem i modą a potrzebami języka, czyli o wyrazach
obcego pochodzenia w polszczyźnie. Poznań.
WALCZAK, B. (1992). “«Pawiem narodów byłaś i papugą...»? (Megalomania i cudzo-
ziemszczyzna w dziejach języka polskiego)”. Język Polski LXXII 2—3: 95—101.
WALCZAK, B. (1994). “Wpływy obce w powojennej polszczyźnie”. In: S. GAJDA and
Z. ADAMISZYN (eds.), Przemiany współczesnej polszczyzny. Materiały konferencji
naukowej, Opole 20—22.09.1993. Opole.
WALCZAK, B. (1997). “Słownictwo obcego pochodzenia na warsztacie badacza: problem
granic („głębokości”) opisu genetycznego”. In: H. POPOWSKA-TABORSKA (ed.), Lek-
syka słowiańska na warsztacie językoznawcy. Warszawa: Slawistyczny Ośrodek
Wydawniczy, pp. 269—280.
WALCZAK, B. (2001). “Kontakty polszczyzny z językami niesłowiańskimi”. In:
J. BARTMIŃSKI (ed.), Współczesny język polski. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu
Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, pp. 527—539.
Bibliography ½ 213
WARCHALA, J. (2003). Kategoria potoczności w języku. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uni-

