English Borrowings in the Russian and Chinese Languages in the Sphere of Trade

Abstract

The article examines the linguistic and cultural phenomenon of borrowing English words in the Chinese and Russian languages in the commercial sphere as a consequence of the growing influence of English in the context of globalization. Today English has become common in every country, and more and more people are beginning to speak English. Sometimes this interest is prompted by a desire to explore international culture and to travel. However, with increasing frequency, the knowledge of English is seen as necessary for professional work, because English has become a universal tool of communication in business, commerce, and international trade. This phenomenon of Anglicization is definitely present both in China and Russia, and the article looks at the vocabulary sphere which is especially vulnerable to bor-rowings: that of commercial and trade terminology. The article gives a review of phonetic borrowings from English into Chinese and Russian, focusing on the specific character of borrowings in Chinese in connection with peculiarities of the script and sounds. It also presents respective examples of borrowings in the sphere of trade, seeks to understand why English terms are borrowed into both languages, and introduces the classification by K. Palmgren which includes commercial borrowings. The author recognizes that both China and Russia are somewhat concerned about the impact of English on their languages, feeling that the increased influx of English words and phrases may pose a threat to their future development and even potentially slow it down. The influence of English on modern Chinese and Russian languages is undoubtedly significant, and, with current policy, aimed at integration into the world economy, this influence is only expected to grow. In the context of increasing commercial connections between the countries, Anglicisms continue to replace the Russian vocabulary. However, it primarily concerns the vocabulary of trade and commerce, while in daily communication English borrowings are used much more rarely. Thus, the author concludes that, although there is a tendency toward fully replacing Russian trade and commercial terms with those of English origin and, in all probability, this tendency will only be expanding, such penetration of Anglicisms into separate spheres doesn’t threaten the integrity of the language system as a whole.