英语中的汉语借词研究
|
摘要
语言接触是20世纪70年代以来国际语言学界研究的热点，主要研究不同源的、或虽同源但已分化的语言相互接触而引发的语言变化规律。
民族之间的贸易往来、文化交流、移民杂居、战争征服等各种形态的接触，都会引起语言的接触。语言的接触有不同的类型，其中最常见的，就是词汇的借用。
从词汇角度说，整个英语史就是一部词汇借用史。英语在其1500多年的变迁过程中，共计吸纳了120多种语言的词汇。它从几个日耳曼部族的语言发展成为今天世界上最流行的语言，成为“不是世界语的世界语”。英语借词的来源，非常广泛，这其中就有一部分是来自汉语。
由于是小宗词源，英语中的汉语借词，虽然早在19世纪晚期语言学家就开始提及，但一直没有得到重视。这种情况直到20世纪80年代才有起色和改观，代表性研究有Chan&Kwok（1985）的香港词汇研究、美国学者Garland Cannon（1987；1988）的汉语词汇研究，以及大陆学者汪榕培（1986；2001；2002）先生的“英语中的汉语借词”研究。在接下来的二三十年里，国内这个领域的研究呈现出一派热闹景象，但繁华的背后，有两个基本问题没有得到解决，一是“量”的问题：英语里到底有多少汉语借词？二是“质”的问题：是什么样的借词？有怎样的规律？
本论文从接触语言学的角度，以已有语料和自建语料为基础，整合已有的借词理论，采用理论研究和语料分析相结合的方法，以借词的整个“动态”过程为“纲”，以借词的分类为“目”，以语言、社会、文化等因素为切入“点”，以借词语料为支撑“面”，做到“点”“面”结合，“纲”举“目”张。
语言接触研究，既讲接触，也讲影响，换言之，就是过程、结果两者都要兼顾。基于这样的认识，我们提出借词“动态过程论”的构想，将借词研究的外延扩大，保留传统的“词典借词”研究，增加“前借词”和“后造词”的研究。这样，借词研究，就分成了三个阶段，从而构成一个“动态”的“过程”。对这个“过程”进行全面考察，有助于从宏观和微观两个方面，形成系统的、分层的认识。
前借词，是指“临时借用”的翻译词汇；后造词，是指英语、汉语或英汉语混合而“新造”的词汇，两者都是“新词”，通常情况下，不能视同“借词”，但随着接触的深入，时间的推移，它们却有可能转化为“借词”。从借词角度看，前借词阶段的音译和仿译方法，有利于“新词”向“借词”转化；后造词阶段的“新造词”，特别是英语新造词，由于舍弃了汉语的形式，看不到汉语的“源模”，因而，相比之下，难成借词，一般词典不予收录，收录了也不注明词源，总体说来，数量有限，难以统计。
语言的发展和演变，通常需要一定的时间，是一个“渐变”的过程；但一些非语言因素，如政治因素、科技因素等，借助现代快捷的传媒，可穿越时空，让“新词”一举成为“借词”，是一个“突变”的过程。
词典借词，顾名思义，就是被一般英语词典收录了的汉语借词，处于借用过程的“借入”阶段。根据其语素和构式的存无，可细分为音译借词、混合借词和义借词三种。
音译借词的数量，大致有三、四百个，从时间上看，16世纪之前的很少，主要集中在19世纪和20世纪，总体呈增长趋势；从语义上看，多为饮食、艺术、动植物、政治等词汇；从拼法上看，普通话拼音词汇最多，以后依次是威妥玛拼音、粤语拼音、威妥玛之前的拉丁拼音、闽南语拼音以及洋泾浜英语等等。需要强调的是，洋泾浜英语的借用方式，和普通的借词方式不同，其特点是“结构借用”比较突出；借词有直接借词和间接借词两种。间接借词中，以“日媒词”贡献最大，有200多个。由于词源考证复杂，尚待深入研究。
混合借词有派生和复合两种方式，通过派生方式产生的汉语借词大约有100个；通过复合方式产生的大约800个，其中音译义注词有几十个，描写词有700多个。音译义注词通常为单个英语词汇，说明其前面音译词的语义类别。描写词是一种最便捷、最经济、最易懂的借词的方式，因此，在整个借词中所占的比例也最大。
义借词有引申和仿译两种类型。词义发生引申，有时是因为语音相似，有时是因为语义相似，这类汉语借词数量有限，加之表现形式为“旧词添新义”，因而其“借词”身份常遭质疑。仿译由于英汉词形同构、语素对应，易于“依瓢画葫芦”，所以，这类借词越来越多，英语里大致有100多个，并且呈强劲增长趋势。译借词的构成方式，以两个或三个词为主，一个或四个词为辅。主要是政治、经济和文化方面的词汇，反映现代中国风貌。
接触语言学认为，借用成分、借用数量跟语言接触的强度密切相关。一般来说，借词数量和接触强度成正比。偶然的接触，一般只借用实义词——通常是名词，也有一些动词、形容词和副词，但没有结构上的借用。高强度的接触，既有词汇借用，也有结构借用。
对照英语中的汉语借词，不难发现，这一理论经受住了检验。汉语和英语接触，18世纪之前，总体程度不高，因而借词也不多；到了19、20两个世纪，特别是鸦片战争之后，接触越发频繁，借词也随之增多，但增长方式不同，音译借词是“递增”式发展，而仿译借词是“倍增”式发展，且主要是政治、经济和文化方面的词汇，不像音译借词多为中国“土产”、“古董”等。地域方面，广东、香港、福建、上海等地，语言接触时间较早、较长、较强，因而，借词中，出现了粤语拼音、闽南语拼音以及洋泾浜英语等。
整体上看，英语对汉语的借用，主要是以词汇为主，音译借词多为“命名”之需；结构上的借用较少，主要体现在仿译词和洋泾浜英语的短句上。英汉语间的接触强度，介于“偶然接触”和“强度不高的接触”之间。
英语中的汉语借词研究，它带来的启示是多方面的，如汉语英译、词汇教学、词典编纂、二语习得、语言规划等，都有一定的借鉴意义。从借词角度看，异化的翻译策略以及音译和仿译的翻译方法，会给汉语词汇提供更多“接触”的机会，从而有利于汉语词汇走入英语。这些汉语词汇，特别是文化词汇，一旦成为借词，也便成了文化符号和文化“使者”。它们架构起中外语言和文化的交流桥梁，让中国走向世界，让世界了解中国。
The study of language contact has been the focus of the international linguistic circlessince the1970s, which is mainly on the changes of contact-induced languages of different(or same) genetic sources.
Trade, cultural exchanges, immigrants, wars and other forms, all can bring languagesto contact.Among them, the most common outcome is the lexical borrowing.
In term of vocabulary, English history is the borrowing history. In its1500years ofdevelopment, English has taken in words from as many as120-odd languages, includingChinese, and developed from several Germanic dialects to the world’s most popularlanguage as so-called the “non-Esperanto Esperanto”.
Due to the minor word contributor, Chinese borrowings in English, although as earlyas the late19thcentury linguists began to mention, had not been taken seriously until1980swith some influential publications from Chan&Kwok (1985), Garland Cannon(1987;1988) and Wang Rong-pei(1986;2001;2002). In the following two or three decades,researches in this area, though with many participated in, still leave two basic problemsunresolved: One is the “quantity”—how many Chinese loanwords are there in English?The other is the “quality”—what types of loan words? Any rules to follow?
This dissertation, on the base of self-built corpora, presents a panoramic description ofthe Chinese borrowings from the perspective of language contact. It views the borrowingas a “dynamic” process and divides it into various stages with a macro and micro analysisfrom the dimensions of language, society and culture.
Language contact researches include contact and influence; therefore, it must take intoaccount both process and result. Based on this understanding, the concept of “dynamicborrowing process” is put forward, which consists of three continual stages of pre-,present-, and post-borrowing. In accordance with this, the research of this paper alsocovers three parts, trying to give the readers a systematic and detailed picture of Chinese borrowings in English.
Pre-borrowing means “temporary borrowing” while post-borrowing “creations”,which includes purely English ones, hybrids and those using only Chinese morphemes.The words in these two periods are just “neologisms”, normally, can not be regarded as“loanwords”, but could be if given more in-depth contact and longer time. At thepre-borrowing stage, the methods of transliteration and loan translation are more suitablefor the transformation of “new words” into “borrowed words”; At the post-borrowing stage,“creations”, especially those using only English morphemes, for lack of original Chinesemodel, by contrast, are usually difficult to turn into loanwords, and are generally excludedin dictionaries. If any, however, the number of this kind is very limited and hard tocalculate.
Language evolution or change is a “gradual” process, usually taking some time, so isthe case of borrowings; but if connected with non-linguistic factors such as political andtechnological, and with modern media, words can pass through time and space, and all ofsudden, narrow the gap between “neologisms” and “loans”.
Borrowings, in traditional sense, are usually those contained in dictionaries. Theybelong to the “borrowed” stage in the whole process. According to more or less foreignmorphemes, they can be further divided into three types: loanword, loanblend andloanshift.
The amount of loanwords, roughly between three and four hundred, with very little inthe16thcentury and much in the19thand20thcenturies, shows an ascending trend; As tosemantics, loanwords are mainly those of Chinese “indigenous”, such as diet, art, biota,and politics; When it comes to spelling, most of them are in Pinyin system, followed inturn by Wade-Giles, Cantonese, Latin, Hokkien, and Pidgin English which, different fromthe ordinary “lexical borrowing”, is characterized by its prominent “structural borrowing”.
Borrowings have two ways to adopt foreign words: directly and indirectly. Among theindirect Chinese loanwords, Japanese, as one of the transmission languages, is the greatestcontributor which has helped bring into English more than200words. However, academicresearches in this area have not been well conducted for the complexity of etymology.
Loanblends can be sub-divided into two types: derivational and compound. Theformer have around100words, and the latter800, of which dozens are those in the form of“transliteration+one category word”, and the rest are those of “descriptive form” which occupy the largest proportion in the entire Chinese borrowings for its most convenient,economical and straightforward ways in adoption of foreign words.