wersytetu Śląskiego.
WASZAKOWA, K. (1995). “Dynamika zmian w zasobie leksykalnym najnowszej polsz-
czyzny”. Poradnik Językowy 3: 1—12.
WASZAKOWA, K. (2001a). “O rozumieniu najnowszych zapożyczeń”. In: K. MICHA-
LEWSKI (ed.), Wspólczesna leksyka. Vol. II. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu
Łódzkiego, pp. 156—167.
WASZAKOWA, K. (2001b).”Różnorodność i intensywność procesów przejmowania ele-
mentów obcych w słowotwórstwie współczesnej polszczyzny”. Poradnik Językowy
6: 2—14.
WASZAKOWA, K. (2001c). “System słowotwórczy”. In: S. GAJDA (ed.), Najnowsze dzieje
języków słowiańskich. Język polski. Opole: Uniwersytet Opolski, pp. 88—107.
WASZAKOWA, K. (2002). “Współczesne słowotwórstwo polskie i czeskie wobec ekspan-
sji zapożyczeń”. Poradnik Językowy 8: 3—17.
WEINREICH, U. (1974). Languages in contact. The Hague and Paris: Mouton.
WEINSBERG, A. (1983). Językoznawstwo ogólne. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo
Naukowe.
WCIÓRKA, B. (ed.) (2009). “Polacy o swoich wyjazdach zagranicznych i znajomości ję-
zyków obcych”. Available online at: http://www.cbos.pl/SPISKOM.POL/2009/
K_111_09.PDF (accessed 8 June 2011).
WILCZEWSKA, K. (1970). “O słownictwie współczesnej mody”. Język Polski L: 97—109.
WITALISZ, A. (2004). “Nowe anglosemantyzmy w języku polityki”. Język Polski
LXXXIV 5: 340—346.
WITALISZ, A. (2007). Anglosemantyzmy w języku polskim — ze słownikiem. Kraków:
Tertium.
WITASZEK-SAMBORSKA, M. (1992). Wyrazy obcego pochodzenia we współczesnej polsz-
czyźnie (na podstawie słowników frekwencyjnych). Poznań: Wydawnictwo Nakom.
WITASZEK-SAMBORSKA, M. (1993). Zapożyczenia z różnych języków we współczesnej
polszczyźnie. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego TPN.
WOJCIECHOWSKA, A. (1992). “Kolegium czy college?”. Poradnik Językowy 1: 83—88.
WOJTAK, M. (2000). “«Wysoki współczynnik czadu», czyli o słownictwie w prasie spe-
cjalistycznej na wybranych przykładach”. In: J. MAZUR (ed.), Słownictwo współcze-
snej polszczyzny w okresie przemian. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii
Curie-Skłodowskiej, pp. 117—130.
WRÓBLEWSKI, K. (1989). “O hitach, szlagierach i przebojach”. Poradnik Językowy 8:
562—566.
WRÓBLEWSKI, K. (1991). “Fan — moda czy językowa konieczność?” Poradnik Językowy
3—4: 142—145.
WYDERKA, B. (ed.) (1999). O kształcie języka. Studia i rozprawy. Opole: Wydawnictwo
Uniwersytetu Opolskiego.
WYDERKA, B. (ed.) (2000—2004). Słownik gwar śląskich, vol. I—V. Opole: Państwowy
Instytut Naukowy — Instytut Śląski w Opolu.
WYRWAS, K. (2004a). “Rywingate i pracoholik — derywaty sufiksalne czy złożenia?”
Język Polski LXXXIV 2: 146—148.
WYRWAS, K. (2004b). “Ekskluzywny”. Język Polski LXXXIV 4: 317—320.
214 ½ Bibliography
YIN, H. (no date). “A cognitive approach to the Japanese verb kuru ‘come’”. Available
online at: http://edocs.lib.sfu.ca/projects/ NWLC2002/NWLC2002_Proceedings_
Yin.pdf (accessed 16 September 2010).
ZABAWA, M. (2002). Syntactic and Morphosyntactic Loans of English Origin in the Po-
lish Language of the Press. Unpublished MA thesis. Uniwersytet Śląski.
ZABAWA, M. (2004a). “Formy z cząstką e- we współczesnym języku polskim”. Poradnik
ZABAWA, M. (2004b). “The use of unassimilated loans of English origin in Polish press
advertisements”. Linguistica Silesiana 25: 135—145.
ZABAWA, M. (2004c). “Nowe zapożyczenia semantyczne w polszczyźnie”. Poradnik Ję-
zykowy 9: 59—68.
ZABAWA, M. (2005). “Po przecinku czy po kropce?”. Poradnik Językowy 8: 70—72.
ZABAWA, M. (2007a). “Współczesny mówiony język polski: ile polszczyzny w pol-
szczyźnie?” Prace Filologiczne LII: 433—442.
ZABAWA, M. (2007b). “English-Polish language contact and its influence on the seman-
tics of Polish”. In: A. KĄTNY (ed.), Studia Germanica Gedanensia 17, Sonderband
1: Kontakty językowe i kulturowe w Europie / Sprach- und Kulturkontakte in Euro-
pa. Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego, pp. 154—164.
ZABAWA, M. (2007c). “Language contact and foreign language teaching”. In: J. ARABSKI
(ed.), On Foreign Language Acquisition and Effective Learning. Katowice: Wy-
dawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, pp. 89—102.
ZABAWA, M. (2008). “Jeszcze o nowych zapożyczeniach semantycznych w polszczyź-
nie”. Poradnik Językowy 9: 28—41.
ZABAWA, M. (2009a). “A corpus of spoken language and its usefulness in the research
on language contact”. In: J. LEVICKA and R. GARABIK (eds.), NLP, Corpus
Linguistics, Corpus Based Grammar Research. Bratislava: Slovak Academy of
Sciences, pp. 377—388.
ZABAWA, M. (2009b). “Begergate, Konkubina gate, Pierścień-gate: o poważnym i mniej
poważnym użyciu cząstki -gate w polskim Internecie”. Poradnik Językowy 10:
32—42.
ZABAWA, M. (2010a). “Awatar, pokój, centrum i inne: najnowsze zapożyczenia seman-
tyczne w języku polskim”. Poradnik Językowy 10: 80—90.
ZABAWA, M. (2010b). “The influence of English on the Polish language of Internet
message boards: investigating the role of individual differences and the context”.
Linguistica Silesiana 31: 219—233.
ZABAWA, M. (2011). “Lexical loans of English origin in informal spoken Polish”. Lingu-
istica Silesiana 32: 101—119.
ZAGRODNIKOWA, A. (1992). Nowe wyrazy i wyrażenia w prasie. Kraków.
ZYBERT, J. (1983). “Polish and English vowels: a contact situation”. Papers and Studies
in Contrastive Linguistics XVI: 99—119.
ŻYDEK-BEDNARCZUK, U. (1992). “Interferencja językowa w śląskich rozmowach potocz-
nych”. In: J. MAĆKIEWICZ and J. SIATKOWSKI (eds.), Język a kultura, vol. 7: Kontak-
ty języka polskiego z innymi językami na tle kontaktów kulturowych. Wrocław:
Wiedza o Kulturze, pp. 117—128.
ŻYDEK-BEDNARCZUK, U. (1994). Struktura tekstu rozmowy potocznej. Katowice: Wydaw-
nictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
Bibliography ½ 215
Marcin Zabawa
Anglicyzmy leksykalne i semantyczne

we współczesnej potocznej polszczyźnie mówionej
Streszczenie
Celem niniejszej monografii jest opisanie najnowszych anglicyzmów leksykalnych i seman-

