This article examines the works of famous linguists, both domestic and foreign, who have studied the problems of the functioning of borrowed vocabulary in the Russian language at different stages of history, starting from the end of the XVII century during the reign of Peter the Great, followed by the period of perestroika at the end of the XX century and ending with modern research and new approaches to solving the problems voiced in our time in the XXI century. We have provided a classification of existing case studies of loan words in the Russian language, which includes periods of time when the research was conducted, the features of the borrowing process, the number of studies on this subject, language-source prevailing at a certain time interval, and the channels where foreign loanwords came from. We identified areas of further study of the problems of foreign languages and loanwords that are common and universal theory of citations as well as being a clear and rigorous classification according to different parameters. Further research on the functioning of the borrowed vocabulary can contribute to the creation of a coherent and practically justified theory of borrowing.
An active time has come when the language, as a phenomenon, has attracted the exclusively great attention of not only researchers-specialists in the field of linguistics, but also ordinary native speakers of the Russian language in recent decades. It is time for the language, the time to realize the significance of it for understanding who we are now, in a troubled, volatile and changed time, and how we relate to our past. Today, when there is a wide influx of words from the English language, the question of their functioning in the modern Russian language, the history of their penetration into the language system, becomes relevant. In our study, we will consider how the problem of the functioning of borrowed vocabulary in the Russian language is investigated by specialists.
The active scientific study of borrowed vocabulary in Russian studies, as you know, begins from the middle of the 18th century, in particular, with the works of the genius of Russian science and culture M.V. Lomonosov and continues, with greater or lesser intensity, to the present.
It has already become a scientific axiom that all cardinal shifts in the life of society, especially at the most important points in its history, are reflected, first of all, in its vocabulary composition in the form of the appearance of lexical units of native and borrowed origin. Such a bright period, of significant interest to the history of the Russian literary language, is the Petrovsky era, when «whole spheres of new ideas, and therefore whole categories of words,» were borrowed [1; 1]. This formulation of academician J.K. Groth became the classical basis for characterizing the language situation of the first third of the 18th century, marked by the name of Peter the Great, in all scientific and educational works dedicated to this time. Interest in the problem of language contacts and lexical borrowing from linguists involved in the history of the Russian literary language and the ways of its establishment and formation as a national language is understandable.
Taking into account the multidimensional significance of Peter The First epistolary for its linguistic description, linguists emphasize that the proximity of speech activity to the nature of its written fixation in the first third of the XVIII century is particularly interesting and useful from the point of view of studying the processes of adaptation of foreign language vocabulary, which flooded into the Russian language under the influence of the active transformative activity of Peter The First. N.I. Gainullina (2008) drew attention to all these problematic issues in her study «Borrowed Vocabulary in the Petrovsky Era».
It should be mentioned that in the science of the Russian language, a number of interesting and significant works are devoted to the borrowings of the Petrovsky era, starting with the works of J.K. Groth «Philo- logical Searches» (1885). One of the earliest studies of such a plan was the dissertation of V.A. Christiani
«Über das Eindringen von Fremdwörter in die Russische Scriftsprache des 17 und 18 Jharhunderts» (Berlin, 1906). For a long time, the work of Professor N.A. Smirnov «Western Influence on the Russian Language in the Petrovsky Era» (1910) remained the most complete study in science and served as almost the only authoritative source for etymologizing a large number of words borrowed in the Petrovsky period.
It should be noted that in the science of the Russian language, a number of interesting and significant works are devoted to borrowings of the Petrovsky era, starting with the works of Y.K. Groth «Philological Searches» (1885). One of the early works of this plan was also V.A. Christiani's dissertation «Über das Eindringen von Fremdwörter in die Russische Scriftsprache des 17 und 18 Jharhunderts» (Berlin, 1906). For a long time, the work of Professor N.A. Smirnov «Western Influence on the Russian Language in the Petrovsky Era» (1910) remained the most complete study in science and served as almost the only authoritative source for the etymologization of a large number of words borrowed in Petrovsky time, judging by etymologies, which in most cases are given by the famous etymologist of the first half of the 20th century M. Fasmer.