Loanshifts also have two types: semantic loans and loan translations. Semantic loanshappen, sometimes because the sound is similar, sometimes the meaning similar. Thenumber of this kind is limited, and in addition, their identity is often doubted for their wordform of “new wine in old bottles”. Loan translations, because of the same structures andcorresponding morphemes between Chinese and English, are becoming more and morepopular with over100in total and still in a soaring rise. Their structure is usuallycomposed of two or three words, but sometimes, of just one or four; their meanings chieflyfall into political, economic and cultural aspects of modern China.
Language contact theory holds that outcomes of influence are closely related with theintensity of contact. In general, more intense contact, more borrowed words and structures.For example, casual contact usually has just lexical borrowings, such as nouns, verbs,adjectives and adverbs, but not structural borrowings. However, in the case of intensecontact, anything is possible, either lexical or structural borrowings.
As far as Chinese borrowings are concerned, it is not difficult to find that this theoryhas withstood the test. Contact between Chinese and English before the18thcentury, wasnot that frequent, therefore, few words came into English; but things have changed greatlysince19thcentury, especially since the Opium Wars. Chinese words in English haveincreased steadily at a high rate in general but with some differences in particular: phoneticloanwords at a progressive growth rate while loan translations, a multiple one and mainlyin political, economic and cultural areas, unlike the former’s of Chinese “native” and“antique”—this phenomenon is very important, worthy of more attention. Geographically,language contact in Guangdong, Hong Kong, Fujian, and Shanghai happens comparativelyearlier, longer and stronger, accordingly in English appear the spellings of Cantonese,Hokkien and Pidgin.
On the whole, Chinese borrowings in English are more lexical (and phonetic loans arein need of naming things), rather than structural which, mainly appear in loan translationsand Pidgin sentences. As a conclusion, it could be drawn as follows: the intensity ofSino-Anglo contact is to some degree between “casual contact” and “slightly more intensecontact.”
The study of Chinese borrowings in English brings enlightenments in many aspects, such as Chinese-English translation, vocabulary teaching, lexicography, second languageacquisition and language planning. From the perspective of loanwords, the strategy offoreignization as well as the methods of transliteration and loan translation will providemore opportunities for Chinese words to “contact”, thus favorable for them to enterEnglish. These Chinese vocabularies, especially the cultural-loaded ones, once “going out”,they would play the role as a cultural “messenger” to bridge the gap between the East andthe West and let the world better understand China.
民族之间的贸易往来、文化交流、移民杂居、战争征服等各种形态的接触，都会引起语言的接触。语言的接触有不同的类型，其中最常见的，就是词汇的借用。
从词汇角度说，整个英语史就是一部词汇借用史。英语在其1500多年的变迁过程中，共计吸纳了120多种语言的词汇。它从几个日耳曼部族的语言发展成为今天世界上最流行的语言，成为“不是世界语的世界语”。英语借词的来源，非常广泛，这其中就有一部分是来自汉语。
由于是小宗词源，英语中的汉语借词，虽然早在19世纪晚期语言学家就开始提及，但一直没有得到重视。这种情况直到20世纪80年代才有起色和改观，代表性研究有Chan&Kwok（1985）的香港词汇研究、美国学者Garland Cannon（1987；1988）的汉语词汇研究，以及大陆学者汪榕培（1986；2001；2002）先生的“英语中的汉语借词”研究。在接下来的二三十年里，国内这个领域的研究呈现出一派热闹景象，但繁华的背后，有两个基本问题没有得到解决，一是“量”的问题：英语里到底有多少汉语借词？二是“质”的问题：是什么样的借词？有怎样的规律？
本论文从接触语言学的角度，以已有语料和自建语料为基础，整合已有的借词理论，采用理论研究和语料分析相结合的方法，以借词的整个“动态”过程为“纲”，以借词的分类为“目”，以语言、社会、文化等因素为切入“点”，以借词语料为支撑“面”，做到“点”“面”结合，“纲”举“目”张。
语言接触研究，既讲接触，也讲影响，换言之，就是过程、结果两者都要兼顾。基于这样的认识，我们提出借词“动态过程论”的构想，将借词研究的外延扩大，保留传统的“词典借词”研究，增加“前借词”和“后造词”的研究。这样，借词研究，就分成了三个阶段，从而构成一个“动态”的“过程”。对这个“过程”进行全面考察，有助于从宏观和微观两个方面，形成系统的、分层的认识。
前借词，是指“临时借用”的翻译词汇；后造词，是指英语、汉语或英汉语混合而“新造”的词汇，两者都是“新词”，通常情况下，不能视同“借词”，但随着接触的深入，时间的推移，它们却有可能转化为“借词”。从借词角度看，前借词阶段的音译和仿译方法，有利于“新词”向“借词”转化；后造词阶段的“新造词”，特别是英语新造词，由于舍弃了汉语的形式，看不到汉语的“源模”，因而，相比之下，难成借词，一般词典不予收录，收录了也不注明词源，总体说来，数量有限，难以统计。
语言的发展和演变，通常需要一定的时间，是一个“渐变”的过程；但一些非语言因素，如政治因素、科技因素等，借助现代快捷的传媒，可穿越时空，让“新词”一举成为“借词”，是一个“突变”的过程。
词典借词，顾名思义，就是被一般英语词典收录了的汉语借词，处于借用过程的“借入”阶段。根据其语素和构式的存无，可细分为音译借词、混合借词和义借词三种。
音译借词的数量，大致有三、四百个，从时间上看，16世纪之前的很少，主要集中在19世纪和20世纪，总体呈增长趋势；从语义上看，多为饮食、艺术、动植物、政治等词汇；从拼法上看，普通话拼音词汇最多，以后依次是威妥玛拼音、粤语拼音、威妥玛之前的拉丁拼音、闽南语拼音以及洋泾浜英语等等。需要强调的是，洋泾浜英语的借用方式，和普通的借词方式不同，其特点是“结构借用”比较突出；借词有直接借词和间接借词两种。间接借词中，以“日媒词”贡献最大，有200多个。由于词源考证复杂，尚待深入研究。
混合借词有派生和复合两种方式，通过派生方式产生的汉语借词大约有100个；通过复合方式产生的大约800个，其中音译义注词有几十个，描写词有700多个。音译义注词通常为单个英语词汇，说明其前面音译词的语义类别。描写词是一种最便捷、最经济、最易懂的借词的方式，因此，在整个借词中所占的比例也最大。
义借词有引申和仿译两种类型。词义发生引申，有时是因为语音相似，有时是因为语义相似，这类汉语借词数量有限，加之表现形式为“旧词添新义”，因而其“借词”身份常遭质疑。仿译由于英汉词形同构、语素对应，易于“依瓢画葫芦”，所以，这类借词越来越多，英语里大致有100多个，并且呈强劲增长趋势。译借词的构成方式，以两个或三个词为主，一个或四个词为辅。主要是政治、经济和文化方面的词汇，反映现代中国风貌。
接触语言学认为，借用成分、借用数量跟语言接触的强度密切相关。一般来说，借词数量和接触强度成正比。偶然的接触，一般只借用实义词——通常是名词，也有一些动词、形容词和副词，但没有结构上的借用。高强度的接触，既有词汇借用，也有结构借用。
对照英语中的汉语借词，不难发现，这一理论经受住了检验。汉语和英语接触，18世纪之前，总体程度不高，因而借词也不多；到了19、20两个世纪，特别是鸦片战争之后，接触越发频繁，借词也随之增多，但增长方式不同，音译借词是“递增”式发展，而仿译借词是“倍增”式发展，且主要是政治、经济和文化方面的词汇，不像音译借词多为中国“土产”、“古董”等。地域方面，广东、香港、福建、上海等地，语言接触时间较早、较长、较强，因而，借词中，出现了粤语拼音、闽南语拼音以及洋泾浜英语等。
整体上看，英语对汉语的借用，主要是以词汇为主，音译借词多为“命名”之需；结构上的借用较少，主要体现在仿译词和洋泾浜英语的短句上。英汉语间的接触强度，介于“偶然接触”和“强度不高的接触”之间。
英语中的汉语借词研究，它带来的启示是多方面的，如汉语英译、词汇教学、词典编纂、二语习得、语言规划等，都有一定的借鉴意义。从借词角度看，异化的翻译策略以及音译和仿译的翻译方法，会给汉语词汇提供更多“接触”的机会，从而有利于汉语词汇走入英语。这些汉语词汇，特别是文化词汇，一旦成为借词，也便成了文化符号和文化“使者”。它们架构起中外语言和文化的交流桥梁，让中国走向世界，让世界了解中国。
The study of language contact has been the focus of the international linguistic circlessince the1970s, which is mainly on the changes of contact-induced languages of different(or same) genetic sources.
Trade, cultural exchanges, immigrants, wars and other forms, all can bring languagesto contact.Among them, the most common outcome is the lexical borrowing.
In term of vocabulary, English history is the borrowing history. In its1500years ofdevelopment, English has taken in words from as many as120-odd languages, includingChinese, and developed from several Germanic dialects to the world’s most popularlanguage as so-called the “non-Esperanto Esperanto”.
Due to the minor word contributor, Chinese borrowings in English, although as earlyas the late19thcentury linguists began to mention, had not been taken seriously until1980swith some influential publications from Chan&Kwok (1985), Garland Cannon(1987;1988) and Wang Rong-pei(1986;2001;2002). In the following two or three decades,researches in this area, though with many participated in, still leave two basic problemsunresolved: One is the “quantity”—how many Chinese loanwords are there in English?The other is the “quality”—what types of loan words? Any rules to follow?
This dissertation, on the base of self-built corpora, presents a panoramic description ofthe Chinese borrowings from the perspective of language contact. It views the borrowingas a “dynamic” process and divides it into various stages with a macro and micro analysisfrom the dimensions of language, society and culture.
Language contact researches include contact and influence; therefore, it must take intoaccount both process and result. Based on this understanding, the concept of “dynamicborrowing process” is put forward, which consists of three continual stages of pre-,present-, and post-borrowing. In accordance with this, the research of this paper alsocovers three parts, trying to give the readers a systematic and detailed picture of Chinese borrowings in English.
