In:Language Contact in the Territory of the Former Soviet Union
Edited by Diana Forker and Lenore A. Grenoble
[IMPACT: Studies in Language, Culture and Society 50] 2021
► pp. 259–288
Some structural similarities in the outcomes of language contact with Russian
Published online: 18 June 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.50.09for
https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.50.09for
Abstract
This paper surveys a broad range of languages in contact
with Russian to provide an overview of a core set of similarities in the
outcomes of contact-induced change. We consider both lexical and structural
borrowings, focusing on five categories: adjectives, verbs, indefinite
pronouns, participles and conjunctions, and the structure of complex
clauses. There are clear genetic and areal tendencies for particular
strategies for the integration of loan verbs, while we also find broad
similarities in the changes across all languages surveyed, despite their
differences typologically and genetically, and also in terms of their
demographics and local contact ecologies.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Borrowing of verbs
- 2.1Typological tendencies
- 2.2The light verb strategy
- 2.3Direct insertion
- 2.4Indirect insertion and minor strategies
- 2.5The morphological form of the Russian input verb
- 2.6Summary of verbal borrowing patterns
- 3.Borrowing of adjectives
- 4.Calquing of indefinite pronouns
- 5.Borrowing of conjunctions and discourse particles
- 6.Complex clauses
- 6.1Conjunction, adverbial subordination and conditional clauses
- 6.2Complement clauses, purpose clauses, adverbial subordination and conditional clauses
- 6.3Relative clauses
- 7.Conclusion / Summary
Notes References
References (61)
Alvre, P. (2002). Russische Lehnelemente in Indefinitpronomen
und Adverbien der Ostseefinnischen Sprachen [Russian loan elements in indefinite pronouns
and adverbs in the Finnic languages of the Baltic Sea
region]. Linguistica Uralica, 48, 161–164.
(2006). Towards a typology of the Siberian linguistic
area. In Y. Matras, A. McMahon, & N. Vincent (Eds.), Linguistic areas. Convergence in historical and typological
perspective (pp. 266–300). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
(2017) The changing profile of case marking in the northeastern Siberia area. In R. Hickey (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of areal linguistics (pp. 627–650). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Auer, P., & Muhamedova, R. (2005). Embedded language and matrix language in insertional
language mixing: Some problematic cases. Rivista di Linguistica, 17(1), 35–54.
Blokland, R., & Rießler, M. (2011). Komi-Saami-Russian contacts on the Kola
peninsula. Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics, 38, 5–26.
Bogoras, W. (1922). Chukchee. In F. Boas (Ed.), Handbook of American Indian languages (pp. 631–903). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Comrie, B. (1996). Language contact in northeastern Siberia (Chukotka and
Kamchatka). In E. H. Jahr & I. Broch (Eds.), Language contact in the Arctic: Northern pidgins and contact
languages (pp. 33–46). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Csató, É. Á. (2000). Some typological features of the viewpoint and tense
system in spoken North-Western Karaim. In Ö. Dahl (Ed.), Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe (pp. 723–752). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Elšik, V., & Matras, Y. (2006). Markedness and language change: The Romani sample. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Ferguson, J. K. (2016). Code-mixing among Sakha-Russian bilinguals in Yakutsk: A
spectrum of features and shifting indexical fields. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 26(2), 141–161.
(2019). Sanzhi-Russian code switching and the Matrix Language
Frame Model. International Journal of Bilingualism, 23(6), 1448–1468.
(2020). The late success of Soviet language
policy. International Journal of Bilingualism, 25(1), 240–271.
Georg, R.-S., & Volodin, A. P. (1999). Die itelmenische Sprache [The Itelmen language]. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Golovko, E. V., & Vakhtin, N. B. (1990). Aleut in contact. The CIA enigma. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 22(1), 97–125.
Harrison, K. D., & Anderson, G. D. S. (2008). Tofa language change and terminal generation
speakers. In K. D. Harrison, D. S. Rood, & A. Dwyer (Eds.), Lessons from documented endangered languages (pp. 243–270). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Höhlig, M. (1997). Kontaktbedingter Sprachwandel in der adygeischen
Umgangssprache im Kaukasus und in der Turkei [Contact-related language change in the
colloquial Adyghe language in the Caucasus and in
Turkey]. Munich: Lincom.
Janurik, B. (2017). Erzya-Russian bilingual discourse: A structural analysis
of intrasentential code-switching patterns (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Szeged.
Kashkin, E., & Muravyev, N. (2021). Izhma Komi in Western Siberia: At the crossroads of
language contact. In D. Forker & L. Grenoble (Eds.), Language contact in the territory of the former Soviet
Union. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume)
Kaysina, I. (2013). The adoption of Russian conjunctions in
Udmurt. Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics, 4(2), 131–144.
(2015). Grammatical effects of Russian-Udmurt language
contact. In C. Stolz (Ed.), Language empires in comparative perspective (pp. 219–235). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Khanina, O. (2021). Enets-Russian language contact. In D. Forker & L. Grenoble (Eds.), Language contact in the territory of the former Soviet
Union. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume)
Khanina, O., & Shluinsky, A. (2008). Finite structures in Forest Enets subordination: A case
study of language change under strong Russian
influence. In E. J. Vaida (Ed.), Subordination and coordination strategies in North Asian
Languages, (pp. 63–75). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kozintseva, N. (2003). Armenian and Russian: Grammatical
contacts. In S. Ureland (Ed.), Convergence and divergence of European languages, (pp. 219–234). Berlin: Logos.