Published in the early 70s of the XX century «Essays on historical lexicology of the XVIII century. Language contacts and borrowings» by E.E. Birzhakova, L.A. Voynova, L.L. Kutina (1972) significantly supplemented the material that had already been collected by N.A. Smirnov and V.A. Khristiani. In the modern scientific community, the question of the time of occurrence of borrowings of a particular period is constantly discussed, since chronological etymologies often have impressive discrepancies-from a quarter of a century to a century or more. And this, of course, significantly distorts the history of the relevant realities represented by such words. Here are some examples: in the Short Etymological Dictionary by N.M. Shansky the borrowing of shampoo lexemes is attributed to the second half of the XIX century [2; 104], but the work «Essays on the Historical Lexicology of the XVIII Century» by E.E. Birzhakova (1972) does not fix this word at all, according to the monograph «Borrowed vocabulary in the Petrovsky era» by N.I. Gainullina (2008), Peter The First used it at the beginning of the 18th century in the form of shanpun: I thank you for the present..., also for the shanpun and I thank you (PBP, VII, 1, 202. 1708). Or other facts: borrowing words such as a claim, subsidy, substance, correlate with the 20–50s of the XIX century. [3; 293]. Comp.: «Despite the fact that Dal held a puristic position and was an opponent of borrowed words, he included in the first edition of the dictionary (1863–1866) more than 750 borrowed words and their derivatives, which came into use in 1820–1850 (among them, for example, claim, subsidy, substance...)», — notes Yu. S. Sorokin [4; 49]. The foreign-language borrowings given in the quote above are found in N.I. Gainullina`s monograph «Borrowed vocabulary in the Petrovsky Era» (2008) in the correspondence of the beginning of the 18th century, as the following contexts of their use indicate: There is a gravitational thing about subsidies, because there are 60,000 troops, except for the Guarnizonophs in another region, a plotter... (IV, 387. Response to the proposal of the Polish king Augustus II. 1706).
There are more «modest,» but no less interesting and significant for the historian of the Russian language, discrepancies in the chronological etymology of individual lexemes — from several years to several decades. So, the use of the marine term compass, according to M. Fasmer with reference to N.A. Smirnov, dates from the 20s of the 18th century: «old. Compass, out-dated marine 1720, in the correspondence of Peter the First, its use is associated with the end of the 17th century, as indicated by the following context: Know drawings or maps of marine, compass, as well as other signs of marine (I, 117. 1697). «Essays» of 1972 do not record this word at all in their «Chronological and Etymological Dictionary,» although it is the most reliable authoritative source from recent studies on the borrowed words of the Petrovsky era.
The foreign language layer of words is also studied in thematic terms. In this direction, research work has been especially active since the mid-50s of the XX century, when interesting candidate dissertations of a number of large scientists of that time were written, for example, such works as «Russian military vocabulary of the 2nd half of the XVII — 1st half of the XVIII century.» by M.F. Tuzova (1955); «The vocabulary of the novels of Petrovsky time» B.A. Margaryan (1956); «Vocabulary of Russian stories of the first third of the 18th century» by V.P. Zabrodchenko (1956); «Military vocabulary borrowed from the German language in the Petrovsky era» by G.M. Sidorov (1966); «Diplomatic vocabulary of the beginning of the 18th century (based on the materials of the short novels of P.P. Shafirov)» by A.V. Voloskova (1966); «Foreign language vocabulary in the works of various genres and in the sources of the business style of the Russian language of the 1st quarter of the 18th century» M.F. Dashkova (1971) and others. As well as separate scientific articles «On lexical synonymy in the literary language of the Petrovsky era (based on the materials of Records 1702– 1703)» by I.S. Khaustova (1961); «Lexical innovations in Russian literary speech of the 18th century» by I.A. Vasilevskaya (1968) and others. It is noteworthy, however, that in many of these works borrowings are considered as part of the general vocabulary of specific written monuments that have been the object of study by researchers with a projection into the language of this time as a whole, or individual works of art of this period. For example, the works of V.P. Zabrodchenko and B.A. Margaryan, or documents of a business and journalistic nature by M.F. Tuzova and I.S. Khaustova. The functional side of the etymological layer of vocabulary of interest, related to the processes of its adaptation and gradual assimilation, is either not affected at all by researchers, or, most often, even if it is said, it acts as a side, secondary and related aspect of consideration. Therefore, we consider the formulation of questions related to the mastery of words of foreign origin in the Russian language of the New Age to be relevant to date.