Pre-borrowing means “temporary borrowing” while post-borrowing “creations”,which includes purely English ones, hybrids and those using only Chinese morphemes.The words in these two periods are just “neologisms”, normally, can not be regarded as“loanwords”, but could be if given more in-depth contact and longer time. At thepre-borrowing stage, the methods of transliteration and loan translation are more suitablefor the transformation of “new words” into “borrowed words”; At the post-borrowing stage,“creations”, especially those using only English morphemes, for lack of original Chinesemodel, by contrast, are usually difficult to turn into loanwords, and are generally excludedin dictionaries. If any, however, the number of this kind is very limited and hard tocalculate.
Language evolution or change is a “gradual” process, usually taking some time, so isthe case of borrowings; but if connected with non-linguistic factors such as political andtechnological, and with modern media, words can pass through time and space, and all ofsudden, narrow the gap between “neologisms” and “loans”.
Borrowings, in traditional sense, are usually those contained in dictionaries. Theybelong to the “borrowed” stage in the whole process. According to more or less foreignmorphemes, they can be further divided into three types: loanword, loanblend andloanshift.
The amount of loanwords, roughly between three and four hundred, with very little inthe16thcentury and much in the19thand20thcenturies, shows an ascending trend; As tosemantics, loanwords are mainly those of Chinese “indigenous”, such as diet, art, biota,and politics; When it comes to spelling, most of them are in Pinyin system, followed inturn by Wade-Giles, Cantonese, Latin, Hokkien, and Pidgin English which, different fromthe ordinary “lexical borrowing”, is characterized by its prominent “structural borrowing”.
Borrowings have two ways to adopt foreign words: directly and indirectly. Among theindirect Chinese loanwords, Japanese, as one of the transmission languages, is the greatestcontributor which has helped bring into English more than200words. However, academicresearches in this area have not been well conducted for the complexity of etymology.
Loanblends can be sub-divided into two types: derivational and compound. Theformer have around100words, and the latter800, of which dozens are those in the form of“transliteration+one category word”, and the rest are those of “descriptive form” which occupy the largest proportion in the entire Chinese borrowings for its most convenient,economical and straightforward ways in adoption of foreign words.
Loanshifts also have two types: semantic loans and loan translations. Semantic loanshappen, sometimes because the sound is similar, sometimes the meaning similar. Thenumber of this kind is limited, and in addition, their identity is often doubted for their wordform of “new wine in old bottles”. Loan translations, because of the same structures andcorresponding morphemes between Chinese and English, are becoming more and morepopular with over100in total and still in a soaring rise. Their structure is usuallycomposed of two or three words, but sometimes, of just one or four; their meanings chieflyfall into political, economic and cultural aspects of modern China.
Language contact theory holds that outcomes of influence are closely related with theintensity of contact. In general, more intense contact, more borrowed words and structures.For example, casual contact usually has just lexical borrowings, such as nouns, verbs,adjectives and adverbs, but not structural borrowings. However, in the case of intensecontact, anything is possible, either lexical or structural borrowings.
As far as Chinese borrowings are concerned, it is not difficult to find that this theoryhas withstood the test. Contact between Chinese and English before the18thcentury, wasnot that frequent, therefore, few words came into English; but things have changed greatlysince19thcentury, especially since the Opium Wars. Chinese words in English haveincreased steadily at a high rate in general but with some differences in particular: phoneticloanwords at a progressive growth rate while loan translations, a multiple one and mainlyin political, economic and cultural areas, unlike the former’s of Chinese “native” and“antique”—this phenomenon is very important, worthy of more attention. Geographically,language contact in Guangdong, Hong Kong, Fujian, and Shanghai happens comparativelyearlier, longer and stronger, accordingly in English appear the spellings of Cantonese,Hokkien and Pidgin.
On the whole, Chinese borrowings in English are more lexical (and phonetic loans arein need of naming things), rather than structural which, mainly appear in loan translationsand Pidgin sentences. As a conclusion, it could be drawn as follows: the intensity ofSino-Anglo contact is to some degree between “casual contact” and “slightly more intensecontact.”
The study of Chinese borrowings in English brings enlightenments in many aspects, such as Chinese-English translation, vocabulary teaching, lexicography, second languageacquisition and language planning. From the perspective of loanwords, the strategy offoreignization as well as the methods of transliteration and loan translation will providemore opportunities for Chinese words to “contact”, thus favorable for them to enterEnglish. These Chinese vocabularies, especially the cultural-loaded ones, once “going out”,they would play the role as a cultural “messenger” to bridge the gap between the East andthe West and let the world better understand China.
引文
Anttila, R.1989. Historical and Comparative Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Appel, R. and P. Muysken.1987. Language Contact and Bilingualism. London: EdwardArnold.
Baugh A. C. and T. Cable.2001. A History of the English Language. Beijing: ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press.
Behrens, L.2002. The Lexicon in Focus: Competition and Convergence in CurrentLexicology. Bern: Peter Lang.
Bliss, A. J.1966. A dictionary of foreign words and phrases in current English. London:Routledge&Kegan Paul.
Bloomfield, L.1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Boas, F.1911. Introduction to the handbook of American Indian languages, GeorgetownUniversity Press.
Bussmann, H.2000. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Beijing: ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press.
Campbell L. and M. J. Mixco.2007.A Glossary of Linguistics. Edinburgh: EdinburghUniversity Press.
Cannon, G.1981. Japanese Borrowings in English. American Speech56:190-206.
Cannon, G.1982.698Japanese Loanwords in English. Verbatim9:9-10.
Cannon, G.1984. Zero Plurals among the Japanese Loanwords in English. AmericanSpeech59:149-58.
Cannon, G.1987a. Historical Change and English Word-Formation:Recent Vocabulary.New York: Lang.
Cannon, G.1987b.Dimensions of Chinese borrowings in English. Journal of EnglishLinguistics20,200-206.
Cannon, G.1988. Chinese borrowings in English, American Speech63:3-33.
Cannon, G.1989. Abbreviations and acronyms in English word-formation. AmericanSpeech64:99-127.
Cannon, G.1990. Sociolinguistic implications in Chinese-language borrowings in English,InternationalJournal of the Sociology of Language86:41-55.
Cannon, G.1992. Malaysian borrowings in English. American Speech67:134-62.
Cannon, G.1994a. The Arabic contributions to the English language: An historicaldictionary. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
Cannon, G.1994b. Recent borrowings from Spanish into English. In Félix Rodríguez,ed.Spanish loanwords in the English language (Berlin: Mouton deGruyter),41-60.
Cannon, G.1995. Innovative Japanese borrowings in English. Dictionarie16:90-101.
Cannon, G.1996.The Japanese contributions to the English language: An historicaldictionary. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
Cannon, G.1997. Post-1949Arabic loans in written English.Word48:171-94.
Cannon, G.1998a. Antedating primarily Arabic loans in English. Dictionaries19:97-123.
Cannon, G.1998b. Post-1949German loans in written English.Word49:19-54.
Cannon, G.1998c. Persian loans in the English language. Orbis40.
Cannon, G.1999. Turkish loans in the English language.Orbis41.
Carroll, D.1973. Dictionary of Foreign Terms in the English language.New York.
Chan, M.1983.Of Hongs and Tongs and All That Jazz: A Note on Lexical Borrowing fromChinese into English with Special Reference to Hong Kong. Journal of the Royal AsiaticSociety Hong Kong Branch. Vol.23:62-90.
Chan, M. and H. Kwok.1985.A Study of Lexical Borrowing from Chinese into English withSpecial Reference toHong Kong. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.
Clyne, M. G.1987b. History of research on language contact.
In H.von Ulrich Ammon,Norbert Dittmar,and Klaus J.Mattheier （eds）Sociolinguistics-SozioLinguistik,
Coteanu, I.1957. A propos des langues mixte（ssur l’istro-roumain）.Budharest: Mélangeslinguistiques.
Cruse, D. A.2005. Lexicology: An International Handbook on the Nature and Structure ofWords and Vocabularies.Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Crystal, D.2008. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics （6th Edition）. BlackwellPublishing Ltd.
Cui, Xiaohua.2006. An understanding of‘China English’and the learning and use of theEnglish language in China. English Today (4).
Dauzat, A.1927. Les patois, Paris.
Davis, J. F.1836. The Chinese: A General Description of the Empire of China and ItsInhabitants2. London: C. Knight.
De la Cruz-Cabanillas, I.2008.Chinese Loanwords in the OED［OL］.
http://ifa.amu.edu.pl/sap/files/44/15_De%20la%20Cruz-Cabanillas.pdf,2008.
Saussure, F.1915. A course in general linguistics. C. Bally and A. Sechehaye （eds.）.Wade Baskin, trans. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dieter Wunderlich.2006. Advances in the Theory of the Lexicon. Berlin:Walter de Gruyter.
Donald Winford.2003. An Introduction to Contact Linguistics. Oxford: BlackwellPublishing.
Donnson Chen.1992. English Borrowings from Chinese. Journal of Foreign Languages(5):58-62.
Edgar C Knowlton Jr.1970. Chinese, Japanese and Korean Loanwords in Webster’s Third.American speech45:8-29.
Ellis, H.1818. Journal of the proceedings of the late Embassy to China (Vol.I.).London:John Murray, Albemarle-Street.
Field,Fredric W.2002. Linguistic Borrowing in Bilingual Contexts. Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins Publishing Company.
Freeborn D.2000. From Old English to Standard English. Beijing: Foreign LanguageTeaching and Research Press.
Garrett P. B.2004. Language contact and contact languages. In Duranti A （ed.） Acompanion to linguistic anthropology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Halliday, M. A. K.2007. Lexicology： A Short Introduction. London, New York:Continuum.
Halt, A. H.1961. Phrase and Word Origins. New York.
Hanks, P.2008. Lexicology: Critical Concepts in Linguistics. London, New York:Routledge.
