GOVOR 33 (2016), 1 67

Izvorni znanstveni rad 
Rukopis primljen 11. 5. 2016. 
Prihvaćen za tisak 27. 3. 2017. 
 
Jacek Kudera 
[email protected] 
Institute of Slavic Philology, University of Wrocław  
Poland 

A comparative study of vowels’ F1 and F2 values 
in frequent English loanwords in Polish and 
Russian languages 
Summary
The paper presents results of an investigation of F1 and F2 formants values in English
loanwords uttered by Polish and Russian native speakers during spontaneous speech. Ten
participants with an equal level of English language proficiency took part in the experiment.
Their stimulated conversation was recorded and English loanwords were extracted from the
recordings to investigate the vowels’ formants, by means of the Praat software. The F1 and F2
analysis points out that a relationship between the frequency of loanwords’ occurrence and the
similarity to pronunciation of language of origin exists. Corpus data were used to find the
comparable frequencies of English loanwords’ occurrence in Polish and Russian.

Key words: F1 and F2 values, loanwords’ adaptation, English loanwords, Polish, Russian
68 J. Kudera: Adaptation of English vowels to Russian and Polish 67-78

1. INTRODUCTION 

English loanwords are nowadays among the most frequently occurring loanwords in
Polish and Russian languages. However, the adaptation of loanwords from English to
Slavic languages differs within the West and East Slavic group of languages.
Among all Slavic languages, Russian contains a considerable proportion of
English loanwords. Therefore, it seems interesting to what extent they are phonetically
adaptive, and whether they significantly differ from the language of origin and from
the other Slavic language, in this case – Polish. The criterion for loanwords’ frequency
is different in some disciplines where English input is significant, for instance in IT
industry where adaptation of English vocabulary is very popular (Volgina, 2003: 119).
English loanwords in Russian are so common that they are noticeable even
among people without any knowledge of the English language. However, the phonetic
influence of English as L2 on Russian (L1) was stressed as one possible exemplification
of loanwords in the late forties by Turbetzkoy (1949).
Currently, there are a few different approaches in the field of loanwords
adaptation. For instance, the phonetic adaptation of loanwords according to
Silverman (1992) firstly involves the phonetic scansion of the L2 input. Nevertheless,
the phonological knowledge of L2 is an important factor in loanwords adaptation,
which seems to be neglected in the "phonetic approximation" model proposed by
Silverman assuming that: the input to loanword phonology is merely a superficial non-
linguistic acoustic signal (1992: 282). Another interesting theory is the replacement of
L2 segment by the closest L1 segment described in works by LaCharité and Paradis
(2005). What was stressed in the study conducted by Horga and Mildner (1997) the
vowel formant space in L2 is just one indicator of the foreign accent and vowel
characteristics of Croatian speakers of English as L2. The aim of aforementioned study
was to find the difference between the English vowel formant space of native speakers
and of Croatian students of English, as well as to find the differences between the
English vowel formant space of the first and fourth year students from the University
of Zagreb.
One of the important factors which should also be taken into consideration is
the time of borrowing of the loanword. Longer time of the loanword presence in a
 GOVOR 33 (2016), 1 69

language indicates the assimilation of pronunciation to the borrowing language or

more frequent L2 segment being replaced with the closest L1 segment.

2. AIMS 

The study attempts to answer two questions: 1) Does the frequency of a loanword in
the language into which it is borrowed have an influence on its segmental
characteristics such as formant frequencies? 2) Does the English loanwords’ phonetic
adaptation differ significantly in Polish and Russian? The assumption that the
loanwords' frequency in L2 influences the phonetic similarity to L1 is followed by the
hypothesis – the more frequent loanword in the borrowing language is phonetically
further from the language of origin than the less frequent loanword. Therefore, the
study might show that the pronunciation of English loanwords by the Russian native
speakers, due to the significant amount of English loanwords, would be more similar
to the pronunciation in the source language in comparison to the pronunciation of
the Polish native speakers.