The relevance of lexical borrowing processes is also that those affected are also in the Essays, and in the dissertation by N.I. Gainullina 1973, which became the basis of the monograph «Borrowed vocabulary in the Petrovsky Era» 2008, the processes of mastering borrowed words have been in the spotlight since the mid80s XX century, when the restructuring began in society, which caused a change in cultural and historical paradigms at the junction of the XX-XXI centuries against the background of a new explosion of lexical borrowing into the Russian language, this time mainly from the English language. This flow of borrowing, of course, is motivated by the specific conditions of both the life of society, that is, globalization in the development of different national communities in the world, and the language itself in the new historical circumstances of its application, largely different from the junction of the XVI–XVIII centuries.
As you know, the main areas of study of vocabulary of foreign origin were laid down by W. Weinreich in his work «Language Contacts» (1953), in which the author identified three main complexes of relevant factors: extralinguistic, or sociolinguistic, internal, or psycholinguistic and actually linguistic. These traditional areas of research in one combination or another are preserved at present in the works of modern Russian scientists, such as «Foreign Language Word in the Context of Modern Social Life» by L.P. Krysin (1996), «Foreign Language Word: the Sociopsycholinguistic Aspect of Research» by I.V. Dyakonova (2002).
Today, it can be considered generally accepted that the process of borrowing foreign language is a complex sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic phenomenon. A foreign-language word is recognized as an integral part of a person's individual vocabulary, or rather, linguistic personality. At the same time, bilingualism, or multilingualism of the speaker, is a priority factor in the psycholinguistic order, as stated in the work of A.A. Burykin «Bilingualism and multilingualism in the educational process» (2000). It also seems that modern researchers have somewhat moved away from discussing how two languages in which speech activity is carried out are combined or intersected in bilingual consciousness. Ontobilinguology is put forward as a new direction, designed to study the types of children's bilingualism, the principles and conditions for its formation and development, as well as the forms of interaction of languages in bilingual speech of the child and their specifics depending on socio- and psycholinguistic characteristics, as evidenced by the work of G.N. Chirsheva «Fundamentals of Ontobilinguology» (2000).
Bilingualism is recognized as ambiguous, gradable and dependent on various factors, according to which it is classified. Moreover, bilingualism is seen both narrowly and broadly as a common ability for all people to use more than one language to a certain extent. So, T.B. Novikova in her work «Borrowing Linguistic and Cultural Concepts: on the Material of English and Russian Languages» (2005) notes that «from this point of view, most of the population of the Earth is bilingual, since bilingualism can be considered both as an elementary knowledge of the contact language and as fluency in it» [5: 16].