Haspelmath, M. and U. Tadmor (eds.).2009a. Loanwords in the World’s Languages: AComparative Handbook. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Haspelmath, M. and U. Tadmor (eds.).2009b. World Loanword Database. Munich: MaxPlanck Digital Library,1344entries. http://wold.livingsources.org/vocabulary.
Haugen, E.1950a. Problems of bilingualism. Lingua2:271-90.
Haugen, E.1950b. The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language26:210-31.
Haugen, E.1953. The Norwegian Language in America: A Study in BilingualBehavior.vol.1: The Bilingual Community; Vol.II: The American Dialects ofNorwegian. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.（Reprinted1969.）
Haugen E.1956. Bilingualism in the Americas: A bibliography and research guide.University of Alabama.
Haugen E.1972. Bilingualism as a Social and Personal Problem. Active Methods andModern Aids in the Teaching of Foreign Languages: London:1-14.
Haugen, E.1992. Borrowing: an overview. International Encyclopedia of Linguistics,ed.by William Bright,197-201. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hockett, C F. ed.1979.The Life and Growth of Language. by W. D. Whitney. New York:Dover Publications.
Jakobson, R.1938. Sur la théorie des affinities phonologiques entre des langues, InSelected Writings,Vol.1:234-246, The Hague: Mouton1962.
Jespersen, O.1962. The Growth and Structure of the English Language.Oxford.
Ju icová, H.2012.Chinese Loans in English［OL］.
http://is.muni.cz/th/266801/pedf_b/Bachelor_thesis_AJ_Helena_Juricova.pdf?lang=en.
Kelly, J.&Nathan K Mao.1979. Fortress Besieged. Indiana University Press.
Kiparsky, V.1938. Comment on Vocadlo,‘Some observations on mixed language’, Actesdu Quatri è me Congr è s Internationale de Linguistes, Copenhagen: EinarMunksgaad,176.
Lehmann, W. P.1962. Historical Linguistics: an Introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehartand Winston.
Masini, F.1993. The Formation of Modern Chinese Lexicon and Its Evolution toward aNational Language:The Period from1840to1898. Journal of Chinese Linguistics.Monograph No.6.
Matras, Y.2009. Language Contact. Cambridge University Press.
McArthur, T.2001. Oxford Concise Companion to the English Language. Shanghai：Foreign Language Education Press．
Meillet, A.1921. Linguistique historique et linguistique générale. Paris: Champion.
Moody, A. J.1996. Transmission language and source languages of Chinese borrowings inEnglish. American Speech71,405-20.
Moody, A. J.1996. Transmission language and source languages of Chinese borrowings inEnglish. American Speech71:405-20.
Moravcsik, E. A.1978. Language contact. Universals of Human Language, Vol.1, ed. byJ.H. Greenberg, J.H.93-122. CA: Stanford University Press.
Mühlh usler, P.1980. Strucural expansion and the process of creolization.Valdman andHighfield.
Müller, F. M.1875. Lectures on the Science of Language. vol.1. New York: Scribner,Armstrong.
Muysken, P.1981a. Generative studies on Creole languages. Dordrecht, Holland,Cinnaminson, NJ: Foris Publications.
Myers-Scotton, C.2002. Contact Linguistics: Bilingual Encounters and GrammaticalOutcomes.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Oksaar, E.1972. Bilingualism. In Thomas A. Sebeok （ed.） Current Trents inLinguistics.Vol.9: Linguistics in Western Europe,476-511.The Hague:Mouton.
Onions C. T.1966. The Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. Oxford: Clarendo Press.
Paul,H.1886. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte.Halle:Max Neimeyer.
Pedersen, H.1931. The Discovery of Language. Indiana University Press.
Rayfield, J. R.1970. The language of a bilingual community. The Hague: Mouton.
Hickey, R.2010.The Handbook of Language Contact. Wiley-Blackwell.
Richards J. C. and R. Schmidt.2002. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching andApplied Linguistics（3rd Edition）. Pearson Education Limited
Morrison, R. A.1815. Dictionary of the Chinese Language (Vol.I.). Macao: TheHonorable East India Company’s Press.
Ross, M. D.1988. Proto Oceanic and the Austronesian Languages of Western Melanesia.Canberra: Australian National University.
Sankoff, G.2001. Linguistic Outcomes of Language Contact. In Peter Trudgill, J.Chambers&N.Schilling-Estes (eds.), Handbook of Sociolinguistics,638-668. Oxford:Basil Blackwell.
Sapir, E.1921. Language. New York: Harcourt, Brace&World.
Schmidt, J.1872. Die Verwantschaftsverh ltnisse
der indogermanischen Sprachen.Weimar:H.Bohlau.
Schuchardt, H.1884. Slawo-deutsches und Slawo-italienisches.Graz: Leuschner andLubensky.
Scott, T.1984. The Wonderful World of Words. The Asia Magazine2-16.
Serjeantson, M. S.1935. A History of Foreign Words in English. London: Routledge andKegan Paul.
Silverstein, M.1972.Chinook Jargon: language contact and the problem of multilevelgenerative systems, Language48:378-406,596-625.
Skeat, W.W.1888. An Etymological Dictionary of the English Language. Oxford: TheClarendon Press.
Speake, J.2005. Oxford Dictionary of Foreign Words&Phrases. Oxford University Press.
Su, Jinzhi.2008. Language contact and morphosyntactic borrowing: the case study ofHong Kong written Chinese（Ph.D. Dissertation）.The Hong Kong PolytechnicUniversity.
Thomason S. G.&T. Kaufman.1988. Language contact, creolization, and geneticlinguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Thomason S. G.2001. Language contact: an introduction. Edinburgh University Press.
Thomason S. G.1996. Contact languages: a wider perspective. Amsterdam: JohnBenjamin’s Publishing Company.
Troubetskoy, N.1938. Principes de phonologie, Paris.
Weinreich U., W. Labov&M. I. Herzog.1968. Empirical foundations for a theory oflanguage change. University of Texas Press
Weinreich, U.1953. Language in Contact: Findings and Problems. New York.
Whitney, W. D.1875. The Life and Growth of Language. New York: D. Appleton.
Whitney, W. D.1881. On mixture in language.Transactions of the American PhilosophicalAssociation12:1-26.
Wilkins, D. A.1972. Linguistics in Language Teaching. Arnold.
Winford, D.2003: An Introduction to contact linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Winford, D.2006. Contact-induced Changes—Classification and Processes, Ms.,Department of Linguistics, Ohio State University.
Yang, Jian.2009. Chinese borrowings in English. World Englishes28,1:90-106.
北京市人民政府外事办公室.2010.美食译苑:中文菜单英文译法.北京:世界知识出版社.
卞凤莲,张艳莲,石颖.2007.从英汉互借词看中国的改革开放.商场现代化（14）.
布龙菲尔德.1933.语言论.北京：商务印书馆.1980.
曹亚民.2000.英语中的汉语借词.江苏教育学院学报（社会科学版）（4）.
曹炜.2010.现代汉语词汇研究(修订本).广州:暨南大学出版社.
常骏跃.1997.英语中汉语借用现象分析.外语教学与研究(5).
常骏跃.1998.英语中汉语借用成分—语音、语法特征变化分析(5).
陈爱兵.2008.还“龙”一个公道.黑龙江教育学院学报(2).
陈保亚.1996.语言接触与语言联盟—汉越（侗台语）语源关系的解释.北京:语文出版社.
陈国强.1990.简明文化人类学词典.杭州：浙江人民出版社.
陈惠琼,陈佳荣.香港会话手册.香港:麒麟书业有限公司.
陈胜利.2005.《围城》的翻译策略及其成因.盐城师范学院学报（4）.
陈胜利.2006.《围城》翻译的文化因缘.盐城师范学院学报（4）.
陈胜利.2013.《牛津英语词典》中的汉语借词数量研究.盐城师范学院学报（3）.
陈原.1983.社会语言学.上海:学林出版社.
陈祖椝,朱自振.1981.中国茶叶历史资料选辑.北京:农业出版社.
大仲马著,蒋学模译.1978.基度山伯爵.北京:人民文学出版社.
邓道宣,谢结果.2000.英语中的汉语借词略论.乐山师范高等专科学校学报（1）.
狄更斯著,石定乐译.1997.大卫·科波菲尔.长沙:湖南文艺出版社.
杜明甫.1999.英语中的汉语外来语探析.河南财政税务高等专科学校学报（4）.
杜再玲.1999.英语汉外来语探析.宁德师专学报（哲学社会科学版）（1）.
杜争鸣.1997.“一国两制”原译切不可轻率改动.中国翻译（4）.
端木义万.2001.英美报刊阅读教程.北京:北京大学出版社.
方梦之.2003.译学词典.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
方欣欣.2004.语言接触问题三段两合论.武汉:华中师范大学.
高丹丹.2006.英汉借词对比探析.安徽文学（10）.
高名凯,刘正埮.1958.现代汉语外来词研究.北京：文字改革出版社.
甘成英.2006.英汉词汇互借对语言文化的影响.绵阳师范学院学报（3）.
葛传椝.1980.漫谈由汉译英问题.翻译通讯（2）.
顾静.2005.透视美国新闻期刊对中国特色词汇的翻译.上海翻译（1）.
顾菊华.2006.英语中汉语借词的文化渊源和语言特征探究.安庆师范学院学报（6）.
关世杰.2007.跨文化传播视觉中“龙”与”dragon”的互译问题与中国国家形象的关系.对外大传播(10).
管益农.1995.中国古代的武举制度.历史文化(4).
郭柏苍.1986.闽产录异.长沙:岳麓书社.
韩哲.1997.新英语外来语词典.哈尔滨:哈尔滨工业大学出版社.
何晓红.2007.从“龙马精神”的翻译看中英文化内涵的差异.安阳师范学院学报(3).
何雅文.2005.借用词与语言文化的渗透.雁北师范学院学报（4）.
何雅文.2005.借用词与语言文化的渗透.雁北师范学院学报（4）
胡发贵.1999.“刺腹”在中国.寻根(17).
胡兆云.2001.语言接触与英汉借词研究.山东:山东大学出版社.