tycznych występujących we współczesnej potocznej polszczyźnie mówionej. Podstawą badań jest
korpus złożony z 20 rozmów codziennych, nagranych, przetranskrybowanych i przeanalizowanych
przez autora pracy. Korpus składa się z ponad 60 000 słów. Autor zdecydował się na badanie za-
pożyczeń w języku mówionym, jako że wyrazy obce w języku pisanym (zwłaszcza prasowym)
zostały dość dobrze opisane, niewiele jest natomiast prac poświęconym zapożyczeniom —
zwłaszcza semantycznym — w języku mówionym. Opisano zarówno poszczególne zapożyczenia
(ich znaczenie, wymowę, kolokacje oraz kontekst, w jakim pojawiły się w korpusie), jak i scha-
rakteryzowano je jako zjawisko globalne, czyli dokonano podziału zapożyczeń według rozmaitych
kryteriów, na przykład według części mowy, częstotliwości ich występowania w korpusie czy też
okresu, w którym trafiły do polszczyzny. Autor podjął również próbę ustalenia, w jakim stopniu
pojawianie się zapożyczeń w języku mówionym jest zależne od tematu rozmowy i idiolektu roz-
mówców. Badania zilustrowano licznymi tabelami statystycznymi obrazującymi różne aspekty ilo-
ściowe i jakościowe znalezionych w korpusie zapożyczeń leksykalnych i semantycznych.
W monografii opisano również różnorakie problemy metodologiczne, jakie stwarzało
badanie zapożyczeń w języku mówionym. Autor zaproponował ponadto własną hipotezę na temat
sposobów wprowadzania i rozprzestrzeniania się zapożyczeń semantycznych w polszczyźnie.
Hipoteza ta związana jest z koncepcją „odpowiedników prymarnych”, stosowaną dotychczas
w badaniach nad przyswajaniem i uczeniem się języków obcych.
Wiele z opisanych w niniejszej pracy zapożyczeń leksykalnych i semantycznych nie zostało
dotychczas opisanych w literaturze przedmiotu ani zarejestrowanych w słownikach języka
polskiego czy wyrazów obcych. Takim zapożyczeniom poświęcono szczególną uwagę. Jednym
z wniosków zawartych w pracy jest stwierdzenie, że o ile liczba zapożyczeń leksykalnych
w języku mówionym w ostatnich latach nie wzrasta (co przeczy odczuciu większości Polaków),
o tyle znacząco wzrosła liczba typów zapożyczeń semantycznych.
216 ½ Bibliography
Marcin Zabawa
Lexikalische und semantische Anglizismen

im heutigen gesprochenen umgangssprachlichen Polnischen
Zusammenfassung
Das Ziel der vorliegenden Monografie ist, die neuesten lexikalischen und semantischen
Anglizismen, die heutzutage im umgangssprachlichen gesprochenen Polnischen auftreten, zu
beschreiben. Die Forschungsgrundlage ist ein Korpus von 20 täglichen Gesprächen, die von dem
Verfasser aufgenommen, transkribiert und analysiert wurden. Der Korpus besteht aus über 60 000
Wörtern. Der Verfasser hat sich entschieden, die in gesprochener Sprache vorkommenden Lehn-
wörter zu untersuchen, denn die in geschriebener Sprache (besonders Zeitungssprache) auftreten-
den Fremdwörter sind schon ganz gut beschrieben worden; den gesprochenen Lehnwörtern
dagegen wurden bisher nur wenige Abhandlungen gewidmet. Die einzelnen Entlehnungen (deren
Bedeutung, Aussprache, Kollokationen und Kontext in dem Korpus) wurden hier untersucht und
als ein allgemeines Phänomen beschrieben: der Verfasser teilte die Lehnwörter zwar nach ver-
schiedenen Kriterien ein, z.B.: nach deren Häufigkeit im Korpus oder nach dem Zeitraum, in dem
sie im Polnischen auftraten. Er bemühte sich auch festzustellen, inwieweit die in gesprochener
Sprache erschienenen Entlehnungen vom Gesprächsthema und vom Idiolekt der Gesprächspartner
abhängig sind. Die Untersuchungen wurden mit zahlreichen statistischen Tabellen bebildert, die
verschiedene quantitative und qualitative Aspekte von den im Korpus entdeckten lexikalischen
und semantischen Lehnwörtern veranschaulichen sollten.
In vorliegender Monografie wurden auch verschiedenerlei methodologische Probleme mit
Erforschung der Lehnwörter in gesprochener Sprache geschildert. Der Verfasser stellte darüber
hinaus eigene Hypothese auf, auf welche Art und Weise semantische Entlehnungen in der
polnischen Sprache eingeführt und verbreitet werden. Diese Hypothese ist mit dem Konzept von
„primären Äquivalenten“ verbunden, das bis jetzt in den Forschungen über Erwerb und Erlernung
von Fremdsprachen angewandt war.
Viele von den in vorliegender Monografie untersuchten lexikalischen und semantischen
Lehnwörtern sind bisher weder in der Fachliteratur beschrieben, noch in den Wörterbüchern der
Polnischen Sprache und Fremdwörterbüchern registriert worden. Den Lehnwörtern wurde hier
besondere Aufmerksamkeit geschenkt. Der Verfasser ist u.a. zum folgenden Schluss gekommen:
obwohl die Anzahl der lexikalischen Entlehnungen in der gesprochenen Sprache in der letzten
Zeit nicht steigt (was im Gegensatz zum Gefühl der meisten Polen steht), ist die Artenzahl von
semantischen Entlehnungen bedeutsam gewachsen.

