PROCESSES AND PHENOMENA

Cognitive-semantic reconstruction of borrowings in the Russian language: a functional-stylistic perspective

Authors

  • Tao Zheng Sichuan International Studies University, 400031, China, Chongqing, Shapingba District, 33 Zhuangpan Rd.

How to cite

GOST Zheng T. Cognitive-semantic reconstruction of borrowings in the Russian language: a functional-stylistic perspective // Academic Research Journal. 2026. Vol. 4. No. 2. P. 10-19. DOI: 10.25726/m0483-9194-0201-u
APA Zheng, T. (2026). Cognitive-semantic reconstruction of borrowings in the Russian language: a functional-stylistic perspective. Academic Research Journal, 4(2), 10-19. https://doi.org/10.25726/m0483-9194-0201-u

Abstract

The article examines the cognitive-semantic reconstruction of borrowings in Russian depending on their functioning in scientific, journalistic, and literary styles. The relevance of the study lies in the fact that traditional descriptions of borrowed vocabulary usually focus on the source language, the time of borrowing, and the degree of formal adaptation, whereas stylistic and cognitive reorganization of meaning often remains underexplored. The aim of the paper is to demonstrate how the communicative tasks of a functional style direct the reinterpretation of a borrowed unit and which cognitive mechanisms support this process. The material includes dictionary descriptions as well as studies in functional stylistics, cognitive semantics, language contact, and the adaptation of foreign lexical items in contemporary Russian. As a result, the article proposes a three-part analytical model: «communicative need of the style – cognitive mechanism – path of semantic reconstruction». It is shown that in scientific discourse borrowings tend to move toward terminological stabilization and controlled metaphorization, in journalistic discourse toward evaluative expansion, metonymic compression, and rapid socialization of meaning, and in literary discourse toward image integration and cultural reaccentuation. The novelty of the study lies in describing borrowing adaptation not as a single linear process, but as a stylistically differentiated system of semantic transformations in which the same lexical unit may follow different trajectories of meaning adaptation across functional spheres.

Keywords

borrowing cognitive semantics functional style Russian language language contact semantic reconstruction scientific style journalistic style

Funding

The authors did not declare any external funding for this research.

References

Van Yin. Embodied cognitive linguistics in the light of postmodern philosophy // Foreign Languages and Literature. 2014. Vol. 30. № 6. pp. 63-70.

Vinogradov V.V. On the language of fiction. Moscow: Goslitizdat, 1959. 655 p.

Kozhina M.N., Duskaeva L.R., Salimovskiy V.A. Stylistics of the Russian language. 8th ed. Moscow: Flinta, 2020. 464 p.

Krysin L.P. Foreign words in contemporary Russian. Moscow: Nauka, 1968. 208 p.

Krysin L.P. The Russian word, one’s own and other: studies in contemporary Russian and sociolinguistics. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskoy Kultury, 2004. 883 p.

Marinova E.V. Foreign words in Russian speech of the late 20th – early 21st century: problems of adaptation and functioning. Moscow: ELPIS, 2008. 495 p.

Marinova E.V. Theory of borrowing in its main concepts and terms: a reference dictionary. 2nd ed. Moscow: Flinta, 2013. 240 p.

Ogden C.K., Richards I.A. The meaning of meaning: a study of the influence of language upon thought and of the science of symbolism. London; New York: Kegan Paul, 1923. 336 p.

Yartseva V.N. Linguistics: a large encyclopedic dictionary. 2nd ed. Moscow: The Great Russian Encyclopedia, 1998. 685 p.

Barcelona A., Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez F.J. Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: towards a consensus view. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2011. 382 p.

Biber D., Conrad S. Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 344 p.

Fauconnier G., Turner M. The way we think: conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books, 2002. 464 p.

Geeraerts D. Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 341 p.

Halliday M.A.K. Language as social semiotic: the social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold, 1978. 256 p.

Haspelmath M., Tadmor U. Loanwords in the world’s languages: a comparative handbook. Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 2009. 1080 p.

Haugen E. The analysis of linguistic borrowing // Language. 1950. Vol. 26. № 2. pp. 210-231.

Lakoff G. Women, fire, and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. 614 p.

Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors we live by. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press, 1980. 242 p.

Leech G., Short M. Style in fiction: a linguistic introduction to English fictional prose. 2nd ed. Harlow: Pearson Longman, 2007. 404 p.

Matras Y. Language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 366 p.

Poplack S., Sankoff D., Miller C. The social correlates and linguistic processes of lexical borrowing and assimilation // Linguistics. 1988. Vol. 26. № 1. pp. 47-104.

Rosch E. Cognitive representations of semantic categories // Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 1975. Vol. 104. № 3. pp. 192-233.

Thomason S.G., Kaufman T. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley; Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1988. 415 p.

Traugott E.C., Dasher R.B. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 341 p.

Weinreich U. Languages in contact: findings and problems. New York: Linguistic Circle of New York, 1953. 148 p.

Issue

Section

PROCESSES AND PHENOMENA

Metrics

56 views
0 downloads
Want to publish with us?
Submit an article