Haugen Einar. 1950. "The Analysis of Linguistic Borrowing." Language 26, 210-231.
Heath Jeffrey. 1984. "LanguageContact and Language Change." Annual Review of Anthropology 13, 367-384.
Myers-Scotton Carol. 2002. LanguageContact: Bilingual Encounters and Grammatical Outcomes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thomason Sarah Grey, Kaufman Terrence. 1988. LanguageContact, Creolization and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley: Unversity of
Languages have been in contact since their existence. The Hungarian and Romanian languages have been so for at least 800 years. The present article aims at analysing the structural changes in the monosyllabic Hungarian loanwords in Romanian. After the theoretical introduction, I discuss the phonological status of the /j/ sound, which is very important in this kind of investigations. After that, I present the syllable structure types of these monosyllabic Hungarian etymons and I present, as well, the changing schemes of their structures in the borrowing. The study concludes that the most affected parts of the syllables are the nucleus and the coda.
The Adaptation of Stop Sounds (Occlusive Plosives)
Csaba Attila Both
Alexics. György. 1888. Magyar elemek az oláh nyelvben [Hungarian elements in the language of the Vlachs]. Budapest: Homyánszky Viktor Konyvnyomdája.
Bakos. Ferenc. 1982. A magyar szókeszlet román elemeinek története [The history of Romanian elements of the Hungarian lexicon]. Budapest: Akademiai Konyvkiado.
Benő, Attila. 2008 Kontaktóldgia. A nyelvi kapcsolatok alapfogahnai [Languagecontact. Fundamental concepts of languagecontact]. Cluj-Napoca: Egyetemi Műhely Kiadó, Bolyai Társaság
Appel, René & Pieter Muysken. 2005 (1987). Languagecontact and bilingualism (Amsterdam Academic Archive). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Bullock, Barbara E. & Almeida J. Toribio. 2009. Themes in the study of code-switching. In Barbara E. Bullock &Almeida J. Toribio (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic code-switching (Cambridge Handbooks in Linguistics), 1–18. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511576331.002
Blanár, Vincent. 2009. Proper names in the light of theoretical onomastics
Allen, Cynthia. 1997. Middle English case loss and the ‘creolization’ hypothesis. English Language and Linguistics 1(1). 63–89. DOI: 10.1017/S1360674300000368
Bech, Kristin & George Walkden. 2016. English is (still) a West Germanic language. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 39(1). 65–100. DOI: 10.1017/S0332586515000219
Bradley, Henry. 1904. The making of English . London: Macmillan.
Braunmüller, Kurt. 1996. Forms of languagecontact in the area of the Hanseatic League: Dialect contact phenomena and semicommunication. Nordic
, and problems. In W. Strange (ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience, 233-272. Baltimore: York Press,
Gathercole, Virginia and Enlli Thomas. 2009. Bilingual first-language development: dominant language takeover, threatened minority language take-up. Bilingualism: language and cognition 12(2). 213-237.
Gómez Rendón, Jorge A. 2008. Typological and social constraints on languagecontact: Amerindian languages in contact with Spanish. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam, Ph.D thesis.
Green, Antony D. 1997. The
Matasović, Ranko. 2012. “The substratum in Insular Celtic”, Journal of Language Relationship , 8: 153-159.
Meillet, Antoine. 1925. La Méthode comparative en linguistique historique. Paris: Champion.
Migge, Bettina. 2003. Creole Formation as LanguageContact: The Case of the Suriname Creoles . Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Odlin, Terence. 1992. “Transferability and linguistic substrates”, Second Language Research. Special issue on Crosslinguistic Influence, 8(3): 171-202.
Pedersen, Holger and Henry Lewis. 1989. A Concise Comparative Celtic Grammar
Appel, René-Muysken, Peter 1987. LanguageContact and Bilingualism. London, Edward Arnold.
Baetens Beardsmore, Hugo. 1986. Bilingualism: Basic Principles. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Blake, Norman (ed.) 1992. The Cambridge History of the English Language, vol. II: 1066-1476. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Braunmüller, Kurt 1995. Beiträge zur skandinavischen Linguistik. Oslo, Novus Forlag.
Breivik, Leiv Egil-Jahr, Ernst Håkon (eds.) 1989. Language Change
Filppula, Markku. 1999. A Grammar of Irish English. London: Routledge.
Gillies, William. 2002. Scottish Gaelic. In: Martin J. Ball & James Fife (eds.), The CelticLanguages . London/ New York: Routledge, 145-227.
Harris, John. 1986. Expanding the Superstrate: Habitual Aspect in Atlantic Englishes. English World Wide 7, 171-199.
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2005. LanguageContact and Grammatical Change . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Henry, Patrick.L. 1957. An Anglo-Irish Dialect of North
This paper describes the linguistic and cultural influence of India on the countries of Indo-China in the 5th to 15th centuries A D. It is shown that India’s penetration into South-East Asia took the forms of Late Brahmanism ~ Early Hinduism and of Buddhism. Indian settlers were promoting different variants of Sanskrit written culture in Java. Differences between culturally dominant Sanskrit, the language of the Indian migrants, and the orally used Austronesian languages of Java were great; as a result of interaction between the two there appeared highly Sanskritized versions of Old Western Javanese (Kavi) and later also of Old Balinese. Between the 7th and 15th centuries a great number of literary texts in Kavi were created in Java. The influx of Indian culture into ancient Burma, realized mostly by the land-route and only partially by sea, implied two main waves differing linguistically: the Sanskrit-bound wave and the P āli-bound one. Under the influence of Sanskrit and numerous texts in Sanskrit a Mon script based on the Indian brāhmī was developed in Upper Burma in the 9th century; later on it became the national system of writing, in use even today. The starting point for the history of Pāli epigraphy and literature in Burma was 1058 AD when Theravāda Buddhism was proclaimed the state religion of the Pagan kingdom. In the 11th to 15th centuries a great number of works in different fields of knowledge appeared in Burma. T he language used in them was a creolized Pāli/Burmese resulting from the intensive linguistic interaction between Pāli and Sanskrit on one hand and the vernaculars on the other. The most important stages in the development of this language and of literary activity in it are characterized.