Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði - 01.01.2021, Síða 146

By following these rules, a corpus was designed which was maximally represen-
tative for the period under analysis, with the caveat that the choice of texts was
of course also subject to the availability of diplomatic editions. This was, however,
a minimal problem thanks to the high accessibility of primary sources.
The corpus of analyzed texts was as follows:
Religious Texts Icelandic Homily Book, Elucidarius, Stjórn I, Oddur Gott skálks -
son’s translation of the New Testament.
Law Texts and diplomata Grágás, Jónsbók and relative réttarbætur, a selection of original
diplomata.
Treatises Icelandic grammatical treatises (I–IV), a selection of medical
texts (AM 655 xxx 4to, AM 194 8vo, AM 434a 12mo, RIA 23
D 43), Algorismus, a selection of computistical and astronomi-
cal texts (AM 415 4to, AM 624 4to, AM 625 4to, AM 685d
4to, AM 727 i 4to, AM 732b 4to, GKS 1812 4to).
Historiographical Texts Book of the Icelanders, Veraldar saga, Kristni saga.
Hagiographical Texts Hungrvaka, Þorláks saga helga, Laurentius saga byskups, Nikuláss
saga af Tólentínó.
Sagas of the Icelanders Egils saga, Droplaugarsona saga, Gísla saga, Gunnlaugs saga orms -
tungu, Grettis saga, Víglundar saga.
Kings’ Sagas Sverris saga, Óláfs saga helga (Heimskr.), Knýtlinga saga.
Chivalric and Legendary Alexanders saga, Erex saga, Flóres saga ok Blankiflúr, Gibbons saga,
    Sagas Sigurgarðs saga frœkna, Sigurðar saga þǫgla, Dínus saga drambláta,
Vǫlsunga saga, Hrólfs saga kraka, Þorsteins saga Víkingssonar.

2.3 Theoretical framework and methodology
The theoretical framework adopted in the research mainly draws on Betz (1959),
an echo of which is found in Halldór Halldórsson (1964). From the point of view
of general linguistics, the theoretical approach taken is that of Gusmani (1981),
especially for what concerns the lexical dynamics associated with the acquisition
of loanwords (on which see § 6).
In the research, loanwords are primarily categorized according to the motiva-
tion for them to be acquired in the lexicon, i.e. prestige vs. necessity loans. The
general term loanword is used to label both loanwords proper, i.e. words which
have been adapted to a given linguistic system, and integral loans. The mere
structural status of a loan in any given language is not alone indicative of its actual
status as a member of the lexicon. In fact, there may be non-adapted loans which
are very much employed, and are thus active members of the lexicon, and other
loans, which, however well integrated, are not active members of the lexicon.
The process by which a loan gains an active status in a given language is called
acclimatization (cf. Gusmani 1981:20–24).
Matteo Tarsi146