Influence of Multi-Word Calques on Russian and Czech – Comparative Study

Influencia de calcos pluriverbales en ruso y checo: estudio comparativo

Jan Gregor (Institute of Technology and Business in České Budějovice)

Libuše Turinská (Institute of Technology and Business in České Budějovice)

Artículo recibido: 21-12-2016 | Artículo aceptado: 01-05-2017

RESUMEN: El artículo analiza las expresiones univerbales y pluriverbales en inglés, checo y ruso. Su objetivo es describir y analizar su interacción mutua a base de su similitud semántica, así como los modelos más detallados de unidades léxicas uni- y pluriverbales en seleccionado campo léxico del mismo o casi el mismo significado. Los ejemplos utilizados para el análisis provienen del único diccionario que fue creado por los autores de este artículo, conteniendo unos miles de unidades léxicas uni- y pluriverbales checas y rusas recogidas por los autores desde 2008. Los autores tratan de explicar el carácter analítico de las elegidas expresiones rusas, lo que se debe a posible influencia del inglés y otros idiomas marcada por la existencia de calcos pluriverbales en el ruso, comparándolos con los calcos en el checo, también el idioma eslavo, con el carácter más sintético. La investigación reveló la existencia de calcos pluriverbales en el ruso, entonces la hipótesis sobre la significante influencia del inglés y otros idiomas extranjeros sobre el ruso y así la existencia de ciertas diferencias tipológicas entre el ruso y checo fue confirmada. Este estudio comparativo parece ser el primer estudio lingüístico de este tipo.
ABSTRACT: The paper deals with English, Czech, and Russian one- and multi-word expressions. Its objective is to describe and analyze their interaction based on the degree of their mutual semantic proximity as well as many detailed models of one- and multi-word combinations within the selected field of lexical units of the same or nearly the same meaning. The examples used were taken from a self-created unique dictionary containing several thousands of Czech and Russian one- and multi-word lexical units which have been gathered by the authors since 2008. The authors try to explain more analytic character of selected Russian naming units due to certain influence of English and other languages manifested by existence of multi-word calques in Russian by comparing them with often more synthetic character of these expressions in Czech as another Slavic language. The research revealed the occurrence of multi-word calques in Russian. The authors´ hypothesis on significant influence of English and other languages on Russian and thus the existence of certain typological differences between Russian and Czech was confirmed. This study seems to be the first detailed comparative linguistics one of its kind.

PALABRAS CLAVE: Calcos pluriverbales, inglés, checo, ruso, diferencias tipológicas
KEY WORDS: Multi-word calques, English, Czech, Russian, typological differences

The scientific study was created during the project No. 201609 of the Internal Grant Competition at the Institute of Technology and Business in České Budějovice.

1. Introduction

In Russian as well as in Czech language there are two basic tendencies characterizing the emergence of new expressions (both in Russian and Czech): condensation and complexity. Condensation describes a process by which the content coherence is expressed by means of a compact form, i.e. “one meaning = one word”. Condensation is implemented by morphological word formation processes (namely derivation and compounding) in so-called condensed designation. Complexity shall be recognized as the opposite process for condensation, a process by which coherent content is expressed in a complex, structured form, i.e. “one meaning = more words”. This is implemented by syntactic word-not formation process in so-called complex designation. The contradiction between the content and form is addressed in terms of semantics; the complex denomination is lexicalized, i.e. a consistent concept is used for one term (Man, 1972; Rudincová, 2001).

At the same time, in both languages two (dynamic) lexical processes occur, usually referred to as univerbation and multiverbation. Multiverbation refers to appearance of a multi-word lexical unit occurring concurrently with an already existing one-word lexeme with the same or similar meaning. It is a reflection of the analytic trends of a language (ESČ, 2002: 276). Univerbation, on the other hand, represents an appearance of a one-word lexeme arising from a synonymous multi-word lexical unit and is considered to be a token of language economy (ESČ, 2002: 505; Rudincová, 2001; Prošek, 2005). At the lexical level, univerbation includes derivation, compounding, substantivization of adjectives and abbreviation (Rudincová, 2001: 171).

Complex (multi-word) expressions (syntagmas, collocations, phrasemes) are broken down into compound (newly emerged fixed expressions without existing one-word lexeme) and multi-word lexemes (fixed expressions arising from one-word lexeme transformed into a multi-word lexeme, i.e. result of the multiverbation process) (Rudincová, 2001). As E. Lotko (2006) claims, multi-word lexemes are generally monosemic.

