I am not a linguist in any way shape or form, but I am studying Japanese, and came across this linguistic issue that fascinates me.
The word was create by taking a Japanese word, "gaijin", which means "foreigner", and swapping the "gai" part with the word "fly". It means "a foreigner who left Japan after the earthquake". It is a somewhat controversial word within the English speaking foreign community in Japan, but here I'm just focused on the linguistic aspects of the word.
The consensus is that is not a Japanese word, since Japanese people don't use it. The issues that gave rise to the word are virtually unknown outside the English speaking subculture within the larger Japanese culture.
But it's a word that only exists because of the Japanese language. Further, it's a word to describe a situation that only exists in Japan, and it defines an aspect of Japanese culture as seen from within a subculture.
Also, while it might at first seem that it's the combination of two languages, since "gaijin" is Japanese, and "fly" is English, I believe it's not quite that simple. "Fly" is a word most Japanese people understand, as it, like a lot of English words, have been integrated to the point of reasonably common usage. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a fully Japanese word now, but it's not that alien either (another linguistic concept I can't fully grasp).
Is there a term for this kind of occurrence, where a word is created from a language and because of that language, but not used within that language?
Are there other examples?
Is it accurate to say that the word is not Japanese just because of the issue of usage among most Japanese speakers? Might it not be reasonable to say it is a Japanese word because it is made from that language? (I'm not making a case to say it should be one way or the other, I'm just exploring the issue.)