As part of the sociolinguistic aspect of the study of foreign language and borrowed vocabulary, T.K. Vurenich in her work «Deexotization of modern borrowings in Russian scientific, linguistic and ordinary language consciousness: on the material of Anglicisms» (2004) and Kitanina E.V. in the work «The Pragmatics of a Foreign Language Word in Russian» (2005) discuss the features of language policy. Fedoseyeva I.V. in the work «Sociolinguistic and cultural aspects of the borrowing process in the Russian political sociolect of the 90s. XX century — the beginning of the XXI century» (2003) and A.B. Kamaletdinova in the work «Foreign language vocabulary in modern mass communication» (2002) identify the causes and conditions of the use of vocabulary of foreign origin; determine the extralinguistic factors of its spread and the main social vectors, status and functional characteristics. I.V. Dyakonova describes age, educational, professional and other differences in the degree of proficiency in a foreign language word.
However, linguistic direction of modern research should be recognized as the dominant one, covering the widest range of problems: pragmatics, vocabulary, grammar, phonetics, graphics and spelling. As a relevant grammatical criterion, the partial terrestrial affiliation of the borrowed vocabulary is most often analyzed. In the work of I.V. Fedoseeva «Sociolinguistic and cultural aspects of the borrowing process in the Russian political sociolect of the 90s XX century. — the beginning of the XXI century» (2003) the meanings of words of foreign origin in the receiving language are revealed from the point of view of semantics; O.E. Bondaretz in her work «Foreign-language borrowings in speech and in language: the linguosociological aspect» (2004) describes semantic processes leading to a change in the semantic structure of a word; G.E. Shilova devotes her work «Features of the semantics and functioning of foreign-language words in modern Russian journalism: on the material of newspapers, radio and television» (2005) to varying or modifying the meaning.
Vocabulary of foreign origin is also studied from the point of view of its word-forming activity, while both new word-forming elements and new productive models are revealed. We can see this in the work of A.A. Isakova «Specifics of switching language codes when adapting pragmonyms of English origin in the Russian advertising text» (2005); I.A. Fedorova in her work «Graphic markers of foreign language vocabulary in the synchronous and diachronic aspects» (2011) offers various thematic classifications: words are classified by conceptual groups, taking into account the graphic design and correlation of native/borrowed vocabulary. Shilova G.E. in the work «Features of the semantics and functioning of foreign-language words in modern Russian journalism: on the material of newspapers, radio and television» (2005) mentions the semantic classification of foreign-language vocabulary used in modern Russian journalism. «Thematic groups of foreign-language words dominated by unambiguous vocabulary are most intensively replenished and developed compared to thematic groups dominated by multi-valued foreign-language lexemes,» the author writes in her study [6; 14]. A.B. Kamaletdinova in her work «Foreign Language Vocabulary in Modern Mass Communication» (2002) differentiates foreign language vocabulary in connection with the specificity of meanings by thematic classes, which can be used to describe language as a holistic system. «During the period of the «information revolution», integration processes in the world economic space, the leading place belongs to the words of the socio-economic region, as well as the sphere of «high technologies,» the author says in her work [7; 19].
Some researchers also focus on such an indicator as the frequency of use of vocabulary of foreign origin. So, A.B. Kamaletdinova in the work «Foreign language vocabulary in modern mass communication» (2002) notes that the frequency of use of a word directly depends on the degree of mastery of the designated concept [7; 5]. G.E. Shilova in her study presents data on the dynamics of the functioning of foreign words, obtained on the basis of a comparison of frequency indicators of the «Frequency Dictionary of the Russian Language» 1977 and «Frequency Dictionary» 2005.
Within the framework of pragmatics, the peculiarities of the functioning of vocabulary of foreign origin are studied. We identified in the work of T.K. Vurenich «Deexotization of modern borrowings in the Russian scientific, linguistic and ordinary language consciousness: on the material of the Anglicisms «(2005), that the foreign-language word is used in modern Russian to express emotional reactions, a system of social assessments in relation to the subject world, spiritual and behavioral spheres, and the work of Nguyen T. T. «New foreign-language vocabulary in a modern newspaper» (2005) expresses the author's ironic attitude to fact, creating a humorous effect, an epage as well as attracting a diverse audience. In particular, a foreign- language word is considered as one of the embodiments of the native — alien dichotomy.