When integrating foreign-language lexemes, elements and word formation models into the contemporary lexical system of Russian within the dynamic internationalization processes, according to J. Gazda (2002: 36–40; 2003: 71) there are several innovative developments and trends playing a significant role in the vocabulary development in general. This concerns, inter alia, a tendency for applying the principles of language economy (condensation feature) in word formation process, reflected in replacing multi-word lexemes by one-word ones, as well as the tendency for using analytical expressions (agglutinative feature) reflected in more agglutinative traits in semantics as well as in the structure of newly emerging naming units.

Calque is defined as a word or phrase borrowed from one (source) language and integrated into other (target) language by means of its literal translation. The process of borrowing and adopting is called calquing. There can be for example phraseological calques whose translated versions follow the same structure of the original phraseme (ESČ, 2002: 210). Borrowing (loan words) is a process of adopting lexical units from one language into another. There are for example semantic or syntactic borrowings. Both calquing and borrowing processes can be applied simultaneously. In Czech linguistics, such words or expressions are referred to as hybrids (ESČ 2002: 542). The identification of calques might be quite difficult sometimes, and their origin is often difficult to prove. E. Lotko (2006) mentions a significant influence of other languages, namely English, and so-called hidden internationalization. Foreign-language borrowings including multi-word calques entering Czech vocabulary as well as their specific use are described in detail by D. Svobodová (2007: 27–28 etc.). The contrastive analysis of synonymous foreign-language lexemes and Czech and Russian lexemes was conducted by J. Gregor and J. Korostenski (2014).

The authors agree with D. Žváček (1998: 39) in terms of his statement that from the historical point of view, Russian (influenced by French and German, which were not subjected to linguistic purism in the past) adopts a more friendly approach to foreign words and expressions with more analytic character, see e.g. French calques in Czech and Russian: le point de vue – hledisko – точка зрения; la salle d’attente – čekárna – зал ожидания.

According to S. Žaža (1999: 12), in the vocabulary of any language there might be found lexical units which are created based on the semantic and structural similarity with other units, that is, they kind of arise from other units. Both Russian and Czech as flectional languages are characterized by prevalence of motivated naming units. However, base, means and types of motivations in both languages are not identical. Therefore, there are significant differences in the structure of the vocabulary of the two languages.

2. Material and methods

The analysed lexical units from the field of Russian and Czech condensation and complex naming units have been gathered since 2008 from various sources and arranged in the form of a Czech-Russian dictionary containing about 2000 entries (several thousands of lexical units).

The above-mentioned expressions including foreign-languages calques occur both in spoken and written language, and cannot be stylistically assigned to a specific functional style (scientific, publicistic style, etc.), as their detailed stylistic distinction was not the objective of the research (Maslovskaya, 2010; in terms of terminology, Gregor, 2011).

The exact verification of the origin of the selected multi-word lexemes is rather problematic, namely in terms of older loan words or calques borrowed from general Russian vocabulary (unlike the specific, e.g. technical vocabulary), as there seems to be no existing dictionary of (multi-word) foreign-language calques in Russian. The multi-word collocations are not included in conventional etymological dictionaries (Chernykh, 2001). The main method applied was therefore the interlingual comparison, or more precisely thematic specification of the lexemes being analysed (their belonging to certain specific semantic fields).

After adding English equivalents of the given lexemes, comparison and analysis was carried out. The authors focused on substantive and adjectival lexemes, although analytic expressions can also be found among other parts of speech, e.g. adverbs or verbs (Gregor 2008a; 2008b). In order to compare the three analysed languages (English – hereinafter referred to as EN, Czech – CZ, Russian – RU), the total number of 27 possible combinations in quantitative terms (according to the number of lexical units) were determined by means of modelling. By applying the methods of induction and synthesis, the results obtained were summarized in brief conclusions.

3. Hypothesis and scope

The research hypothesis was that the much higher occurrence of multi-word lexemes in RU compared to CZ is partially due to the stronger influence of EN and other foreign languages on RU. This is reflected in higher number of adopted calques, which contributes to weakening the synthetic character of this Slavic language and thus to more typological differences existing between RU and CZ.

The main objective of the article is to verify the above mentioned hypothesis.

The sub-objectives include:

Identifying the basic relations between the studied languages on the basis of the semantic correspondence between the analyzed lexical units,
Creating possible models and combinations of multi-word and one-word lexemes, and subsequently, on the basic of selected type of semantic correspondence, illustrating the existence of such models and combinations by examples from the analyzed lexical corpus,
Carrying out quantitative and qualitative interlingual and intralingual comparison and analysis of those lexemes with regards to the main objective of the study.

