Explore the vast range of titles available.

Although Anglicisms1 have been the subject of research for quite some time now, their definition in the literature sometimes tends to be somewhat inexplicit, and there are points of disagreement, especially regarding their classification and the distinction between their types. This paper advocates a uniform, consistent approach to defining loans (Anglicisms) and their typology in terms of an interplay between three criterial features which are transferred in, and thereby constitute, (lexical) borrowing: concept, model, and form. Their combination results in seven feature patterns or loan types (both mono- and bilingual), which the paper correlates and compares with standard categories of Anglicisms found in the literature and illustrates using examples from Czech

Although Anglicisms1 have been the subject of research for quite some time now, their definition in the literature sometimes tends to be somewhat inexplicit, and there are points of disagreement, especially regarding their classification and the distinction between their types. This paper advocates a uniform, consistent approach to defining loans (Anglicisms) and their typology in terms of an interplay between three criterial features which are transferred in, and thereby constitute, (lexical) borrowing: concept, model, and form. Their combination results in seven feature patterns or loan types (both mono- and bilingual), which the paper correlates and compares with standard categories of Anglicisms found in the literature and illustrates using examples from Czech.