Speakers
Description
Some (prescriptive) dictionaries do not include recently borrowed lexemes, while other descriptive ones treat them like older words or (‘native’) neologisms formed within the given language. The question of inclusion/exclusion is especially relevant in cases where a ‘native’ neologism in a language and a newly borrowed word are in fact (near)-synonyms; compare, for example, German downloaden – herunterladen (1990s), Gendergap – Geschlechtergefälle (2000s), Wallbox – Ladestation (2010s), and Microgreens – Mikrogrün (2020s). In our paper, we present a study on the preference of such neologistic synonym pairs and build on previous studies on the acceptance of neologisms. Here, we hypothesized that borrowed neologisms are accepted similarly well by the speech community as other ‘native’ neologisms, e.g., new lexical units created by word formation or loan translations. Both types of neologisms are not characterized by a specific semantic relationship between them. A first corpus-based study (KlosaKückelhaus & Wolfer, 2020) focused on frequency developments of neologisms and on the use of pragmatic markers (e.g., quotation marks) with these words as indicators for acceptance in DeReKo, a German reference corpus. These results were contrasted with those from a psycholinguistic experimental paradigm (Wolfer & Klosa-Kückelhaus, 2023) that allowed us to estimate the degree of uncertainty of the participants based on the mouse trajectories of participants’ responses. While the first study indicated a clear difference between borrowed and ‘native’ neologisms (highly frequent neologisms in general, as well as German neologisms, are marked less often) with diminishing differences over time, the results of the second study suggested (unexpectedly) that Anglo-neologisms are accepted more frequently, more quickly, and with less uncertainty than the ‘native’ ones. These effects, however, were restricted to participants born after 1980. The present study expands on these findings by collecting data in a questionnaire study employing a two-alternative forced-choice paradigm accompanied by supplementary contrastive corpus examinations. This time, the subjects of investigation were different neologisms holding a synonymous relation. Overall, we examine forty pairs of (near-)synonyms from four decades (1990s to 2020s) and a range of subject areas (e.g., technology, economics). The pairs are embedded in a stimulus sentence providing some context for their use. This stimulus sentence is preceded by a context sentence which further clarifies the communicative situation. This contextual scenario itself varies between formal and informal. Hence, for each choice between a ‘native’ neologism and its sense equivalent (a borrowed word), we can investigate the influence of the decade when a word first appeared in the German language (as documented by the German Neologismenwörterbuch (2006ff.)) and the communicative setting (formal vs. informal). Several covariates that might modulate these effects are available via the personal data provided by the participants. The questionnaire results will be juxtaposed with intrinsic characteristics of the words, such as corpus frequency or subject area. To discern usage preferences and potential distinctions, Cruse (2004) suggests examining the selectional and collocational profiles. This approach, grounded in usage, highlights syntagmatic relations in particular communicative situations. A subsequent corpus-based analysis will try to determine ‘contrastive’ contexts, i.e., contexts that tend to favor one lexeme over the other. On the other hand, we also aim to identify (types of) contexts in which both lexemes co-occur (see example (1)). 1) Als private Strom-Tankstelle empfiehlt sich stattdessen die Installation einer sogenannten Wallbox, die an der Garagenwand festmontiert wird. Die privaten Ladestationen gibt es in verschiedenen Leistungsstufen. (DeReKo, Die Rheinpfalz, 01.03.2019) (Instead, as a private power station, we recommend installing a so-called wallbox, which is permanently mounted on the garage wall. The private charging stations are available with different power levels.) All analyses will be based on DeReKo. It is argued that corpus-based examinations of the specified synonyms enhance the insights obtained from the questionnaire. Both, data collection and interpretation as well as corpus analyses are currently still under way. It is, unfortunately, too soon to present any conclusive results here. However, we expect the results to be available and analyses to be completed well before the conference. Given our previous studies, we expect borrowed neologisms to be preferred among younger participants proficient in English, presumably even more so in informal contexts – this should also align with frequency of occurrence in reference corpora. We also posit that discernible 119tendencies emerge over time in terms of established preferences regarding the selection of native versus non-native terms. The findings not only offer understanding of lexicological matters related to the equivalence of meaning in newly coined and/or borrowed words but also address diverse lexicographic inquiries (cf. Hahn, 2004; Storjohann & Pawels, 2023). Consequently, we will propose alternatives for comparative lexicographic documentations, adopting an approach where entries resemble a “discriminating synonymy based on contextual analysis” (Hausmann, 1990, p. 1071).
