Mandarin Chinese demonstrates an unusually low rate of lexical borrowing compared to other world languages. Studies show a minimal percentage of loanwords, even when considering non-basic vocabulary. While the effect of the Chinese writing system on loanword assimilation has been noted—transliterations struggle to survive if the original meanings of characters interfere—the impact of writing on language ideology itself has received less attention. This study explores the reasons for Chinese's resistance to borrowing, highlighting the pervasive influence of writing on language ideology. The paper reviews the history of lexical borrowing in Chinese, quantitatively analyzes the retention of loanwords over the past 100 years, examines the relationship between ideographic writing and linguistic purism, and ultimately concludes by discussing the broader relationship between writing systems and language ideology.

Previous research has highlighted the role of the Chinese writing system in hindering loanword integration. Studies by Cook (2018), Tsou and You (2003), and Wiebusch (2009) point to the interference of pre-existing character meanings as a major obstacle. However, the effect of writing on language ideology itself remains largely unexplored. Existing literature primarily views orthography as a battleground for competing language ideologies, neglecting the active role of writing in shaping language attitudes. This study addresses this gap by examining how the Chinese writing system contributes to the country’s inherent resistance to lexical borrowing.

The study employs a mixed-methods approach. First, a historical review traces the history of lexical borrowing in Chinese, focusing on three major periods: the spread of Buddhism, the New Culture Movement, and the Reform and Opening Up era. This review analyzes various approaches to translating foreign terms, including transliteration, meaning-pronunciation compromises, calques, loan-based creations, and graphic loans. Second, a quantitative study investigates the retention rate of different loanword types over the past 100 years. The study analyzes the vocabulary in Lu Xun's book, *Fén Tomb*, published around 100 years ago, comparing the word choices to the Balanced Modern Mandarin Corpus. This corpus allows for assessing the long-term survival of different loanword types (transliterations, loan blends, and fully analyzable items). The analysis identifies the retention rate for each loanword type, revealing the preference for analyzable lexical items over transliterations. Finally, the study discusses the relationship between ideographic writing and linguistic purism, examining how the nature of Chinese characters contributes to an implicit xenophobic purism rooted in archaizing purism.

The quantitative analysis reveals a strong preference for analyzable lexical items in Modern Mandarin. Transliterations, particularly those using pre-existing characters, demonstrate a significantly lower retention rate compared to words formed by native morphemes or through calques and loan-based creations. This preference is evident both in the historical review and in Lu Xun's own writing, where transliterations often show instability and variation, ultimately being replaced by more analyzable forms. The study found that transliterations are more likely to be replaced than calques/loan-based creations/meaning extensions. The analysis of Lu Xun's work highlighted the instability of transliterations, with different forms used for the same concept across different essays. The retention rates are as follows: * **Transliteration:** Low retention rate, often replaced by analyzable alternatives. * **Loanblend (partially analyzable):** Moderate retention rate, with some replacements by fully analyzable items. * **Fully analyzable item:** High retention rate. The study also shows a strong correlation between the type of writing system and the prevalent language ideology. The ideographic nature of Chinese characters, with its stable graphic-semantic association and loose graphic-phonetic correspondence, inherently promotes a self-purification system that favors analyzable items and resists direct borrowing through transliteration. This is further supported by the comparison with other languages in the Sinosphere that used Chinese characters, exhibiting similar resistance to lexical borrowing. The study emphasizes the writing-based definition of "Chinese", where the unified written language has maintained cultural commonality across vast geographical areas and time, even in the presence of significant dialectal variations. This contrasts with the traditional view of writing as merely secondary to spoken language, a view the study argues is influenced by the implicit ideology of alphabetic writing systems.

The findings of this study challenge the traditional view of writing as secondary to spoken language, particularly when considering the context of alphabetic versus ideographic writing systems. The strong preference for analyzable lexical items in Chinese highlights the active role of the ideographic writing system in shaping language ideology and influencing lexical borrowing patterns. The study demonstrates that the stability of graphic-semantic associations in Chinese characters fosters an implicit xenophobic purism. The inherent resistance to transliterations reflects the prioritization of maintaining established graphic-semantic correspondences over the adoption of new phonetic forms. This sheds light on the interaction between writing systems, language ideology, and linguistic purism. The stability of meaning associated with Chinese characters creates a strong preference for internal word-formation mechanisms over direct borrowing. This self-purification system, inherent to the ideographic writing system, effectively filters out many loanwords, thereby explaining the relatively low proportion of loanwords in the Chinese lexicon.

This study demonstrates that the resistance to lexical borrowing in Chinese is deeply intertwined with its ideographic writing system. The stability of graphic-semantic associations in Chinese characters creates a self-purification system that implicitly favors analyzable items and filters out transliterations. This contrasts with the traditional view of writing as secondary to spoken language and reveals the active role of writing in shaping language ideology. Further research should investigate the interaction between writing systems and language ideologies in a wider range of languages, particularly those that have undergone writing system transitions. The interplay of implicit and explicit language ideologies also warrants further study.

The study focuses primarily on Mainland China, acknowledging that Hong Kong and Taiwan exhibit different patterns of loanword adoption. Further research is needed to explore the influence of sociocultural and political factors on lexical borrowing patterns in these regions. The study primarily analyzes implicit linguistic purism through language use, while explicit opinions and policies regarding language purity are not directly addressed. The limited scope of the quantitative analysis, relying on Lu Xun's work and the Balanced Modern Mandarin Corpus, may not fully capture the nuances of loanword adoption across different time periods and genres.