黄海军.2007.也谈美国主流英文媒体对中国特色词汇采取的翻译策略.上海翻译（3）.
黄河清.1992.试论China的词源及其他.现代外语(2).
黄河清.1994.汉语外来词研究中的若干问题.词库建设通讯（3）.
黄河清.1995.汉语外来影响词.词库建设通讯(7).
黄河清.2003.“纸老虎”的来历.香港语文建设通讯（1）.
黄佶.2006.关于“龙”的英译名修改问题.社会科学(11).
黄焰结.2005.从silk(888)到taikonaut(2003)——英语中汉语借词的社会文化研究.天津外国语学院学报（4）.
黄友义.2000.把好编辑和翻译两道关不断提高办外宣品的质量（二）.对外大传播（2）.
姜智芹.2007.傅满洲与陈查理—美国大众文化中的中国形象.南京:南京大学出版社.
蒋晓玲.2004.美国新闻期刊中的汉语文化项翻译的处理.对外经济贸易大学硕士学位论文.
雷颐著.2008.李鸿章与晚清四十年.山西:山西人民出版社.
黎昌抱.2001.英汉外来词对比研究.外语教学（5）.
李冀宏.2003.英语中借自汉语的外来词.山东师范大学外国语学院学报（1）.
李建红.2004.英语中的汉语借词初探.云梦学刊（2）.
李荣篙.1989.试探英语外来词中的几个汉语词源.天津师范大学学报（自然科学版）（4）.
李小飞.2004.从英汉互借词看中外文化渗透.山东外语教学（1）.
李学禧.1963.英语词汇中的汉语贷词探源.兰州师大学报（2）.
李媛,苏彦.2011.结合语义学相关理论谈汉字“龙”的最佳翻译.学术探讨(2).
廉英红.李彩红.2007.英语中的汉语借词与中西文化渗透.华北煤炭医学院学报（3）.
梁改萍.2005.关于英语中汉语借词问题的探讨.西华大学学报（5）.
梁慧敏.2006.英语词典中的汉语译借词.语文建设通讯（香港）（84）
林伦伦,陈慨丽.2000.现代英语中的汉语借词说略.辽宁大学学报（2）.
刘白玉,刘夏青,韩小宁.2010.文化软实力视野下“龙”的英译创新研究.牡丹江教育学院学报(3).
刘法公.1991.英语借自汉语的外来语考释.山东外语教学（1）.
刘海平,王守仁.2002.美国文学史（第四卷）.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
刘海清,邓寿群.2010.试论英语中汉语借词及其语言学特征.宜春学院学报（3）
刘建明.1993.宣传舆论学大辞典.北京：经济日报出版社.
刘彦仕.2004.文化交融下的汉英互借词研究.中共成都市委党校学报（6）.
刘镇清.2000.China和Cathay词源考证.福建外语（3）.
刘正埮、高名凯、麦永乾、史有为.1984.汉语外来词词典.上海:上海辞书出版社.
陆刚.2004.英汉外来借词的对比与翻译.南平师专学报（1）.
阮绩智.2002.英语中汉语借词构词探析.浙江工业大学学报（社会科学）（6）.
罗常培.2003.语言与文化.北京:北京出版社.
吕叔湘.1942.中国文法要略.北京：商务印书馆.
马睿颖.2008.英语中汉语借词研究概览.外国语言文学(3).
毛东辉.2006.源于汉语的英语词汇分析.湛江海洋大学学报（5）
梅耶著,岑麒祥译.1957.历史语言学中的比较方法.北京：科学出版社会.
孟兆芬.2008.从中西方“龙”的演变史看“龙”的翻译.内蒙古民族大学学报(3).
彭爱民.2011.《红楼梦》中龙文化及其英译评析.红楼梦学刊(5).
彭克宏.1989.社会科学大词典.北京：中国国际广播出版社.
彭嫣.2007.语言接触研究述评.新疆大学学报（2）.
彭永和.1994.浅谈英语中的汉语借词.楚雄师专学报（社会科学版）（1）.
戚雨村.1993.语言学百科词典.上海：上海辞书出版社.
齐揆一.1987.英语中的汉语词探源.外语学刊（3）.
乔建珍,冯梅.2006.英语中的汉语外来词.河北教育（11）.
钱锺书.2005.钱锺书英文文集.北京：外语教学与研究出版社.
秦秀白.1983.英语简史.湖南：教育出版社.
任静明.2012.英语中汉语音译贷词的语言特征研究.攀枝花学院学报(5).
任绍曾,殷企平.2011.含英咀华——老浙大外语学科论文精选.北京:商务印书馆.
汝信.1988.社会科学新辞典.重庆：重庆出版社.
萨丕尔著,陆卓元译.1985.语言论.北京:商务印书馆.
宋水培等.1993.中国文化语言学辞典.四川人民出版社.
斯诺著,宋久等译.1984.今日的红色中国：大河彼岸.北京:新华出版社.
史有为.2000.汉语外来词.北京:商务印书馆.
史有为.2004.异文化的使者.上海:上海辞书出版社.
苏金智.2010.语言接触与语言借用—汉语借词消长研究.中国语言学报（14）.
苏全有.2004.论清代中英茶叶贸易.聊城大学学报(社会科学版)(2).
苏秀玲，杨鹏.2010.英语中的汉语文化借词新探.内蒙古农业大学学报（1）.
孙常叙.1957.汉语词汇.长春:吉林人民出版社.
孙瑶.2011.英语中的汉语借词.边疆经济与文化（9）.
索绪尔著，高名凯译.1999.普通语言学教程.北京：商务印书馆.
佘坤珊.1942.英文里的中国字.文讯（1）.
沈从文.2005.中国古代服饰研究.上海：上海书店出版社.
沈叙伦.1990.英语外来语辞典.北京：北京语言学院出版社.
邵荣芬.2009.邵荣芬语言学论文集.北京:商务印书馆.
陶红梅.2011.从英语中的汉语借词看语言的包容性.江淮论坛（1）.
陶岳炼.2006.从英语中汉语借词看中国文化的影响.台州学院学报（2）.
陶岳炼,顾明华.2001.英语中汉语借词的社会文化渊源及其语法、语用特征.外语与外语教学（11）.
唐祥金.2000.英语中的汉语借词及其语言文化因素.西安外国语学院学报（3）．
唐祥金.2003.英语中的汉语借词及其文化阐释.天津职业大学学报（5）.
田卉.2005.从英语、汉语中的借词看中西方文化交往.湘潭师范学院学报（4）.
童隽著,李大夏译.1993.童寯文选.南京:东南大学出版社.
汪榕培.1986.英语中的汉语借词.外语与外语教学（1）.
汪榕培.1991.中国英语是客观存在.解放军外国语学院学报（1）.
汪榕培.2000.英语词汇学研究.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
汪榕培.2002.英语词汇学高级教程.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
汪榕培,常骏跃.2001.英语词汇中汉语借词的来源.四川外语学院学报（4）.
汪榕培,李冬.1983.实用英语词汇学.沈阳:辽宁人民出版社.
汪榕培,卢晓娟.1997.英语词汇学教程.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
汪榕培,王之江.2008.英语词汇学.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
汪榕培,杨彬.2011高级英语词汇学.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
汪滔.1998.“亚洲四小龙”应译为“fourAsian tigers”吗？中国科技翻译(2).
王长友.2010.英语词汇中的汉语元素.语文学刊(5).
王芳姿.2001.英汉外来词比较.嘉兴学院学报（4）.
王丽.2006.英语中的汉语外来语及其语言学特征.牡丹江大学学报（12）.
王力,1958.汉语史稿.北京：科学出版社.
王祥兵.2002.论《时代》周刊中国报道文章对汉语文化词语的翻译.上海科技翻译（2）.
王欣.2012.英汉借词范畴化认知研究.华中师范大学博士论文.
王燕.2011.牛津词典否认收上千汉语外来词.法制晚报,2011-01-05.
巫坚贞.2006.英语中汉语借词探析.龙岩学院学报.增刊（1）.
伍铁平.1986.论词源学及其意义和研究对象.外语学刊（4）
吴福祥.2007.关于语言接触引发的演变.民族语文(2).
吴伟雄.2000.何必译“龙”为“虎”？上海科技翻译(2).
吴玉贵.2002.唐代文化.北京：中国社会科学出版社.
吴宗济,赵新那.2002.赵元任语言学论文集.北京:商务印书馆.
肖云萍.2002.英语中的汉语借词探讨.泉州师范学院学报（3）.
肖中琼,戴卫平．2007.英语中的汉语贷词研究．广西社会科学（1）.
相德宝．2006.英国媒介中的中国国家形象．对外大传播（9）．
熊文华.1996.汉语和英语中的借词.语言教学与研究（2）.
邢福义.2001.文化语言学.湖北教育出版社.
徐通锵.1996.历史语言学.北京:商务印书馆.
徐通锵.2001.基础语言学教程.北京:北京大学出版社.
许家金.2005.英语常用外来语双解词典.合肥：安徽科学技术出版社.
严筠.1987.英语中源自汉语的外来词.江西师范大学学报（2）.
阎文儒.2004.中国考古学史.桂林:广西师范大学出版社
杨彬.2008.心智的门铃：英语新词的认知阐释.济南:山东大学出版社.
杨映春.2011.英语中的汉语借词及其社会文化因素探究.长沙大学学报（3）.
叶蜚声,徐通锵.1981.语言学纲要.北京:北京大学出版社.
易中天.2006.大话方言.上海:上海文化出版社.
游汝杰,邹嘉彦.2004b.语言接触论集.上海:上海教育出版社.
余刚.1999.英语中汉语借词分析.四川三峡学院学报（增刊）.
早川勇.2005.英語に入った日本語の同化度-1990年における-.言語と文化(13).
曾泰元,章忠建.2009.谈汉语文化特色词英译的方向.辞书研究(5).
曾晓光.2010.汉语“纸老虎”一词及其英译“paper tiger”的源流.中国电力教育（27）.
曾晓渝.2004.汉语水语关系论—水语里汉语借词及同源词分层研究.北京:商务印书馆.