Lebedeva, E. P., Konstantinova, O. A., & Monaxova, I. V. (1985). Èvenkijskij jazyk. Učebnoe posobie [The Evenki language. Tutorial]. Leningrad: Prosveščenie.
Leinonen, M. (2009). Russian influence on the Ižma Komi
dialect. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(3), 309–329.
Malchukov, A. L. (2003). Russian interference in Tungusic languages in an
areal-typological perspective. In S. Ureland (Ed.), Convergence and divergence of European languages, (pp. 235–251). Berlin: Logos.
Matić, D. (2008). Russian influence on the Kolyma Yukaghir
morphosyntax. In A. Casaretto & S. Kutscher (Eds.), Sprachkontakt, synchron und diachron [Language contact, diachronic and
synchronic], (pp. 93–124). Aachen: Shaker.
Matras, Y. (1998). Utterance modifiers and universals of grammatical
borrowing. Linguistics, 36(2), 281–331.
Minayeva, V. (2003). Russian grammatical interference in Ket. Language Typology and Universals, 56(1–2), 40–54.
Muhamedova, R. (2006). Untersuchung zum kasachisch-russischen Code-mixing
(mit Ausblick auf den uigurisch-russischen Sprachkontakt) [Investigating Kazakh-Russian code-mixing
(with view on Uyghur-Russian language contact]. Munich: Lincom.
Nedjalkov, I. V. (2009). Taksis v èvenkijskom jazyke [Taxis in Evenki]. In V. S. Xrakovskij (Ed.), Tipologija taksisnyx konstrukcii [Typology of taxis
constructions] (pp. 803–827). Moscow: Znak.
Nikolaeva, I. (2004). Online Kolyma Yukaghir documentation. Retrieved on 16 June,
2020 from [URL]
Oskolskaya, S., & Stoynova, N. (2013). The la-form: Russian verbs in Nanai
speech. Eesti ja soome-ugri keeleteaduse ajakiri, 4(2), 99–116.
Pakendorf, B., & Novgorodov, I. N. (2009). Sakha vocabulary. In M. Haspelmath & U. Tadmor (Eds.) World loanword database. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Retrieved on 3 July,
2019 from [URL]
Potanina, O., & Filchenko, A. (2016). Russian contact-induced innovations in Eastern
Khanty. Tomsk Journal LING & ANTHRO, 2(12), 27–39.
Rießler, M. (2007). Grammatical borrowing in Kildin Saami. In Y. Matras, & J. Sakel (Eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective, (pp. 229–244). Berlin: De Gruyter.
(2009). Kildin Saami vocabulary. In M. Haspelmath & U. Tadmor (Eds.), World loanword database. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology Retrieved on 4 April,
2019 from [URL]
Robbeets, M. (2015). Common denominal verbalizers in the Transeurasian
languages: Borrowed or inherited? In F. Gardani, P. Arkadiev, & N. Amiridze (Eds.), Borrowed morphology (pp. 137–154). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Schlyter, B. N. (2003). Sociolinguistic changes in transformed Central Asian
societies. In J. Maurais & M. A. Morris (Eds.), Languages in a globalising world, (pp. 157–187). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Shapiro, R. (2010). Chinese Pidgin Russian. In U. Ansaldo (Ed.), Pidgins and creoles in Asian contexts (pp. 5–62). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Stapert, E. L. (2013). Contact-induced change in Dolgan: An investigation into
the role of linguistic data for the reconstruction of a people’s
(pre)history (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Leiden University.
Stolz, T. (2008). Romancisation worldwide. In T. Stolz, D. Bakker, & R. Salas Palomo (Eds.), Aspects of language contact: New theoretical, methodological and empirical findings with special focus on Romancisation processes (pp. 1–42). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Teptiuk, D. (2021). Quotative indexes in Permic: Between the original
strategies and Russian. In D. Forker & L. Grenoble (Eds.), Language contact in the territory of the former Soviet
Union. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume)
Tereščenko, N. M. (1953). O russkix vlijanijax na neneckij jazyk (na
material leksiki) [On Russian influence onto Nenets (evidence
from lexicon)]. In Učenye zapiski LGU 157, Fakulʹtet narodov severa,
vyp. 2 (Jazyki i istorija narodnostej krajnego severa SSSR) [Research notes of Leningrad State University
157, Faculty of peoples of the North, Vol. 2 (Languages and history
of circumpolar peoples of USSR)] (pp. 60–83). Leningrad: Izdatelʹstvo LGU.
Vajda, E. J. (2009). Loanwords in Ket. In M. Haspelmath & U. Tadmor (Eds.), Loanwords in the world’s languages (pp. 471–495). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Van Alsenoy, L., & van der Auwera, J. (2015). Indefinite pronouns in Uralic languages. In M. Miestamo, A. Tamm, & B. Wagner-Nagy (Eds.), Negation in Uralic languages (pp. 517–546). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Van den Berg, H. (2004). Coordinating constructions in Daghestanian
languages. In M. Haspelmath (Ed.), Coordinating constructions (pp. 197–226). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wagner-Nagy, B. (2015). Negation in Selkup. In M. Miestamo, A. Tamm, & B. Wagner-Nagy (Eds.), Negation in Uralic languages, (pp. 133–158). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Werner, H. (2002). Vergleichendes Wörterbuch der
Jennisej-Sprachen [Comparative dictionary of the Yeniseian
languages]. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
Wertheim, S. (2003). Linguistic purism, language shift and contact-induced
change in Tatar (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of California.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Maisak, Timur
Grenoble, Lenore A & Boris Osipov
2023. The dynamics of bilingualism in language shift ecologies. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 13:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