3. MATERIAL AND METHOD 

Vowel formants in the frequent English loanwords pronounced by either Russian or

Polish native speakers were examined in this study. The collected speech samples were
spontaneous speech samples which were used for vowel formants analysis.
The analyzed loanwords selected for the study are: 1) business, 2) manager and 3)
boss with the following vowels 1) /ɪ/, 2) /æ/ and 3) /ɒ/. The reason why these words
were selected for the analysis is the possibility to compare their frequency in the
Spoken Corpus of Polish and Russian language. Business is the most frequent word
followed by manager, and finally the least frequent – boss (Pęzik, 2012a).
Balanced Corpus driven data proved that the analyzed loanwords appeared in
both languages with comparable frequency making them relevant for the analysis in
the field of loanwords’ adaptation (Pęzik, 2012b).
The orthographic adaptation of the words suggests their complete assimilation
into the borrowing language. Two the most frequent loanwords are orthographically
adapted to the norms of the Polish language: biznes and menadżer. The Polish
orthography adapted manager in two possible forms: menedżer and menadżer.
70 J. Kudera: Adaptation of English vowels to Russian and Polish 67-78

However the first form is seven times more frequent than the second one. Due to the
relatively rare and colloquial usage of the word boss, it is not orthographically adapted
in Polish. If it were, it would be adapted into bos form – on the basis of analogy to
bobslej, orthographically adapted from bobsleigh, or many other loanwords fully
assimilated to Polish spelling rules. The English loanwords adaptation to Russian
might occur as transliteration: slogan – слоган, transcription: office – офис or the
mixed type of adaptation: dealer – дилер, leasing – лизинг. The last type according
to Giljarevskij and Starostin (1985: 21) is the most common way of adapting
loanwords in contemporary Russian. Retaining the original form of Latin alphabet to
Russian text is called transplantation. The orthographical adaptation of investigated
words in Russian is: бизнес, менеджер and босс and their frequency of occurrence
according to National Corpus of Russian language is respectively: 0.00006337676,
0.00000551807 and 0.00000432202.

4. SUBJECTS 

Ten Russian and Polish native speakers were chosen to participate in the study. The
level of the participants’ English language proficiency was equal – B2. During
spontaneous speech, five speakers of Russian and five speakers of Polish pronounced
the selected English loanwords spontaneously, without paying attention to English
pronunciation aspects, which met the aims of this research. None of the participants
were living in an English speaking country nor had an English native speaker teacher.
All participants were between 21–27 years old. Considering the influence of their
experience in English, all of subjects seem to have similar skills. However it is difficult
to evaluate the level of subjects’ proficiency in detail because, nowadays, the constant
exposure to the modern lingua franca is inevitable (Thomason, 2001: 10).

5. MATERIAL AND RECORDING 

The recordings of conversations between the subjects were conducted for the purposes
of the experiment during a stimulated conversation on the topic of economic issues,
in which the typical phrases included: business, manager and boss. The participants
were not informed about the aim of the study before participation, so as not to
 GOVOR 33 (2016), 1 71

influence their pronunciation of loanwords. The participants were sitting in a quiet

room. The conversation took no more than ten minutes.

6. PROCEDURE 

Some of the most frequent English loanwords were chosen, based on the National
Corpus of Polish and National Corpus of Russian, in order to analyze their prosodic
adaptation in Polish and Russian and compare the vowels’ characteristics such as F1
and F2 values.
Twenty three samples of each English loanword were extracted from the
recordings and F1 and F2 values were analyzed. Praat software (Boersma & Weenink,
2005) was used for the acoustic analysis. The target words were used for the acoustic
analysis in order to examine the hypothesis about the occurrence frequency in both
languages. The F1 and F2 values of stressed vowels: /ɪ/, /æ/ and /ɒ/ in business,
manager and boss phrases were compared to the mean American English formant
values (Hillenbrandt et al., 1995: 3103). The aforementioned study reports separate
values for speakers who were women, men and children.