Zabawa English Lexical and Semantic Loans PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Zabawa English Lexical and Semantic Loans PDF

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

Zabawa English Lexical and Semantic Loans PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Title: English lexical and semantic loans in informal spoken Polish

Author: Marcin Zabawa

Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego Katowice 2012

Editor ot the Series: Językoznawstwo Neofilologiczne

Executive Editor: Krystian Wojcieszuk

Cover Design: Paulina Dubiel

Technical Editor: Małgorzata Pleśniar

Proofreader: Danuta Stencel

Computer-generated forms: Edward Wilk

6.4.16 List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

I would like to express my deep gratitude to Professor Janusz Arabski, who

It is a well-known fact that nowadays English exerts a strong influence on

differentiating between English borrowings and borrowings of other origin or

SPOKEN LANGUAGE AS A LINGUISTIC PHENOMENON

The present chapter concentrates on some theoretical points concerning

1.2 The primacy of speech over writing and vice versa

as primary whereas writing ceased to be perceived as worthy of serious

As AKINNASO (1982: 98) and BIBER (1988: 7) observe, even within

speaking a lecture or note to an addressee who is separated by time or place

A similar view was also expressed by numerous other linguists, including

1.3 Differences between speech and writing

1.3.1 Introductory remarks

According to POOLE and FIELD (1976: 305), studies on various aspects of

BIBER (1988: 37), face-to-face conversation should be perceived as typical

1.3.2 List of the differences

In general, the differences between written and spoken language can be

2 Obvious differences, such as phonetic/graphic manifestation (perception by ears/eyes) will

to no one in particular, or, at best, to a distant interlocutor’ (AKINNASO, 1982:

1.4 Research done in the field of spoken Polish4

As DUNAJ notes (1989; cited in OTWINOWSKA-KASZTELANIC, 2000: 58; cf. also

4 Some parts of this section have been used in ZABAWA (2009a).

for researching written and spoken language began to be clearly differentiated

2001b: 207—219), BUTTLER (1982), BUTTLER and MARKOWSKI (1991:

[...] język ogólny, mówiony, jakim się ludzie posługują na co dzień,

[...] general, spoken language, used by people on everyday basis, in casual

In the present book, the term język potoczny (informal variety) is

THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF THE CONCEPT

The previous chapter concentrated on some theoretical points concerning

2.2 The definition of borrowing

An element adopted from a foreign language. Most frequently it is a word

The process here is perceived in a broader way; nevertheless, it seems still

Wszelkie elementy (głoski, fonemy, cząstki słowotwórcze, wyrazy, wyrażenia,

All the elements (speech sounds, phonemes, word-formation elements, words,

CRYSTAL, on the other hand, seems to make a distinction between

[a] term used in comparative and historical linguistics to refer to linguistic

Furthermore, he states than ‘loan’ is

As one can see, according to CRYSTAL, ‘borrowing’ can refer to any

Nevertheless, one of the most succinct definitions was given by HAUGEN:

The heart of our definition of borrowing is then the attempted reproduction in

2.3 Types of loans

2.3.1 Introductory comments

(a) those affecting ‘more loosely patterned domains of a language,’

2.3.2 Lexical and semantic loans

According to POPLACK et al., the process of lexical borrowing can be defined in

Lexical borrowing involves the incorporation of individual L2 words (or

Lexical borrowings, which are more frequently noticed (in comparison to

cf. section 6.2.

1. The stage of assimilation into a recipient language (HAUGEN, 1950: 183;

• neologisms composed of Greek and/or Latin morphemes transferred to