4. Results and discussion

For further work with the studied material, there was used a criterion of existing degree of correspondence between semantic and word-formation motivation of the lexemes in both languages being compared. In terms of this the following situations may arise:

Total correspondence between semantic and word-formation motivation in both CZ and RU (compare cathedral = / = katedrála = / = кафедральный собор)
Total correspondence in CZ and/or RU in terms of semantic motivation, almost perfect correspondence in word-formation motivation in CZ and/or RU (compare brainstorming = / = brainstorming = / ≠ мозговой штурм (also: мозговая атака, брейнсторминг). Based on the results of this research, this is typical for calques.
Total or almost total non-correspondence of semantic and word-formation motivation in both CZ and RU (compare handkerchief ≠ / ≠ kapesník ≠ / ≠ носовой платок; posture ≠ / ≠ držení těla ≠ / ≠ осанка; syringe ≠ / ≠ injekční stříkačka ≠ / ≠ шприц; tenure ≠ / ≠ funkční období ≠ / ≠ созыв

According to this research, 6 basic types of semantic relations can be determined between the studied languages, based on the correspondence in between semantic and word-formation motivation of the examined nominal lexical units.

Type	Examples
1. EN=CZ=RU (total or almost total correspondence)	cathedral	katedrála	кафедральный собор
	brainstorming	brainstorming	мозговой штурм
	homeless	bezdomovec	БОМЖ/бездомный
2. EN=CZ≠RU (partial correspondence)	airbag	airbag	подушка безопасности
2. EN=CZ≠RU (partial correspondence)	traffic policeman	dopravní policista	регулировщик
3. EN≠CZ=RU (partial correspondence)	cousin	bratranec	двоюродный брат
	landlady	bytná	хозяйка квартиры
	auditorium	hlediště	зрительный зал
4. EN=RU≠CZ (partial correspondence)	extreme sport athlete	экстремал	adrenalinový sportovec
	mountain stream	горный ручей/поток	bystřina
	(statutory) declaration	декларация	čestné prohlášení
5. EN≠RU=CZ (partial correspondence)	scene / setting	место действия	dějiště
	gem	самоцвет + драгоценный / самоцветный камень	drahokam
	peanut	arašídy/buráky + burské oříšky	арахис + земляной орех
6. EN≠CZ≠RU (total disagreement)	highway	dálnice	автомагистраль + автомобильная магистраль
	thymus	brzlík	зобная железа
	handkerchief	kapesník	носовой платок

Table 1: Typology of the languages being compared in terms of correspondence in semantic and word-formation motivation

In the aforementioned types with existing correspondence between at least two languages being analysed, there can be seen a large number of borrowings including calques. For each type, there are 27 possible models (combinations). In terms of this research (influence of EN and other foreign languages on RU in the field of multi-word lexemes formation), the most important types are obviously type 1 and 4. In addition, for type 4, semantic motivation of the emergence of the lexeme in CZ is different from EN and RU.

For optimal achieving the interlingual research objective within type 1, the analysed lexical units were selected based on the above-mentioned criteria of the total correspondence between semantic and word-formation motivation in CZ and RU, or the total semantic motivation concurrence and at the same time almost total word-formation motivation concurrence in CZ and/ or RU.

Within type 1 by means of numerous examples of structural models (see Table 2 – Table 4) it is possible to demonstrate the influence of EN and other foreign languages on RU in the form of lexical calques and phraseological calques adopted into RU, often in contrast to Czech. These calques are often multi-word lexemes in the target language (RU), in accordance with the source language.

Table 2 shows possible word-formation combinations of English, Czech and Russian lexemes, focusing on compound and univerbated equivalents in CZ and RU, provided that there is an one-word lexeme in EN. The fact that examples could be found for all possible combinations is an evidence of the diversity of lexical relations between the languages being compared. Within this type the most frequent combination in the analysed lexical material is type 2 (1/0 – 1/0 – 0/2+), where a one-word EN and CZ lexeme can be expressed only by multi-word lexeme in RU. This is the evidence of a stronger tendency for analytic (complex) expressions in RU influenced partly by EN and other languages.

EN uses mainly compound words, in contrast to CZ, which has the strongest tendency for using derived lexemes of all languages being analysed (compare battlefield – bojiště – поле битвы / боя / сражения; beechnut – bukvice – буковый орех etc.).

Some of the English compounds might have arisen from interesting metaphors, which is sometimes the same in CZ as well as in RU (compare goalmouth – brankoviště – вратарская площадка; площадь ворот; kneecap – čéška – коленная чашечка; starfish – hvězdice – морская звезда etc.).

There can be observed also the influence of one-word English (French, Latin, Greek, etc.) borrowings or calques on RU (also on CZ), see brainstorming – brainstorming – мозговой штурм; database – databáze – база данных; header – hlavička – удар головой; herbivore – býložravec – травоядное животное; homeless – bezdomovec – бездомный/БОМЖ + человек без определённого места жительства и работы etc.