赵辰.2000.“Sharawadgi”—中西方造园景观学说之间的迷雾.建筑史论文集(2).
赵蓉晖.2004.社会语言学.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
赵元任.1979.汉语口语语法.北京:商务印书馆.
赵元任.1999.语言问题.北京:商务印书馆.
张博.2008.“切腹”源自中国？寻根(6).
张柏然.1995.英语外来语辞典.西安:世界图书出版公司.
张世禄.1957.普通话词汇.上海:新知识出版社.
张顺生.2008.从龙的英译实践谈龙的英文名修改.苏州科技学院学报(2).
张维友.2004.英语词汇学教程.武汉:华中师范大学出版社.
张艳君.2007.英语中的汉语借词及其文化透视.读与写杂志（6）.
张逸,蔡静.2005.从英语词典中的汉语词汇看文化多样化和语言借用.国外外语教学（4）.
张兴权.1994.从语言接触看朝鲜族的语言使用和朝鲜语的共时变异.民族语文（5）.
张兴权.2012.接触语言学.北京：商务印书馆.
张振江.2006.中国洋泾浜英语研究述评与探索.广西民族学院学报（2）.
真田信治,涩谷胜己,阵内正敬,杉户清树.1992.社会言语学.东京:樱枫社.
郑朝红,李玲.2007.英语中的早期汉语借词浅议.河北大学成人教育学院学报（2）.
郑声滔.1985.源于汉语的英语词汇.现代外语（3）.
周毅.2005.洋泾浜英语在近代中国产生的历史渊源之探讨.中国文化研究(1).
邹嘉彦,游汝杰.2001.汉语与华人社会.上海:复旦大学出版社.
邹嘉彦.2004.语言接触论集.上海:上海教育出版社.
邹嘉彦,游汝杰.2009.社会语言学教程.上海：复旦大学出版社.
邹园艳.2006.英语中的汉语借词探讨.重庆职业技术学院学报（5）.
钟吉娅.2003.汉语外源词.华东师范大学博士论文.
朱和中,黎斌初,陶立三.1999.英语外来语大辞典.北京:外文出版社.
朱天文.2003.美国新闻期刊中汉英翻译采用的策略和方法.上海科技翻译（3）.
朱雪茹.2005.英语中汉语借词的借入方式与发展趋势.济源职业技术学院学报（2）.
祝畹瑾.1992.社会语言学概论.长沙:湖南教育出版社.
Appel, R. and P. Muysken.1987. Language Contact and Bilingualism. London: EdwardArnold.
Baugh A. C. and T. Cable.2001. A History of the English Language. Beijing: ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press.
Behrens, L.2002. The Lexicon in Focus: Competition and Convergence in CurrentLexicology. Bern: Peter Lang.
Bliss, A. J.1966. A dictionary of foreign words and phrases in current English. London:Routledge&Kegan Paul.
Bloomfield, L.1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Boas, F.1911. Introduction to the handbook of American Indian languages, GeorgetownUniversity Press.
Bussmann, H.2000. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Beijing: ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press.
Campbell L. and M. J. Mixco.2007.A Glossary of Linguistics. Edinburgh: EdinburghUniversity Press.
Cannon, G.1981. Japanese Borrowings in English. American Speech56:190-206.
Cannon, G.1982.698Japanese Loanwords in English. Verbatim9:9-10.
Cannon, G.1984. Zero Plurals among the Japanese Loanwords in English. AmericanSpeech59:149-58.
Cannon, G.1987a. Historical Change and English Word-Formation:Recent Vocabulary.New York: Lang.
Cannon, G.1987b.Dimensions of Chinese borrowings in English. Journal of EnglishLinguistics20,200-206.
Cannon, G.1988. Chinese borrowings in English, American Speech63:3-33.
Cannon, G.1989. Abbreviations and acronyms in English word-formation. AmericanSpeech64:99-127.
Cannon, G.1990. Sociolinguistic implications in Chinese-language borrowings in English,InternationalJournal of the Sociology of Language86:41-55.
Cannon, G.1992. Malaysian borrowings in English. American Speech67:134-62.
Cannon, G.1994a. The Arabic contributions to the English language: An historicaldictionary. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
Cannon, G.1994b. Recent borrowings from Spanish into English. In Félix Rodríguez,ed.Spanish loanwords in the English language (Berlin: Mouton deGruyter),41-60.
Cannon, G.1995. Innovative Japanese borrowings in English. Dictionarie16:90-101.
Cannon, G.1996.The Japanese contributions to the English language: An historicaldictionary. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
Cannon, G.1997. Post-1949Arabic loans in written English.Word48:171-94.
Cannon, G.1998a. Antedating primarily Arabic loans in English. Dictionaries19:97-123.
Cannon, G.1998b. Post-1949German loans in written English.Word49:19-54.
Cannon, G.1998c. Persian loans in the English language. Orbis40.
Cannon, G.1999. Turkish loans in the English language.Orbis41.
Carroll, D.1973. Dictionary of Foreign Terms in the English language.New York.
Chan, M.1983.Of Hongs and Tongs and All That Jazz: A Note on Lexical Borrowing fromChinese into English with Special Reference to Hong Kong. Journal of the Royal AsiaticSociety Hong Kong Branch. Vol.23:62-90.
Chan, M. and H. Kwok.1985.A Study of Lexical Borrowing from Chinese into English withSpecial Reference toHong Kong. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.
Clyne, M. G.1987b. History of research on language contact.
In H.von Ulrich Ammon,Norbert Dittmar,and Klaus J.Mattheier （eds）Sociolinguistics-SozioLinguistik,
Coteanu, I.1957. A propos des langues mixte（ssur l’istro-roumain）.Budharest: Mélangeslinguistiques.
Cruse, D. A.2005. Lexicology: An International Handbook on the Nature and Structure ofWords and Vocabularies.Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Crystal, D.2008. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics （6th Edition）. BlackwellPublishing Ltd.
Cui, Xiaohua.2006. An understanding of‘China English’and the learning and use of theEnglish language in China. English Today (4).
Dauzat, A.1927. Les patois, Paris.
Davis, J. F.1836. The Chinese: A General Description of the Empire of China and ItsInhabitants2. London: C. Knight.
De la Cruz-Cabanillas, I.2008.Chinese Loanwords in the OED［OL］.
http://ifa.amu.edu.pl/sap/files/44/15_De%20la%20Cruz-Cabanillas.pdf,2008.
Saussure, F.1915. A course in general linguistics. C. Bally and A. Sechehaye （eds.）.Wade Baskin, trans. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dieter Wunderlich.2006. Advances in the Theory of the Lexicon. Berlin:Walter de Gruyter.
Donald Winford.2003. An Introduction to Contact Linguistics. Oxford: BlackwellPublishing.
Donnson Chen.1992. English Borrowings from Chinese. Journal of Foreign Languages(5):58-62.
Edgar C Knowlton Jr.1970. Chinese, Japanese and Korean Loanwords in Webster’s Third.American speech45:8-29.
Ellis, H.1818. Journal of the proceedings of the late Embassy to China (Vol.I.).London:John Murray, Albemarle-Street.
Field,Fredric W.2002. Linguistic Borrowing in Bilingual Contexts. Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins Publishing Company.
Freeborn D.2000. From Old English to Standard English. Beijing: Foreign LanguageTeaching and Research Press.
Garrett P. B.2004. Language contact and contact languages. In Duranti A （ed.） Acompanion to linguistic anthropology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Halliday, M. A. K.2007. Lexicology： A Short Introduction. London, New York:Continuum.
Halt, A. H.1961. Phrase and Word Origins. New York.
Hanks, P.2008. Lexicology: Critical Concepts in Linguistics. London, New York:Routledge.
Haspelmath, M. and U. Tadmor (eds.).2009a. Loanwords in the World’s Languages: AComparative Handbook. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Haspelmath, M. and U. Tadmor (eds.).2009b. World Loanword Database. Munich: MaxPlanck Digital Library,1344entries. http://wold.livingsources.org/vocabulary.
Haugen, E.1950a. Problems of bilingualism. Lingua2:271-90.
Haugen, E.1950b. The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language26:210-31.
Haugen, E.1953. The Norwegian Language in America: A Study in BilingualBehavior.vol.1: The Bilingual Community; Vol.II: The American Dialects ofNorwegian. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.（Reprinted1969.）
Haugen E.1956. Bilingualism in the Americas: A bibliography and research guide.University of Alabama.
Haugen E.1972. Bilingualism as a Social and Personal Problem. Active Methods andModern Aids in the Teaching of Foreign Languages: London:1-14.
Haugen, E.1992. Borrowing: an overview. International Encyclopedia of Linguistics,ed.by William Bright,197-201. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hockett, C F. ed.1979.The Life and Growth of Language. by W. D. Whitney. New York:Dover Publications.
Jakobson, R.1938. Sur la théorie des affinities phonologiques entre des langues, InSelected Writings,Vol.1:234-246, The Hague: Mouton1962.
Jespersen, O.1962. The Growth and Structure of the English Language.Oxford.
Ju icová, H.2012.Chinese Loans in English［OL］.
http://is.muni.cz/th/266801/pedf_b/Bachelor_thesis_AJ_Helena_Juricova.pdf?lang=en.
Kelly, J.&Nathan K Mao.1979. Fortress Besieged. Indiana University Press.
Kiparsky, V.1938. Comment on Vocadlo,‘Some observations on mixed language’, Actesdu Quatri è me Congr è s Internationale de Linguistes, Copenhagen: EinarMunksgaad,176.
Lehmann, W. P.1962. Historical Linguistics: an Introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehartand Winston.
Masini, F.1993. The Formation of Modern Chinese Lexicon and Its Evolution toward aNational Language:The Period from1840to1898. Journal of Chinese Linguistics.Monograph No.6.
Matras, Y.2009. Language Contact. Cambridge University Press.
McArthur, T.2001. Oxford Concise Companion to the English Language. Shanghai：Foreign Language Education Press．
Meillet, A.1921. Linguistique historique et linguistique générale. Paris: Champion.