7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

F1 and F2 average values in Polish and Russian do not differ as much in comparison
to average English values. It seems interesting how Polish and Russian vowel systems
adapted the units of English in common loanwords. Towards which of Slavic
segments does the pronunciation of loanwords gravitate? Russian vowel system
consists of the following stressed vowels: open-central /a/, near-open, near-front /æ/,
open-mid, near-front /ɛ/, close-mid, near-front /e/, close, near-front /ɨ/, close-front
/i/, open-mid, back /o/, close-mid, central /ɵ/, near-close, back /u/, near-close, central
/ʉ/ and unstressed: /ɐ/, /ə/, /o/, /ɪ/, /ᵻ/, /ʊ/, /ʉ/. Polish vowel system consists of: open-
central /a/, mid-front /ɛ/, close-front /i/, close-central /ɨ/, mid-back /ɔ/ and close-back
/u/ and two nasals /ɛ/ and /ɔ/.
According to the F1 and F2 measures figures 1 and 2 point out some interesting
similarities between F1 and F2 in Slavic languages such as /ɪ/ and /æ/ are much closer
to the English target in both Slavic languages than /ɒ/.
72 J. Kudera: Adaptation of English vowels to Russian and Polish 67-78

Figure 1. Formant values of Polish native speakers when pronouncing loanwords

Slika 1. Vrijednosti formanata poljskih izvornih govornika prilikom izgovaranja
posuđenica

 /ɪ/ Formant values from realization of segment by Polish native

speakers pronouncing loanword business

 /æ/ Formant values from realization of segment by Polish

native speakers pronouncing loanword manager

 /ɒ/ Formant values from realization of segment by Polish native

speakers pronouncing loanword boss

/ɪ/ /æ/ /ɒ/ Average English formant values uttered by female subjects
(from Hillenbrandt et al., 1995)
 GOVOR 33 (2016), 1 73

Figure 2. Formant values of Russian native speakers when pronouncing loanwords

Slika 2. Vrijednosti formanata ruskih izvornih govornika prilikom izgovaranja
posuđenica

 /ɪ/ Formant values from realization of segment by Russian native

speakers pronouncing loanword business
 /æ/ Formant values from realization of segment by Russian native
speakers pronouncing loanword manager
 /ɒ/ Formant values from realization of segment by Russian native
speakers pronouncing loanword boss
/ɪ/ /æ/ /ɒ/ Average English formant values uttered by female subjects (from
Hillenbrandt et al., 1995)

At the less frequent loanword with vowel /ɒ/ there is more variation than among
other vowels. Possible explanation of this phenomenon is the low frequency of the
loanword in Russian. The lack of stimuli, according to the aforementioned theory of
replacing L2 segment with the closest L1 segment /o/, might have an influence on a
variety of /ɒ/ articulation patterns.
74 J. Kudera: Adaptation of English vowels to Russian and Polish 67-78

Table 1. Average values of F1 and F2 of Polish and Russian native speakers when
pronouncing loanwords compared to average English formant values
Tablica 1. Srednje vrijednosti F1 i F2 poljskih i ruskih izvornih govornika prilikom
izgovaranja posuđenica u usporedbi sa srednjim vrijednostima engleskih
formanata

Polish Russian
English target
F1 F2 F1 F2
354 2451 /ɪ/ F1: 483, F2: 2365 297 2553
447 1801 /æ/ F1: 669, F2: 2349 375 2169
543 1094 /ɒ/ F1: 850, F2: 1220 516 1208

Mean F1 and F2 values of American English (from Hillenbrandt et al., 1995):

/ɪ/ – F1: 483, F2: 2365; /æ/ – F1: 669, F2: 2349; /ɒ/ – F1: 850, F2: 1220.

Figure 3. Averaged F1 and F2 values of loanwords vowels uttered by subjects

compared to English
Slika 3. Srednje vrijednosti F1 i F2 ispitanika prilikom izgovaranja samoglasnika
u posuđenicama u usporedbi s engleskim
 GOVOR 33 (2016), 1 75

 Russian average formant values from realization segment /ɪ/ when

pronouncing loanword business
 Polish average formant values from realization segment /ɪ/ when
pronouncing loanword business
 Russian average formant values from realization segment /æ/ when
pronouncing loanword manager

