basic vocabulary borrowing

[Ante Aikio]

(I wrote:)
> As for body parts, there is hardly a real "reason" for replacing native
> words by foreign ones in any circumstance (other than the wish to be
> considered fashionable, of course).

(Robert Orr replied:) 
> YES, THERE IS (if we consider exactly what is meant by foreign)
> A word is "borrowed" in a different meaning (cf. Latin cuppa > (Old High)
> German kop(f))
> Later on, a (nativised) kopf is transferred (probably via slang) to become
> the (unmarked) word for head.
> The native speakers have not "borrowed" the word for head.  there has been
> an internal semantic shift.
> But to sophisticated linguists it does look like a borrowing.

Yes, but this is not the type of case I had in mind, since the loan
original does not mean 'head'.

> I know this makes things more complicated, but it's probably the path most
> of these forms took.

This is certainly true in some cases, as e.g. Kopf. But if the loan
original has identical meaning (e.g. Proto-Finnic *onc´c´a 'forehead' <
Germanic *anthja- id.) this type of explanation is hardly applicable.
Rather, it seems that the speakers just chose to replace the native word
with a loan word.

 Ante Aikio