Moody, A. J.1996. Transmission language and source languages of Chinese borrowings inEnglish. American Speech71,405-20.
Moody, A. J.1996. Transmission language and source languages of Chinese borrowings inEnglish. American Speech71:405-20.
Moravcsik, E. A.1978. Language contact. Universals of Human Language, Vol.1, ed. byJ.H. Greenberg, J.H.93-122. CA: Stanford University Press.
Mühlh usler, P.1980. Strucural expansion and the process of creolization.Valdman andHighfield.
Müller, F. M.1875. Lectures on the Science of Language. vol.1. New York: Scribner,Armstrong.
Muysken, P.1981a. Generative studies on Creole languages. Dordrecht, Holland,Cinnaminson, NJ: Foris Publications.
Myers-Scotton, C.2002. Contact Linguistics: Bilingual Encounters and GrammaticalOutcomes.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Oksaar, E.1972. Bilingualism. In Thomas A. Sebeok （ed.） Current Trents inLinguistics.Vol.9: Linguistics in Western Europe,476-511.The Hague:Mouton.
Onions C. T.1966. The Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. Oxford: Clarendo Press.
Paul,H.1886. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte.Halle:Max Neimeyer.
Pedersen, H.1931. The Discovery of Language. Indiana University Press.
Rayfield, J. R.1970. The language of a bilingual community. The Hague: Mouton.
Hickey, R.2010.The Handbook of Language Contact. Wiley-Blackwell.
Richards J. C. and R. Schmidt.2002. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching andApplied Linguistics（3rd Edition）. Pearson Education Limited
Morrison, R. A.1815. Dictionary of the Chinese Language (Vol.I.). Macao: TheHonorable East India Company’s Press.
Ross, M. D.1988. Proto Oceanic and the Austronesian Languages of Western Melanesia.Canberra: Australian National University.
Sankoff, G.2001. Linguistic Outcomes of Language Contact. In Peter Trudgill, J.Chambers&N.Schilling-Estes (eds.), Handbook of Sociolinguistics,638-668. Oxford:Basil Blackwell.
Sapir, E.1921. Language. New York: Harcourt, Brace&World.
Schmidt, J.1872. Die Verwantschaftsverh ltnisse
der indogermanischen Sprachen.Weimar:H.Bohlau.
Schuchardt, H.1884. Slawo-deutsches und Slawo-italienisches.Graz: Leuschner andLubensky.
Scott, T.1984. The Wonderful World of Words. The Asia Magazine2-16.
Serjeantson, M. S.1935. A History of Foreign Words in English. London: Routledge andKegan Paul.
Silverstein, M.1972.Chinook Jargon: language contact and the problem of multilevelgenerative systems, Language48:378-406,596-625.
Skeat, W.W.1888. An Etymological Dictionary of the English Language. Oxford: TheClarendon Press.
Speake, J.2005. Oxford Dictionary of Foreign Words&Phrases. Oxford University Press.
Su, Jinzhi.2008. Language contact and morphosyntactic borrowing: the case study ofHong Kong written Chinese（Ph.D. Dissertation）.The Hong Kong PolytechnicUniversity.
Thomason S. G.&T. Kaufman.1988. Language contact, creolization, and geneticlinguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Thomason S. G.2001. Language contact: an introduction. Edinburgh University Press.
Thomason S. G.1996. Contact languages: a wider perspective. Amsterdam: JohnBenjamin’s Publishing Company.
Troubetskoy, N.1938. Principes de phonologie, Paris.
Weinreich U., W. Labov&M. I. Herzog.1968. Empirical foundations for a theory oflanguage change. University of Texas Press
Weinreich, U.1953. Language in Contact: Findings and Problems. New York.
Whitney, W. D.1875. The Life and Growth of Language. New York: D. Appleton.
Whitney, W. D.1881. On mixture in language.Transactions of the American PhilosophicalAssociation12:1-26.
Wilkins, D. A.1972. Linguistics in Language Teaching. Arnold.
Winford, D.2003: An Introduction to contact linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Winford, D.2006. Contact-induced Changes—Classification and Processes, Ms.,Department of Linguistics, Ohio State University.
Yang, Jian.2009. Chinese borrowings in English. World Englishes28,1:90-106.
北京市人民政府外事办公室.2010.美食译苑:中文菜单英文译法.北京:世界知识出版社.
卞凤莲,张艳莲,石颖.2007.从英汉互借词看中国的改革开放.商场现代化（14）.
布龙菲尔德.1933.语言论.北京：商务印书馆.1980.
曹亚民.2000.英语中的汉语借词.江苏教育学院学报（社会科学版）（4）.
曹炜.2010.现代汉语词汇研究(修订本).广州:暨南大学出版社.
常骏跃.1997.英语中汉语借用现象分析.外语教学与研究(5).
常骏跃.1998.英语中汉语借用成分—语音、语法特征变化分析(5).
陈爱兵.2008.还“龙”一个公道.黑龙江教育学院学报(2).
陈保亚.1996.语言接触与语言联盟—汉越（侗台语）语源关系的解释.北京:语文出版社.
陈国强.1990.简明文化人类学词典.杭州：浙江人民出版社.
陈惠琼,陈佳荣.香港会话手册.香港:麒麟书业有限公司.
陈胜利.2005.《围城》的翻译策略及其成因.盐城师范学院学报（4）.
陈胜利.2006.《围城》翻译的文化因缘.盐城师范学院学报（4）.
陈胜利.2013.《牛津英语词典》中的汉语借词数量研究.盐城师范学院学报（3）.
陈原.1983.社会语言学.上海:学林出版社.
陈祖椝,朱自振.1981.中国茶叶历史资料选辑.北京:农业出版社.
大仲马著,蒋学模译.1978.基度山伯爵.北京:人民文学出版社.
邓道宣,谢结果.2000.英语中的汉语借词略论.乐山师范高等专科学校学报（1）.
狄更斯著,石定乐译.1997.大卫·科波菲尔.长沙:湖南文艺出版社.
杜明甫.1999.英语中的汉语外来语探析.河南财政税务高等专科学校学报（4）.
杜再玲.1999.英语汉外来语探析.宁德师专学报（哲学社会科学版）（1）.
杜争鸣.1997.“一国两制”原译切不可轻率改动.中国翻译（4）.
端木义万.2001.英美报刊阅读教程.北京:北京大学出版社.
方梦之.2003.译学词典.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
方欣欣.2004.语言接触问题三段两合论.武汉:华中师范大学.
高丹丹.2006.英汉借词对比探析.安徽文学（10）.
高名凯,刘正埮.1958.现代汉语外来词研究.北京：文字改革出版社.
甘成英.2006.英汉词汇互借对语言文化的影响.绵阳师范学院学报（3）.
葛传椝.1980.漫谈由汉译英问题.翻译通讯（2）.
顾静.2005.透视美国新闻期刊对中国特色词汇的翻译.上海翻译（1）.
顾菊华.2006.英语中汉语借词的文化渊源和语言特征探究.安庆师范学院学报（6）.
关世杰.2007.跨文化传播视觉中“龙”与”dragon”的互译问题与中国国家形象的关系.对外大传播(10).
管益农.1995.中国古代的武举制度.历史文化(4).
郭柏苍.1986.闽产录异.长沙:岳麓书社.
韩哲.1997.新英语外来语词典.哈尔滨:哈尔滨工业大学出版社.
何晓红.2007.从“龙马精神”的翻译看中英文化内涵的差异.安阳师范学院学报(3).
何雅文.2005.借用词与语言文化的渗透.雁北师范学院学报（4）.
何雅文.2005.借用词与语言文化的渗透.雁北师范学院学报（4）
胡发贵.1999.“刺腹”在中国.寻根(17).
胡兆云.2001.语言接触与英汉借词研究.山东:山东大学出版社.
黄海军.2007.也谈美国主流英文媒体对中国特色词汇采取的翻译策略.上海翻译（3）.
黄河清.1992.试论China的词源及其他.现代外语(2).
黄河清.1994.汉语外来词研究中的若干问题.词库建设通讯（3）.
黄河清.1995.汉语外来影响词.词库建设通讯(7).
黄河清.2003.“纸老虎”的来历.香港语文建设通讯（1）.
黄佶.2006.关于“龙”的英译名修改问题.社会科学(11).
黄焰结.2005.从silk(888)到taikonaut(2003)——英语中汉语借词的社会文化研究.天津外国语学院学报（4）.
黄友义.2000.把好编辑和翻译两道关不断提高办外宣品的质量（二）.对外大传播（2）.
姜智芹.2007.傅满洲与陈查理—美国大众文化中的中国形象.南京:南京大学出版社.
蒋晓玲.2004.美国新闻期刊中的汉语文化项翻译的处理.对外经济贸易大学硕士学位论文.
雷颐著.2008.李鸿章与晚清四十年.山西:山西人民出版社.
黎昌抱.2001.英汉外来词对比研究.外语教学（5）.
李冀宏.2003.英语中借自汉语的外来词.山东师范大学外国语学院学报（1）.
李建红.2004.英语中的汉语借词初探.云梦学刊（2）.
李荣篙.1989.试探英语外来词中的几个汉语词源.天津师范大学学报（自然科学版）（4）.
李小飞.2004.从英汉互借词看中外文化渗透.山东外语教学（1）.
李学禧.1963.英语词汇中的汉语贷词探源.兰州师大学报（2）.
李媛,苏彦.2011.结合语义学相关理论谈汉字“龙”的最佳翻译.学术探讨(2).
廉英红.李彩红.2007.英语中的汉语借词与中西文化渗透.华北煤炭医学院学报（3）.
梁改萍.2005.关于英语中汉语借词问题的探讨.西华大学学报（5）.
梁慧敏.2006.英语词典中的汉语译借词.语文建设通讯（香港）（84）
林伦伦,陈慨丽.2000.现代英语中的汉语借词说略.辽宁大学学报（2）.
刘白玉,刘夏青,韩小宁.2010.文化软实力视野下“龙”的英译创新研究.牡丹江教育学院学报(3).
刘法公.1991.英语借自汉语的外来语考释.山东外语教学（1）.