No.	Number of lexical units
No.	EN	CZ	RU
1	1/0	1/0	1/0
	skyscraper	mrakodrap	небоскрёб
	waterfall	vodopád	водопад
2	1/0	1/0	0/2+
	brainstorming packing (charges) banking numeral daily	brainstorming balné bankovnictví číslovka deník	мозговой штурм плата за упаковку банковское дело имя числительное ежедневная газета
3	1/0	1/0	1/2+
	homeless timekeeper charity engineering	bezdomovec časoměřič dobročinnost / charita inženýring	бездомный/БОМЖ + человек без определённого места жительства и работы секундометрист, хронометрист + контролёр времени благотворительность + благотворительная деятельность инжиниринг + инженерное дело
4	1/0	0/2+	1/0
	linesman eyewitness pomegranate dewdrop strawberry grape	čárový rozhodčí očitý svědek granátové jablko kapka rosy jahoda zahradní kulička vína	лайнсмен очевидец гранат росинка клубника виноградин(к)а
5	1/0	0/2+	0/2+
	eyeball deposition	oční bulva místopřísežné písemné prohlášení	глазное яблоко письменное заявление, равносильное присяге
6	1/0	0/2+	1/2+
	passport house nurse lifestyle	cestovní pas rodinný dům / domek zdravotní sestra způsob života; životní styl	загранпаспорт + заграничный паспорт коттедж + дом на одну семью медсестра + медицинская сестра быт + образ / стиль жизни
7	1/0	1/2+	1/0
	tourism beef orbit	turismus + cestovní ruch hovězí + hovězí maso orbita + oběžná dráha	туризм говядина орбита
8	1/0	1/2+	0/2+
	chipboard archery lying	dřevotříska + dřevotřísková deska lukostřelba + střelba z luku leh + poloha vleže	древесно-стружечная плита (ДСП) стрельба из лука положение лёжа
9	1/0	1/2+	1/2+
	e-mail fool / blockhead cash ice-hockey	e-mail + elektronická pošta hlupák + hloupý člověk hotovost + peníze v hotovosti hokej + lední hokej	электронка (colloq.) + электронная почта дурак / дура; глупец; болван + глупый человек наличность / наличные + наличные деньги хоккей + хоккей с шайбой

Table 2: Word-formation combinations in EN, CZ and RU within Type 1 from the quantitative point of view (usually 3–7 lexical units).

Table 3 shows possible word-formation combinations of EN, CZ and RU lexemes with a focus on compound and univerbated equivalent denominations in CZ and RU, provided that there is an existing multi-word lexeme in EN. As in the previous case, the fact that examples could be found for all possible combinations is the evidence of the diversity of lexical relations between the languages being compared. The far most frequent combination in this group is the combination No. 11 (0/2+ – 1/0 – 0/2+), where a multi-word English and Russian lexeme can be expressed only by a one-word Czech lexeme. This is the evidence of a stronger tendency for analytic (complex) expressing in EN and RU, unlike in CZ. According to the results of this research, this also demonstrates higher influence of EN and other foreign languages on RU in comparison with CZ.

The strong influence of EN and other foreign languages on RU is illustrated mainly by the existence of a number of multi-word English (French, Latin, Greek, etc.) calques, see address book – adresář – адресная книжка; cookery book – kuchařka – кулинарная книга (cf. also reading-book – čítanka – книга для чтения or notebook – zápisník – записная книжка); box of chocolates – bonboniéra – набор / коробка конфет; gear case (gearbox) – převodovka – коробка передач (cf. also doorframe / doorcase – zárubeň – дверная рама / коробка); plastic bag – igelitka – целлофановый пакет; road map – automapa / autoatlas – карта дорог; concrete plant – betonárka / betonárna – бетонный завод; завод по производству бетона; cement plant / factory – cementárna – цементный завод; brick factory – cihelna – кирпичный завод; sugar factory – cukrovar – сахарный завод; potato field – brambořiště – картофельное поле; dead nettle – hluchavka – глухая крaпива; kneeling position – klek – поза на коленях; reading room – čítárna – читальный зал; waiting room – čekárna – зал ожидания; assembly hall – aula – актовый зал etc.

Although less frequently, calques can be found in Czech in their original unabridged (literate multi-word) form, see e.g. travel agency – cestovka (colloq.) + cestovní agentura / kancelář (CK) – турфирма / турагентство / туроператор + туристическая фирма / агентство; бюро путешествий; flea market – blešák (colloq.) + bleší trh – блошиный рынок, or in a shortened (compound or derived one-word) version, see e.g. star cluster – hvězdokupa – звёздное скопление; aluminium foil – alobal – алюминиевая фольга; pocket money – kapesné – карманные деньги etc. It is these examples which illustrate the tendency in Russian for analytic expressing often under the influence of English or other foreign-language calques, where both in EN and RU there appear the whole sets of models based on similar thematic areas with a basic lexeme, such as plant (завод), factory (фабрика), room (зал), field (поле) etc. as an indication of place (Gregor, 2009; 2011).