The analysis has not only semantic, but also the formal side of borrowing. E.B. Turdumatova in her work «Inter-language inconsistencies in the accent structure of borrowed words: on the material of borrowed Anglicisms in Russian» (2003), within the framework of phonetics, analyzes the phonemic structure of borrowed vocabulary, features of its accent structure, as well as options for its pronunciation, reveals trends of phonetic adaptation of foreign-language elements. From the point of view of the graphic design of the borrowed vocabulary, elements of foreign origin are identified, which are studied both in synchronous and diachronous aspects. Interesting in this regard is the work of I.A. Fedorova, who not only systematizes graphic markers of foreign language in three Romance languages, but also tries to trace the relationship of graphics, vocabulary and phonetics. The researcher concludes that the words of related languages with the same graphics show different markings in terms of foreign language, on the basis of which several types of interlingual correspondences are distinguished.
In addition to the traditional approaches, the research of XXI century has some new ones, such as cultural and cognitive. So T.M. Efimenko in her work «The role of foreign language vocabulary in objectifying the interaction of world pictures» (2009) explores the intersection of conceptual and linguistic pictures of the world by representatives of various linguistic and cultural communities through the study of borrowed words and concepts. At the same time, the cultural approach involves the study of a national-specific component, while the cognitive one focuses on identifying and studying non-cultural concepts. Borrowing is understood in this case in a broad sense as the penetration of elements from other linguistic cultures, whether it is borrowing knowledge, culture or language units. Such borrowings change the linguistic picture of the world, introducing elements of a different worldview.
Of course, the «new word» is the study of the vocabulary of foreign origin as a scientific and methodological problem. Today it is difficult to disagree with the fact that the «linguistic taste» of the modern era provides for the widespread use of foreign language and borrowed vocabulary. However, this process is still happening, in fact, spontaneously, as evidenced, among other things, by the results of experiments in which different informants give different interpretations of foreign words. So why not take this process under the control of specialists and include foreign language vocabulary in the content of lexical work in school? A.V. Voronina devoted her research to this issue, focusing on the process of mastering foreign-language and borrowed words in the learning process, and from the elementary school stage. The author tries to model a possible system of studying foreign-language borrowed words in primary school, and offers an experimental course of studying foreign-language borrowed words in Russian language lessons.
One of the promising areas of modern research can be recognized as complex. So E.A. Protsenko, the author of the work «Inter-language transcoding in the works of F.M. Dostoevsky» (2002), sees a systematic study of foreign origin vocabulary from the point of view of various principles or approaches. The integrative approach has, in our view, a number of advantages, since it allows us to consider the phenomenon or process being studied in a complex of discovered relationships and interdependencies. It provides obtaining «universal» knowledge, which is not simplified as a result of distraction from the variety of environmental conditions and the action of multidirectional factors and, therefore, most adequately reflects objective reality. At the same time, different authors distinguish various aspects within the framework of the system integrative approach.
An example of a comprehensive description of a foreign-language word is a sociopsycholinguistic study aimed at identifying the specifics of knowledge and use of a foreign-language word from various biological, psychological, social characteristics. I.V. Dyakonova tried to build a consolidated stratification model of mastering a foreign-language word, which makes it possible not only to describe, but also to predict the speech behavior of a person.
Another researcher, N.V. Fedoseeva, focused on a combination of sociolinguistic and cultural aspects of the borrowing process. Presenting the borrowing process as a reflection of the process of interaction of languages and contact between different cultures, the author tries to outline the range of reasons for the migration of borrowed elements into the modern Russian political sociolect. The paper describes the essential status, functional, cultural and rhetorical parameters of the latest borrowings in modern Russian.