刘海平,王守仁.2002.美国文学史（第四卷）.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
刘海清,邓寿群.2010.试论英语中汉语借词及其语言学特征.宜春学院学报（3）
刘建明.1993.宣传舆论学大辞典.北京：经济日报出版社.
刘彦仕.2004.文化交融下的汉英互借词研究.中共成都市委党校学报（6）.
刘镇清.2000.China和Cathay词源考证.福建外语（3）.
刘正埮、高名凯、麦永乾、史有为.1984.汉语外来词词典.上海:上海辞书出版社.
陆刚.2004.英汉外来借词的对比与翻译.南平师专学报（1）.
阮绩智.2002.英语中汉语借词构词探析.浙江工业大学学报（社会科学）（6）.
罗常培.2003.语言与文化.北京:北京出版社.
吕叔湘.1942.中国文法要略.北京：商务印书馆.
马睿颖.2008.英语中汉语借词研究概览.外国语言文学(3).
毛东辉.2006.源于汉语的英语词汇分析.湛江海洋大学学报（5）
梅耶著,岑麒祥译.1957.历史语言学中的比较方法.北京：科学出版社会.
孟兆芬.2008.从中西方“龙”的演变史看“龙”的翻译.内蒙古民族大学学报(3).
彭爱民.2011.《红楼梦》中龙文化及其英译评析.红楼梦学刊(5).
彭克宏.1989.社会科学大词典.北京：中国国际广播出版社.
彭嫣.2007.语言接触研究述评.新疆大学学报（2）.
彭永和.1994.浅谈英语中的汉语借词.楚雄师专学报（社会科学版）（1）.
戚雨村.1993.语言学百科词典.上海：上海辞书出版社.
齐揆一.1987.英语中的汉语词探源.外语学刊（3）.
乔建珍,冯梅.2006.英语中的汉语外来词.河北教育（11）.
钱锺书.2005.钱锺书英文文集.北京：外语教学与研究出版社.
秦秀白.1983.英语简史.湖南：教育出版社.
任静明.2012.英语中汉语音译贷词的语言特征研究.攀枝花学院学报(5).
任绍曾,殷企平.2011.含英咀华——老浙大外语学科论文精选.北京:商务印书馆.
汝信.1988.社会科学新辞典.重庆：重庆出版社.
萨丕尔著,陆卓元译.1985.语言论.北京:商务印书馆.
宋水培等.1993.中国文化语言学辞典.四川人民出版社.
斯诺著,宋久等译.1984.今日的红色中国：大河彼岸.北京:新华出版社.
史有为.2000.汉语外来词.北京:商务印书馆.
史有为.2004.异文化的使者.上海:上海辞书出版社.
苏金智.2010.语言接触与语言借用—汉语借词消长研究.中国语言学报（14）.
苏全有.2004.论清代中英茶叶贸易.聊城大学学报(社会科学版)(2).
苏秀玲，杨鹏.2010.英语中的汉语文化借词新探.内蒙古农业大学学报（1）.
孙常叙.1957.汉语词汇.长春:吉林人民出版社.
孙瑶.2011.英语中的汉语借词.边疆经济与文化（9）.
索绪尔著，高名凯译.1999.普通语言学教程.北京：商务印书馆.
佘坤珊.1942.英文里的中国字.文讯（1）.
沈从文.2005.中国古代服饰研究.上海：上海书店出版社.
沈叙伦.1990.英语外来语辞典.北京：北京语言学院出版社.
邵荣芬.2009.邵荣芬语言学论文集.北京:商务印书馆.
陶红梅.2011.从英语中的汉语借词看语言的包容性.江淮论坛（1）.
陶岳炼.2006.从英语中汉语借词看中国文化的影响.台州学院学报（2）.
陶岳炼,顾明华.2001.英语中汉语借词的社会文化渊源及其语法、语用特征.外语与外语教学（11）.
唐祥金.2000.英语中的汉语借词及其语言文化因素.西安外国语学院学报（3）．
唐祥金.2003.英语中的汉语借词及其文化阐释.天津职业大学学报（5）.
田卉.2005.从英语、汉语中的借词看中西方文化交往.湘潭师范学院学报（4）.
童隽著,李大夏译.1993.童寯文选.南京:东南大学出版社.
汪榕培.1986.英语中的汉语借词.外语与外语教学（1）.
汪榕培.1991.中国英语是客观存在.解放军外国语学院学报（1）.
汪榕培.2000.英语词汇学研究.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
汪榕培.2002.英语词汇学高级教程.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
汪榕培,常骏跃.2001.英语词汇中汉语借词的来源.四川外语学院学报（4）.
汪榕培,李冬.1983.实用英语词汇学.沈阳:辽宁人民出版社.
汪榕培,卢晓娟.1997.英语词汇学教程.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
汪榕培,王之江.2008.英语词汇学.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
汪榕培,杨彬.2011高级英语词汇学.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
汪滔.1998.“亚洲四小龙”应译为“fourAsian tigers”吗？中国科技翻译(2).
王长友.2010.英语词汇中的汉语元素.语文学刊(5).
王芳姿.2001.英汉外来词比较.嘉兴学院学报（4）.
王丽.2006.英语中的汉语外来语及其语言学特征.牡丹江大学学报（12）.
王力,1958.汉语史稿.北京：科学出版社.
王祥兵.2002.论《时代》周刊中国报道文章对汉语文化词语的翻译.上海科技翻译（2）.
王欣.2012.英汉借词范畴化认知研究.华中师范大学博士论文.
王燕.2011.牛津词典否认收上千汉语外来词.法制晚报,2011-01-05.
巫坚贞.2006.英语中汉语借词探析.龙岩学院学报.增刊（1）.
伍铁平.1986.论词源学及其意义和研究对象.外语学刊（4）
吴福祥.2007.关于语言接触引发的演变.民族语文(2).
吴伟雄.2000.何必译“龙”为“虎”？上海科技翻译(2).
吴玉贵.2002.唐代文化.北京：中国社会科学出版社.
吴宗济,赵新那.2002.赵元任语言学论文集.北京:商务印书馆.
肖云萍.2002.英语中的汉语借词探讨.泉州师范学院学报（3）.
肖中琼,戴卫平．2007.英语中的汉语贷词研究．广西社会科学（1）.
相德宝．2006.英国媒介中的中国国家形象．对外大传播（9）．
熊文华.1996.汉语和英语中的借词.语言教学与研究（2）.
邢福义.2001.文化语言学.湖北教育出版社.
徐通锵.1996.历史语言学.北京:商务印书馆.
徐通锵.2001.基础语言学教程.北京:北京大学出版社.
许家金.2005.英语常用外来语双解词典.合肥：安徽科学技术出版社.
严筠.1987.英语中源自汉语的外来词.江西师范大学学报（2）.
阎文儒.2004.中国考古学史.桂林:广西师范大学出版社
杨彬.2008.心智的门铃：英语新词的认知阐释.济南:山东大学出版社.
杨映春.2011.英语中的汉语借词及其社会文化因素探究.长沙大学学报（3）.
叶蜚声,徐通锵.1981.语言学纲要.北京:北京大学出版社.
易中天.2006.大话方言.上海:上海文化出版社.
游汝杰,邹嘉彦.2004b.语言接触论集.上海:上海教育出版社.
余刚.1999.英语中汉语借词分析.四川三峡学院学报（增刊）.
早川勇.2005.英語に入った日本語の同化度-1990年における-.言語と文化(13).
曾泰元,章忠建.2009.谈汉语文化特色词英译的方向.辞书研究(5).
曾晓光.2010.汉语“纸老虎”一词及其英译“paper tiger”的源流.中国电力教育（27）.
曾晓渝.2004.汉语水语关系论—水语里汉语借词及同源词分层研究.北京:商务印书馆.
赵辰.2000.“Sharawadgi”—中西方造园景观学说之间的迷雾.建筑史论文集(2).
赵蓉晖.2004.社会语言学.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
赵元任.1979.汉语口语语法.北京:商务印书馆.
赵元任.1999.语言问题.北京:商务印书馆.
张博.2008.“切腹”源自中国？寻根(6).
张柏然.1995.英语外来语辞典.西安:世界图书出版公司.
张世禄.1957.普通话词汇.上海:新知识出版社.
张顺生.2008.从龙的英译实践谈龙的英文名修改.苏州科技学院学报(2).
张维友.2004.英语词汇学教程.武汉:华中师范大学出版社.
张艳君.2007.英语中的汉语借词及其文化透视.读与写杂志（6）.
张逸,蔡静.2005.从英语词典中的汉语词汇看文化多样化和语言借用.国外外语教学（4）.
张兴权.1994.从语言接触看朝鲜族的语言使用和朝鲜语的共时变异.民族语文（5）.
张兴权.2012.接触语言学.北京：商务印书馆.
张振江.2006.中国洋泾浜英语研究述评与探索.广西民族学院学报（2）.
真田信治,涩谷胜己,阵内正敬,杉户清树.1992.社会言语学.东京:樱枫社.
郑朝红,李玲.2007.英语中的早期汉语借词浅议.河北大学成人教育学院学报（2）.
郑声滔.1985.源于汉语的英语词汇.现代外语（3）.
周毅.2005.洋泾浜英语在近代中国产生的历史渊源之探讨.中国文化研究(1).
邹嘉彦,游汝杰.2001.汉语与华人社会.上海:复旦大学出版社.
邹嘉彦.2004.语言接触论集.上海:上海教育出版社.
邹嘉彦,游汝杰.2009.社会语言学教程.上海：复旦大学出版社.
邹园艳.2006.英语中的汉语借词探讨.重庆职业技术学院学报（5）.
钟吉娅.2003.汉语外源词.华东师范大学博士论文.
朱和中,黎斌初,陶立三.1999.英语外来语大辞典.北京:外文出版社.
朱天文.2003.美国新闻期刊中汉英翻译采用的策略和方法.上海科技翻译（3）.
朱雪茹.2005.英语中汉语借词的借入方式与发展趋势.济源职业技术学院学报（2）.
祝畹瑾.1992.社会语言学概论.长沙:湖南教育出版社.