On the other hand, within the combination No. 13 (0/2+ – 0/2+ – 1/0) there is a large number of one-word Russian lexemes, or multi-word lexemes with coexisting one-word ones within the combination No. 15 (0/2+ – 0/2+ – 1/2+), with only multi-word English and Czech equivalents. The influence of EN or other languages on RU in the form of borrowings or calques should not be overestimated or absolutized. Synthesizing (condensing) means of word-formation in RU are not used as much as in CZ, however, their range is the same and their occurrence in RU is not rare.

Condensation in RU as well as CZ as a language closely related to RU (ESČ, 2002: 505) occurs by means of:

Compound words arising from calquing from EN, see film studio – filmové studio – киностудия; film festival – filmový festival – кинофестиваль; fire extinguisher – hasicí přístroj – огнетушитель; fire and explosion hazards – nebezpečí požáru a výbuchu – взрывопожароопасность,
Words arising from lexemes in the target language, see birch bark – březová kůra – береста; fraternal twins – dvouvaječná dvojčata – двойняшки; identical twins – jednovaječná dvojčata – близнецы / близняшки (colloq.); wood pile – hranice dřeva – поленница; collar bone – klíční kost – ключица,
Substantivization of adjectives, see deed of gift – darovací listina – дарственная,
ellipses of the specifying adjective, see catholic church – katolický kostel – костёл,
blended words within the combinations No. 15 (0/2+ – 0/2+ – 1/2+), see bar code – čárový kód – штрихкод + штриховой код; natural person – fyzická osoba – физлицо + физическое лицо, and No. 18 (0/2+ – 1/2+ – 1/2+), see hydroelectric power station / hydro power plant – hydroelektrárna + vodní elektrárna – гидроэлектростанция (ГЭС) + гидроэлектрическая станция; concentration camp – koncentrák (colloq.) + koncentrační tábor – концлагерь + концентрационный лагерь,
metonymic motivated expression, as in the previous case within the combination No. 15 (0/2+ – 0/2+ – 1/2+), see means of transport – dopravní prostředky – транспорт + транспортные средства; средства транспорта.

For naming of a new fact, one-word, usually monosemic borrowing from a foreign language is used, see time central – časový spínač – таймер; blood donnor – dárce krve – донор; type of product – druh výrobku – атрикул; rules of procedure – jednací řád – регламент; film adaptation – filmové zpracování – экранизация. According to J. Gazda (2002: 37) this results from the effort for the economy of language “not as a result of the necessity to term a new fact, but as an effort for more rational, briefer expression of the facts already known”.

A number of similar one-word equivalents in RU can be found not only within the analysed Type 1 (EN=CZ=RU), but also within Type 2 (EN=CZ≠RU), see cooling tower – chladicí věž – градирня; electronic timing – elektronická časomíra – фотофиниш; equestrian acrobatics – jezdecká akrobacie – вольтижировка etc.

