English Words Abroad (review)

English words abroad (EWA) is Manfred Görlach’s third derivative work based on his Dictionary of European anglicisms (DEA, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2001; see also his Annotated bibliography of European anglicisms (John Benjamins, 2002) and English in Europe (John Benjamins, 2002)). Despite a broad title, the scope is limited to lexicography of English loanwords in Europe.

Chs. 1–3 (1–55) call for a transnational, comparative anglicism dictionary of current usage (i.e. the DEA) and briefly introduce topics detailed later, such as DEA lexicographical challenges and problems with previous anglicism dictionaries.

For G, collecting anglicisms was easy, but culling inappropriate candidates and standardizing entries was challenging. Chs. 4–10 detail answers to tough questions such as ‘Is an English word borrowed from French and subsequently loaned to German an anglicism or a gallicism?’. These chapters cover issues such as anglicisms mediated through third languages (Ch. 4, 56–63), screening marginal lexis (Ch. 5, 64–71), orthographic (Ch. 6, 72–74) and morphological (Ch. 7, 75–92) forms of head words, polysemy (Ch. 8, 93–95), anglicisms coexisting with local calques (Ch. 9, 96–108), and entry currency (Ch. 10, 109–16).

I found the discussion of DEA grids the most provocative. DEA grids consist of four, four-language blocks organized by language family, for a total of sixteen boxes for sixteen languages. The boxes display at a glance the distribution and usage for each head word by language and language family, with degree of assimilation and usage category indicated by shading and sigils. The explanatory economy of the grids conserves space, a major concern in dictionary publishing.

Only Chs. 4–8 and 13 are completely new. It was the second time in print for five chapters and the third for two. With portions published as early as 1994, EWA’s age is showing. Except for Ch. 13 (163–67), a last-minute addition discussing the DEA CD-ROM (which was not available until 2003), EWA is decidedly analog, hardly mentioning the internet or digital lexicography. The survey of ‘recent’ anglicism dictionaries (Ch. 11, 117–24) was originally published in 1999. G claims that no major anglicism dictionaries were published between 1999 and 2003, but a quick search on the internet turned up a few. Nevertheless, I was disappointed there was not more new material, and inconsistencies in the table of contents, list of figures, bibliography, and other typographical errors added to the impression that EWA was hastily cobbled together from G’s earlier publications. Nonetheless, some readers may find the collection of his previous work into one volume convenient.

G’s discussion of his Cologne fieldwork is engaging and informative. EWA is of interest to lexicographers working with language variation, such as loans, creoles, dialects, neologisms, and so on. Those who want to use G’s template should note the call for new gallicism and germanism dictionaries in Ch. 12 (125–62).