 Polish average formant values from realization segment /æ/ when

pronouncing loanword manager
 Russian average formant values from realization segment /ɒ/ when
pronouncing loanword boss
 Polish average formant values from realization segment /ɒ/ when
pronouncing loanword boss
/ɪ/ /æ/ /ɒ/ Average English formant values uttered by female subjects (from
Hillenbrandt et al., 1995)

The figure 3 summarizes the investigation of F1 and F2 values. Symbols refer to

subjects' productions.
It appears that F1 and F2 values in the most frequent loanwords are relatively
close to English origin. A great difference is visible in the pronunciation of the word
manager. In both languages English vowel /æ/ seems to be adapted into a central /ə/.
Apart from that, Russian (R2) vowels are more near-front than Polish ones (P2).
Closer pronunciation of the vowels in loanwords, both in Polish and Russian appears
in the most frequent loanword i.e. word business. It is significant that the front/back
category is more comparable in Slavic languages and English than the open/close
category. During vowel articulation in the languages included in this study, the tongue
position on a horizontal axis is also comparable. The closest L1 and L2 segments are
visible on the basis of the most frequent loanword. The subjects' pronunciation
gravitate towards L1 segments in less frequent loanwords. The vowel formant-defined
coordinates among less frequent words differ more.
In the field of Polish-Russian comparison of the adaptation of English
loanwords, naturally based just on vowel F1 and F2 values, it seems possible to assume
that in the current experiment, the articulation of Polish and Russian native speakers
76 J. Kudera: Adaptation of English vowels to Russian and Polish 67-78

is more similar to each other than to the language of a loanwords’ origin. It is

noticeable that the Russian equivalent of /æ/ is more front and open than the Polish
one. The similarity of /ɒ/ adaptation in Polish and Russian is noticeable as well.
Segments gravitate towards Russian /o/ and Polish /ɔ/.
The less frequent loanword was adapted in the most different way, what seems
to confirm the theory of influence of frequency to loanwords' adaptation. The closest
segment for English target /ɒ/ in Russian was /o/ and Polish /ɔ/. The similarity is
visible only on vertical axis shown on figure 3. However Polish /ɛ/ segment is closer
to English target /æ/ on the horizontal axis of the same figure.

8. CONCLUSION 

The study examined only one of the important parameters of the vowel comparison.
It is necessary to include other aspects of vowel characteristics in research, such as
vowels’ duration.
However, considering F1 and F2 formant values, the study confirms that the less
frequent loanwords are pronounced differently from the language of origin. On the
other hand, it is impossible to conclude weather Polish or Russian native speakers’
pronunciation was closer to English basing just on the formant values. To conclude
which language group had a more accurate pronunciation of English loanwords, some
other aspects of phonetic analysis should be taken into consideration such as vowels
duration.
Subjects' L2 skills should also be controlled during recruitment in the similar
studies, as well as other criteria such as age, education or sex. Nevertheless, it is possible
to conclude, that the pronunciation of more frequent loanwords differs from the
pronunciation of less frequent loanwords in Polish and Russian. Further research
including a wider variety of investigated vowels pronounced by larger number of
subjects should be conducted.
To summarize, a relation was found between frequency of English loanwords
and its similarity to the language of origin in phrases uttered by native speakers of
Polish and Russian. The less frequent loanwords are more assimilated into
phonological system of the borrowing language. There was no significant difference
between Russian and Polish in the process of phonological adaptation of selected
English loanwords.
 GOVOR 33 (2016), 1 77

REFERENCES 

Boersma, P., Weenink, D. (2005). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer,