No.	Number of lexical units
No.	EN	CZ	RU
10	0/2+	1/0	1/0
	tea room / shop	čajovna	чайная
11	0/2+	1/0	0/2+
	shoe cabinet bad ways book of travels dramatic company wall bars	botník scestí cestopis činohra žebřiny	тумба /шкафчик для обуви ложный путь путевые записки драматическая труппа шведская стенка
12	0/2+	1/0	1/2+
	street / ground hockey	hokejbal	хоккейбол; стрит-хоккей + уличный хоккей
13	0/2+	0/2+	1/0
	fire and explosion hazards turnover of goods film studio collar bone first name tea leaf ice berg / shelf	nebezpečí požáru a výbuchu obrat zboží filmové studio klíční kost křestní jméno lísteček čaje plovoucí ledovec	взрывопожароопасность товарооборот киностудия ключица имя чаинка айсберг
14	0/2+	0/2+	0/2+
	foreign language tax office chamber of commerce general meeting annual report	cizí jazyk finanční úřad hospodářská komora valná hromada výroční zpráva	иностранный язык налоговая служба торгово-промышленная палата общее собрание годовой отчёт
15	0/2+	0/2+	1/2+
	bar code natural person power lines ballot paper website attendance hand break boil water	čárový kód fyzická osoba elektrické vedení hlasovací lístek návštěvnost webových stránek ruční brzda vroucí / vařicí voda	штрихкод + штриховой код физлицо + физическое лицо электропроводка + электрические провода бюллетень + избирательный лист трафик + посещаемость сайта ручник + ручной тормоз кипяток + кипящая вода
16	0/2+	1/2+	1/0
	electric locomotive towing service	elektrolokomotiva + elektrická lokomotiva odtahovka (colloq.) + odtahová služba	электровоз (авто)эвакуатор
17	0/2+	1/2+	0/2+
	flea market e-mail address dispatching office tax stamp	blešák (colloq.) + bleší trh e-mail + e-mailová adresa expedice + expediční oddělení kolek + kolková známka	блошиный рынок электронный адрес отгрузочный отдел гербовая марка
18	0/2+	1/2+	1/2+
	power plant hydroelectric power station / plant travel agency concentration camp one-way road own goal	elektrárna + elektrárenský podnik hydroelektrárna + vodní elektrárna cestovka (colloq.) + cestovní agentura / kancelář (CK) koncentrák (colloq.) + koncentrační tábor jednosměrka (colloq.) + jednosměrná ulice vlastňák (colloq.) + vlastní gól	электростанция + электрическая станция гидроэлектростанция (ГЭС) + гидроэлектрическая станция турфирма / турагентство / туроператор + туристическая фирма / агентство; бюро путешествий концлагерь + концентрационный лагерь односторонка (colloq.) + односторонняя улица автогол + гол в собственные ворота

Table 3: Word-formation combinations in EN, CZ and RU within Type 1 from the quantitative point of view (usually, 4–8 lexical units).

The influence of EN and other foreign languages on RU in the form of a number of multi-word EN (French, Latin, Greek etc.) calques (see Table 4) is evident namely in the following combinations:

20 (1/2+ – 1/0 – 0/2+), see headquarters + head / central office – centrála – головной офис; standpoint / attitude + point of view – hledisko / stanovisko – точка зрения; gangue + waste rock – hlušina – пустая порода,
21 (1/2+ – 1/0 – 1/2+), see casino + gambling room / house – herna / kasino – казино + игорный зал / дом,
26 (1/2+ – 1/2+ – 0/2+), see tabloid + yellow press – bulvár (colloq.) + bulvární tisk – жёлтая / бульварная пресса; chest + rib cage – hrudník + hrudní koš – грудная клетка,
27 (1/2+ – 1/2+ – 1/2+), see funicular + funicular / cable / cliff railway – lanovka + lanová dráha – фуникулёр + подвесная дорога.

No.	Number of lexical units
No.	EN	CZ	RU
19	1/2+	1/0	1/0
	quarry + stone pit	kamenolom	каменоломня
20	1/2+	1/0	0/2+
	headquarters + head / central office standpoint / attitude + point of view gangue + waste rock inflator + hand / bicycle pump	centrála hledisko / stanovisko hlušina hustilka / pumpička	головной офис точка зрения пустая порода воздушный / велосипедный насос
21	1/2+	1/0	1/2+
	casino + gambling room / house	herna / kasino	казино + игорный зал / дом
22	1/2+	0/2+	1/0
	historiographer + art historian landmark + point of orientation surcharge + additional fee	historik umění orientační bod přirážka k ceně	искусствовед ориентир наценка / накидка
23	1/2+	0/2+	0/2+
	strength + strong point	silná stránka	сильная сторона
24	1/2+	0/2+	1/2+
	trademark + brand name law + system of law; legal order opening + job vacancy weekdays + working days	obchodní značka právní řád volné pracovní místo všední / pracovní dny	бренд + торговая марка правопорядок + правовой порядок вакансия + свободное (рабочее) место будни + будние дни
25	1/2++	1/2++	1/0
	arteriosclerosis / hardening of the arteries	arterioskleróza / kornatění tepen	артериосклероз
26	1/2+	1/2+	0/2+
	tabloid + yellow press black / blackness + black colour guarantor + responsible person chest + rib cage weakness + weak point	bulvár (colloq.) + bulvární tisk čerň + černá barva garant + odpovědná osoba hrudník + hrudní koš slabina + slabá stránka	жёлтая / бульварная пресса чёрная краска / цвет ответственное лицо грудная клетка больное / слабое / уязвимое место
27	1/2+	1/2+	1/2+
	CD + compact disc redness + red colour funicular + funicular / cable / cliff railway	cédéčko (colloq.) (CD) + kompaktní disk červeň + červená barva lanovka + lanová dráha	CD + компакт-диск краснота + красная краска / цвет фуникулёр + подвесная дорога

Table 4: Word-formation combinations in EN, CZ and RU within Type 1 from the quantitative point of view (usually 5–9 lexical units).

