Abstract
Abstract In his by now classic survey of the linguistic: consequences of language contact, Weinreich (1968: 56-61) proposed several reasons for lexical borrowing, the most universal, according to him, being the need to designate cultural novelties, that is, items peculiar to another culture and therefore for which the recipient language lacks lexical designations. Twenty years later Scotton and Okeju (1973), in a study devoted to lexical borrowings in Ateso, an East African ‘.Nilotic language, would remark– indeed complain– that lexical borrowings serving as designations for cultural borrowings have so attracted the attention of linguists as to obscure the existence of lexical borrowings infringing on the ‘core’ or common vocabulary of the recipient language.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