Modern approaches contribute to the emergence of interesting, sometimes unexpected results. So, Voronkova I. S. in her work «Linguistic mastery of the alien reality (on the example of Russian-French language processes at the turn of the XVII-XIX centuries)» (2011) in the framework of a study of French- Russian language contacts revealed differences in the strategy of mastering the alien reality inherent in comparable languages. In fact, the openness of the Russian language and its desire for enrichment through borrowed words was confirmed, which many researchers mention. But what is most interesting — the rate of borrowing Gallicisms by the Russian language over the past two centuries was measured, which, according to the researcher, amounted to 433 words per century.
Another pronounced trend of recent work on the problem of borrowing is the unification of the object of study. So, almost all authors unanimously note the intensification and internationalization of borrowing from the English language. Some researchers see this as a consequence of «linguistic expansion» or «interven- tion,» and we can trace this idea in the work of M.V. Tarasova «Semantic changes in English borrowing in Russian and German in the context of globalization» (2009), others believe in manifestation of the fashion for using foreign words. E.V. Marinova emphasizes in her work «Foreign language words in Russian speech of the late XX — early XXI centuries: problems of mastering and functioning» (2008) the fact that «the final change by the end of the twentieth century of the dominant source language», which in the vast majority of cases became the American version of the English language, which says of the process of «Americanization» of the language [8: 7].
As the material of the study, linguists attract various sources of both oral and written speech of various genre-stylistic affiliation, such as art prose, journalism, letters, newspaper chronicles, folklore, and historical monuments. Lexicographic sources are also widely used: from explanatory dictionaries of a particular language to dictionaries of foreign words or dictionaries of neologisms.
In the work of V.A. Dupliychuk, «Foreign language vocabulary in Russian lexicographic sources of the late XX-early XXI century» (2009), dictionaries issued at the beginning of the XXI century were analyzed. The study was carried out on the material of lexical units borrowed from the English language from the 1990s to the present and recorded in the following dictionaries: Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language of the Beginning of the XX Century edited by G.N. Sklyarevskaya, Explanatory Dictionary of Foreign Language Words edited by L.P. Krysin, Large Dictionary of Foreign Words, compiled by A.Yu. Moskvin.
The entire existing body of studies of borrowed words in Russian can be classified:
- According to the periods, time periods when research was carried out: 1) the end of the XIX — the beginning of the XX century (3 works), 2) the 50s — 70s of the XX century (9 works), 3) the end of the XX — the beginning of the XXI century (23 works).
- According to the features of the borrowing process: 1) From the end of the XIX to the 70s of the XX century, foreign language was considered more in thematic terms, while the functional side associated with the processes of its adaptation and assimilation was not affected by researchers, little studied. 2) At the junction of the 20th — 21st centuries, restructuring began in society, which caused a change in cultural and historical paradigms, and during which the processes of mastering borrowed words were in the spotlight. At the same time, this means not only the breadth of their distribution and the high frequency of use, but also their active penetration into different genres and styles of speech, the expansion of their areas of use. E.V. Marinova also notes the intensification of secondary borrowing and the more active use of previously borrowed words. In addition to such characteristics of foreign language and borrowed vocabulary as high frequency and communicative activity, researchers note the functional mobility of borrowing of the «latest period», its graphic-phonetic variability, word-forming activity, emotional coloring and high stylistic potential.
- In terms of the productivity (number) of studies on this topic: Intensification of the process of assimilation of borrowed vocabulary, its «accelerated adaptation» [8], faster mastering both in language and in speech, led to the need for research in such a large number in the XXI century.
- According to the source language: If in the era of Peter the Great the main source languages were Dutch and French, then in the late XX — early XXI centuries the «final change of the dominant source lan- guage» is obvious [10; 10], which in the vast majority of cases became English or its American version.
- By the channels of occurrence of foreign language and borrowed vocabulary: At present, the media and the worldwide Internet are coming to the fore, which are «a kind of transshipment» point for foreign language vocabulary in its transition to the literary language» [7].
Also of interest is the fact that the problem of borrowing continues to be studied mainly in line with the traditions of the Soviet school. The works of foreign colleagues, although quoted quite widely, are rarely involved as the methodological basis of the study. Few studies in theoretical terms, in most cases the works are devoted to the semantic aspect. Insufficient work has been developed on the structural features of borrowed vocabulary. The diachronic aspect is poorly studied, all works are devoted to a certain period of entry of foreign language vocabulary, that is, the synchronic aspect dominates.
It should be noted that although some researchers note a negative attitude towards the abundance of foreign language and borrowed vocabulary, characteristic of the modern language situation, today the opposite trend is also obvious. So, many scientists, for example, A.A. Isakova and I.V. Fedoseyeva talk about the positive importance of borrowing to facilitate mutual understanding between peoples, stabilizing society as a whole. Many modern authors like M.V. Tarasova and G.E. Shilova emphasize the self-regulating function of the language system, which allows us to say that the language system, which is characteristic of historical vitality, will not self-destruct.
In conclusion, we would like to say about the prospects for further study of issues of foreign language and borrowed vocabulary, which are largely outlined by the researchers themselves. Of the priority areas, two can be distinguished: 1) the development of a single and, if possible, universal borrowing theory; 2) studies of borrowed vocabulary in the context of the anthropocentric paradigm, within which various scientific directions are actively developing, allowing to present a multidimensional study from different perspectives of anthropocentrism. Further study of the functioning of borrowed vocabulary can contribute to the creation of a slender and practically justified theory of borrowing.
References
- Groth, Ya.K. (1899). Filolohicheskie razyskaniia [Philological searches]. Sait elektronnoi biblioteki GNPBU [Site of elibrary GNPBU]. — Retrieved from: http://elib.gnpbu.ru/text/grot_trudy_t2_filologicheskie-razyskaniya_1899/ [in Russian].
- Shansky, N.M., Ivanov, V.V., & Shanskaya, T.V. (1971). Kratkii etimolohicheskii slovar rysskoho yazyka [Short etymological dictionary of the Russian language]. — Moscow [in Russian].
- Gainullina, N.I. (2008). Zaimstvovannaia leksika v Petrovskuiu epokhu: problemy adaptatsii [Borrowed vocabulary in the Petrovsky era: adaptation problems]. — Almaty: Kazakh University [in Russian].
- Sorokin, Yu.S. (1965). Razvitie slovarnoho sostava russkoho literaturnoho yazyka. 30–90-e hody XIX veka [Development of the vocabulary of the Russian literary language. 30–90s of the XIX century]. Leningrad: Nauka [in Russian].
- Novikova, T.B. (2005). Zaimstvovanie linhvokulturnykh kontseptov: na materiale anhliiskoho i russkoho yazykov [Borrowing of linguistic and cultural concepts: on the material of English and Russian]. Extended abstract of candidate’s thesis. Volgograd [in Russian].
- Shilova, G.E. (2005). Osobennosti semantiki i funktsionirovaniia inoiazychnykh slov v sovremennoi rossiiskoi publitsistike: na materiale hazet, radio i televideniia [Features of semantics and functioning of foreign-language words in modern Russian journalism: on the material of newspapers, radio and television]. Extended abstract of candidate’s thesis. Voronezh [in Russian].
- Kamaletdinova, A.B. (2002). Inoiazychnaia leksika v sovremennykh sredstvakh massovoi kommunikatsii: 1996–2001 hh. [Foreign language vocabulary in modern media: 1996–2001]. Extended abstract of candidate’s thesis. Ufa [in Russian].
- Marinova, E.V. (2008). Inoiazychnye slova v russkoi rechi kontsa XX – nachala XXI v.: problemy osvoeniia i funktsionirovaniia [Foreign Language Words in Russian Speech of the Late XX – early XXI century: problems of Mastering and functioning]. Extended abstract of Doctor’s thesis. Moscow [in Russian].