5. Conclusion

By comparing English, Czech and Russian one-word and multi-word lexemes, the authors attempted to describe intralingual word-formation processes within one language and confirm the assumption that the more analytic nature of RU and thus the typological differences between CZ and RU might be caused, inter alia, by borrowing multi-word calques from EN and other languages.

After selection of an extensive lexical material from three languages the selection was carried out based on the criterion of the degree of concurrence of word-formation motivation (semantic proximity), and 6 possible types were determined. The lexical units within Type 1 were classified into 27 model combinations and subsequently analysed with a focus on the lexical combinations containing multi-word calques from EN or other languages adopted into RU.

The overwhelming majority of language combinations within Type 1 was managed to be illustrated by examples. This indicates an extraordinary diversity of word-formation models in the analysed languages and possible interlingual combinations. Quantitatively dominant combinations within the analysed lexical material seem to be combinations No. 2 (1/0 – 1/0 – 0/2+), see battlefield – bojiště – поле битвы / боя / сражения, where one-word lexemes in EN and CZ have only a multi-word equivalent in RU, and No. 11 (0/2+ – 1/0 – 0/2+), see brick factory – cihelna – кирпичный завод, where multi-word lexemes in EN and RU have only one-word equivalent in Czech.

It results from above that both EN and RU tend to analytical (complex) expressing. Based on the results of the research, it may be said that the influence of EN on RU is much higher than its influence on CZ. This is demonstrated by a number of multi-word calques in RU which do not have equivalent in CZ except for the rare occurrence of such calques in one-word form, see: address book – adresář – адресная книжка; box of chocolates – bonboniéra – набор / коробка конфет; flea market – blešák (colloq.) + bleší trh – блошиный рынок; gear case (gearbox) – převodovka – коробка передач (see also doorframe / doorcase – zárubeň – дверная рама / коробка); brick factory – cihelna – кирпичный завод; sugar factory – cukrovar – сахарный завод; potato field – brambořiště – картофельное поле; dead nettle – hluchavka – глухая крапива; kneeling position – klek – поза на коленях; waiting room – čekárna – зал ожидания; brainstorming – brainstorming – мозговой штурм; database – databáze – база данных; header – hlavička – удар головой; herbivore – býložravec – травоядное животное; homeless – bezdomovec – бездомный/БОМЖ + человек без определённого места жительства и работы; headquarters + head / central office – centrála – головной офис; standpoint / attitude + point of view – hledisko / stanovisko – точка зрения; gangue + waste rock – hlušina – пустая порода; casino + gambling room / house – herna / kasino – казино + игорный зал / дом; tabloid + yellow press – bulvár (colloq.) + bulvární tisk – жёлтая / бульварная пресса; chest + rib cage – hrudník + hrudní koš – грудная клетка etc.

The authors therefore believe that the formulated hypothesis on the influence of EN and other foreign languages which can be seen in a relatively large number of multi-word calques adopted into RU, and thus in strengthening the tendency for analytic character in RU was successfully confirmed by comparing the three analysed languages (EN, CZ, RU) and thus the objective of the study was successfully achieved. Apart from other problems, it was rather complicated to identify the source language of que calques. To identify of the exact origin of the analysed multi-word calques adopted into RU was therefore not among the objectives of the research. The abundance, irreplaceability and high frequency of using those calques in RU indicate their lasting influence on its vocabulary in which they have been integrated. One-word as well as multi-word calques might be found in RU also within other parts of speech.

Although less frequently, multi-word calques occur in their original, not shortened (literal multi-word) form, see e.g. travel agency – cestovka (colloq.) + cestovní agentura / kancelář (CK) – турфирма / турагентство / туроператор + туристическая фирма / агентство; бюро путешествий; flea market – blešák (colloq.) + bleší trh – блошиный рынок, or in the shortened (compound or derived one-word) form, see e.g. star cluster – hvězdokupa – звёздное скопление; aluminium foil – alobal – алюминиевая фольга; pocket money – kapesné – карманные деньги.

Nevertheless, much higher occurrence of multi-word calques in RU compared to CZ does not necessarily mean lower capability of Russian word-formation system to create one-word naming units. It is rather the extension of the range of the means used by the word-formation system. It seems that the individual types of word-formation used within the broader range – compounding, shortening, derivation, substantivization of adjectives, borrowings from other languages – are used more equally in RU, whereas in CZ it is mainly about derivation, which, however, cannot be used within all expressions.