http://www.praat.org/ [accessed 5th January 2016].
Giljarevskij, R. S., Starostin, B. A. (1985). Иностранные имена и названия в
русском тексте. Москва: Высшая школа.
Hillenbrandt, J., Getty, L. A., Clark, M. J., Kimberlee, W. (1995). Acoustic
characteristics of American English vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society
of America 5, 1, 3100–3111, http://homepages.wmich.edu/~hillenbr/Papers/
HillenbrandGettyClarkWheeler.pdf) [accessed 17th February 2016].
Horga, D., Mildner, V. (1997). Differences in format-defined vowel space between
native speakers of English and Croatian students of English. Studia Romanica et
Anglica Zagrabiensia 42, 155–166.
LaCharité, D., Paradis, C. (2005). Category preservation and proximity versus
phonetic approximation in loanword adaptation. Linguistic Inquiry 36, 2, 223–
258.
Pęzik, P. (2012a). Język mówiony w NKJP. Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego. In A.
Przepiórkowski, M. Bańko, R. Górski, B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (eds.), 37–
48. Warszava: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Pęzik, P. (2012b). Wyszukiwarka PELCRA dla danych NKJP. Narodowy Korpus Języka
Polskiego. In A. Przepiórkowski, M. Bańko, R. Górski, B. Lewandowska-
Tomaszczyk (eds.), 253–274. Warszava: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Silverman, D. (1992). Multiple scansions in loanword phonology: Evidence from
Cantonese. Phonology 9, 2, 298–328.
Thomason, S. G. (2001). Language Contact. Washington D. C.
Trubetzkoy, N. S. (1949). Principes de phonologie. Paris.
Volgina, N. S. (2003). Актуальные процессы в современном русском языке.
Моscow.
   
78 J. Kudera: Adaptation of English vowels to Russian and Polish 67-78

Jacek Kudera
[email protected] 
Institut za slavensku filologiju, Sveučilište u Wroclawu 
Poljska 

Usporedba vrijednosti F1 i F2 vokala u izgovoru 
čestih posuđenica iz engleskog jezika kod 
izvornih govornika poljskog i ruskog 
Sažetak
Engleske su posuđenice trenutačno među najčešće korištenim posuđenicama u poljskom i
ruskom. Međutim, njihov stupanj fonetske adaptacije nije isti, a na njega utječe nekoliko
činjenica: učestalost posuđenice, stupanj poznavanja engleskoga jezika, vrijeme adaptacije i
jezična kompetencija govornika. Uzimajući u obzir niz spomenutih faktora, u članku su istražene
vrijednosti prvih dvaju formanata naglašenih samoglasnika u engleskim posuđenicama business,
manager i boss. Njihova je učestalost relativno slična na osnovu Nacionalnog korpusa poljskog jezika
(NKJP – Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego) i Nacionalnog korpusa ruskog jezika (Ruscorpora –
Национальный корпус русского языка). Da bi se uspješno moglo istražiti vrijednosti F1 i F2
u spontanome govoru, u istraživanju je sudjelovalo deset ispitanika – izvornih govornika ruskog
i poljskog jezika. Cilj istraživanja nije bio poznat ispitanicima zbog mogućeg utjecaja na namjernu
pažnju te neprirodne artikulacije posuđenica. Ispitanici su imali isti stupanj poznavanja
engleskoga jezika, tj. B2 prema Europskom referentnom okviru. Stimulirani razgovori na temu
ekonomije bili su snimljeni u akustički izoliranoj sobi. Iz snimaka su izdvojene posuđenice te su
uz pomoć programa Praat istražene vrijednosti formanata F1 i F2 u naglašenim slogovima.
Istraživani su samoglasnici bili: /ɪ/, /æ/ i /ɒ/. Pretpostavljeno je da se fonetska adaptacija može
razlikovati na razini slavenskih jezika te da stupanj učestalosti posuđenica utječe na njihovu
artikulaciju. Na prikazanim slikama vidljive su tendencije prema kojima su neki suglasnici bliži
ciljanome engleskom suglasniku, a neki znatno dalji od izvornog primjera. Međutim, na temelju
triju posuđenica nije moguće doći do zaključaka o općim tendencijama fonetske adaptacije
engleskih posuđenica u ruskom i poljskom jeziku. U članku su navedeni i primjeri drugih
hrvatskih istraživanja artikulacije engleskih riječi od strane studenata Sveučilišta u Zagrebu.
Naglašeno je da treba uzeti u obzir nekoliko drugih obilježja, kao na primjer usporedbu trajanja
samoglasničkih segmenata, što može biti polazište za buduća istraživanja.

Ključne riječi: vrijednosti F1 i F2, adaptacija posuđenica, engleske posuđenice, poljski, ruski