It is possible to find a large number of cases when in CZ, applying the principles of language economy and despite its ability to create new naming units or to shorten the existing designations by means of the above mentioned word-formation processes of univerbation, namely derivation, it is not possible to create or adopt a one-word equivalent, unlike RU (and often also EN), and it is therefore necessary to use strictly multi-word designation in order to maintain their precise original meaning, see e.g. theatre-goer (театрал), masterpiece (шедевр), minced / ground meat (фарш), motorboat (катер), stroke / apoplexy (инсульт), money forger (фальшивомонетчик), heartburn (изжога), memorial site (мемориал), mousetrap (мышеловка), smoking break (перекур), sealing-wax (сургуч), refund (сдача), ramble, hike (турпоход), power of attorney (доверенность), number of floors (этажность), handshake (рукопожатие), floorboard (половица), floor sidebar (плинтус), midwife (акушерка), back street (переулок), surface mine (карьер), general practitioner (терапевт), legal capacity (дееспособность), first-born child (первенец), exceeding the time limit (просрочка), suburban area (пригород), glass beads (бисер), springboard (трамплин), dead end street (тупик), pun (каламбур), business trip (командировка), snow ball (снежок), snow flake (снежинка), snowmobile (снегоход), snow car (ратрак), summary report (сводка), citizenship (подданство), roof tile (черепица), intestinal (gastrointestinal tract) (кишечник), (free)mason (массон), Christmas tree (ёлка), toilet bowl (унитаз), soured cream (сметана), floodplane (пойма), trowel (мастерок), sweetened condensed milk (сгущёнка), exam period (сессия) etc.

The conclusions of the comparative research may be used for the needs of teaching the foreign languages analysed, translation studies, lexicology and lexicography. The research methods used can be implemented in other foreign languages in which the occurrence of multi-word calques is assumed.

6. Works cited

Chernykh, Pavel Yakovlevich (2001). Istoriko-etimologicheskiy slovar sovremennogo russkogo jazyka. Moskva: Russkiy yazyk.

ESČ (2002): Encyklopedický slovník češtiny. Praha: NLN.

Gazda, Jiří (2002). Dynamika a internacionalizace slovní zásoby současné ruštiny. Brno: Filozofická fakulta Masarykovy univerzity.

Gazda, Jiří (2003). “Internacionalizační tendence v rozvoji slovní zásoby současných západoslovanských jazyků”. Internacionalizmy v nové slovní zásobě. Praha: Ústav pro jazyk český Akademie věd České republiky.

Gregor, Jan (2008a). Valenční možnosti verbonominálních spojení v publicistickém stylu (v rusko-českém srovnávacím plánu). Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci.

Gregor, Jan (2008b). Verbonominální spojení v ruštině (v částečné konfrontaci s češtinou). České Budějovice: Vysoká škola evropských a regionálních studií.

Gregor, Jan (2009). “Структурная и словообразовательная типология русских уни- и мультивербов по сравнению с их чешскими соответствиями”. Rossica Olomucensia XLVIII: pp. 87–93.

Gregor, Jan (2011). “Смысловая типология русских уни- и мультивербов по сравнению с их чешскими соответствиями”. Rossica Olomucensia L: pp. 125-132.

Gregor, Jan & Korostenski, Jiří (2014). “Иноязычный словарный состав – типология (потенциальных) интерференционных отношений (на материале чешского и русского языков)”. Rossica Olomucensia LIII: pp. 75–80.

Kopeckij, Leontij Vasil’jevič et al. (1982). Пособие по лексикологии русского литературного языка. Praha: SPN.

Lotko, Edvard (2006). “Nová víceslovná pojmenování a frazeologická spojení v češtině (na materiálu slovníku neologismů)”. Ed. Balowski, M. & Svoboda, J. Język i literatura czeska w interakcji. Racibórz: Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa. pp. 115-125.

Luschützky, Hans Christian (2003). Uvedení do typologie jazyků. Praha: Ústav Srovnávací Jazykovědy.

Man, Oldřich (1972). “Struktura víceslovných (komplexních) pojmenování v ruštině”. Sborník statí o jazyce a překládání. Praha: Univerzita Karlova. pp. 122–140.

Maslovskaya, Lyudmila Juryevna (2010). “Angliyskiye i francuzskiye kalki v sovremennom russkom jazyke”. Molodoy uchenyy 5 (12) Т. 2: pp. 31–34. <http://moluch.ru/archive/16/1610/> (14-12-2016).

Prošek, Martin (2005). “O jednom typu univerbizovaných pojmenování místních názvů na –ák”. Naše řeč 88 (2): pp. 57–66.

Svobodová, Diana (2007). Internacionalizace současné české slovní zásoby. Ostrava: Pedagogická fakulta Ostravské univerzity.

Žaža, Stanislav (1999). Ruština a čeština v porovnávacím pohledu. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.

Žváček, Dušan (1998). Úvod do teorie překladu (pro rusisty). Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého.