Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Intercultural Approach of Professional Lexicon
.pdf
association of the Russian word чума (plague) with something dangerous, or deadly,
derives from the verb чумить (to stupefy, deprive of memory), as in the expression пир во
время чумы (lit. 'to feast in time of plague', having a meaning similar to that of the English
expression 'to fiddle while Rome burns').
In order to compile a dictionary one should observe the particular characteristics of
the motivemes of Russian zoonotic terms, which are influenced by the following factors:
• The possibility of carrying over the cultural relevance of a unit of language to
another semiotic code such as folklore, proverbs, myths, and the presence in
these units of culturally significant effects;
• There is less use in Russian of linguistic forms connected to the animal kingdom.
This can apparently be explained by the main occupations of Russian language
users in agriculture;
• The empirical knowledge of the people in the field of veterinary
medicine;
• The presence in Russian of words with close meanings, which are the result of
differences in historical and everyday ways of thinking so essential to the
Russian linguistic picture of the world.
Concepts picked out in a particular way in the Kazakh linguistic picture of the
world, and signifying zoonotic terms, are undoubtedly connected with the ethnic culture
of the people, and their own unique economic structure. The motivological activity of
Kazakh language users is linked particularly closely to the tort tulik in epizoologisms.
One motivem may combine several motives, as was apparent in the example of
сибирская язва (splenic fever) in Kazakh, which has various names according to the
different species of animal.
The colour attribute цара (black) is often present in the more complex disease names,
due to its conceptual import in the lexis of the language: black as in malignant.
In Kazakh, animal diseases named with the motiveme similarity with other objects
bear the attribute цұрт (worm). Perceiving the true essence of objects and phenomena in
the world is often impossible where there is a lack of sufficient knowledge or
equipment. In practice, the ancient Kazakh people had to deal with all kinds diseases,
but they did not understand their causes. Not having microscopes, for example, meant
that they could not identify these causes. It was therefore thought among the people that
there was a worm (цұрт) in the diseased organ, causing this or that illness.
This study suggests that the variety of motivemes in Kazakh zoonotic terms is
influenced by the following factors:
• The highly developed observational powers of Kazakh language users in relation
to those creatures which traditionally accompanied them throughout their
economic activity;
• The extraordinarily developed lexical synonymy around a single name connected
to a wide semantic range of Kazakh metaphors;
• Distinguishing phenomena by selecting particular corresponding attributes
in their nomination and formation into semantic units.
By comparing data from the quantitative distribution of commonly used words and
the corpus of scientific names as a whole we are able to ascertain their motives, which
encourage the expansion of terminologisation in the field of epizoology. These
motivemes are genus, species and anatomical attributes. It seems to be these attributes that
are at the bottom of scientific distinctions between one zoonosis and another.
This study suggests that the uniquely national nature of the fragments which make
up the Russian and Kazakh linguistic pictures of the world, exist at the motivated level
of language as arranged by language users. The national and cultural motivation of
linguistic substance is defined by the stable communicative aspects of a nation or
people. Linguistic models vary from one language to the next. 'Through linguistic
models of reality comes our contingent vision of the world. These models act as
incidental sources of cognition in our interpretation of reality and contribute to our
shared picture of knowledge, correcting it along the way' (Denisov, 1984:157).
The motives behind creating distinctive vocabularies, conceived in the names given
to objects, signify the variety in this world of objects, including semantic information on
our knowledge of objects. Differentiation in lexis by motivemes and motives is our
universal means of constructing our vocabularies, which shows the influence it has on
the language of various human pictures of the world: religious and mythological,
philosophical, scientific and academic, artistic and so on. Establishing the motives
behind the naming of different realia firstly reflects the formation in the depths of
language of one of the deeper layers of our picture of the world, and secondly
demonstrates how language expresses and explicates other peoples' pictures of the
world, which through its connection with a particular culture enters into our own
language, bringing with it certain elements of that people and its culture. The empirical
knowledge attained by different peoples around the world is transformed through
language in our collective heritage.
Conclusion
suDjeci-specific terminology in Russian and Kazakh has evolved along a
challenging path, which has set the tone for how it is structured today.
Terminology began to develop from linguistics as an applied academic discipline
during the 1930s. Its aim was to conduct research into terms and Terminological
Systems. Throughout its history, contributions to the discipline have been made by
outstanding academics from Kazakhstan, Russia and other countries working in both
linguistics and terminology proper. Their research into terms took the discipline in the
most up-to-date directions, using nominative, normative and functional approaches.
Today, a general theory of terminology has evolved, and is one of the most important
elements of the general theory of linguistics. Analysis of the theory around terms and
Terminological Systems allowed the academic world to identify a need to study issues
surrounding the evolution of terminological language in Russian and Kazakh. It
facilitated the process of designating objects in the world of academia and technology, as
well as establishing a contemporary set of vocabulary dedicated to terminology itself.
The theory of terminology brought together experimental findings from terminology
research. It enabled Terminological Systems to be established and improved across a
variety of disciplines by pinpointing the characteristics that are particular to a given
term and distinguishing these from the characteristics of non-terms.
Knowledge of any naturally occurring language could be described as knowing
about a unified system of communication: elements of the internal content of a given
language can inform one's experiences and worldview. The effect of a language's
internal content is most clearly expressed in the knowledge area where a person
develops their skills most fully. The need for individuals to develop particular ways of
interacting that will be maximally effective in expressing messages with specialised
content is considered to be the trigger for the development of specialised linguistic
subsystems, which then evolve into terminologies in a given subject area of research or
technology. Some posit that certain socio-economic groupings within any given country
or culture (some specify the academic community) possess a deeper knowledge of
reality. Within their overall appreciation of the world as it is, specific aspects of the
world which relate to academics' specialised field of research become highly
particularised. Their knowledge within these fields is therefore fuller and more detailed
than average. Insofar as the aspects of this more detailed knowledge needs to be
expressed in language, people belonging to these specialised groups begin to use
linguistic units (lexemes), whose ordinary meaning and internal form becomes
extended: this implies the addition of elements of specialised knowledge.
It is therefore important for terminologists to understand the detailed
sub-systems at work within the system of logic of any given language.
Lexis (vocabulary) can be considered a system insofar as it is a comprehensive
vehicle for users of that lexis to perceive the world. Terminology as a phenomenon does
not violate the comprehensive nature of Lexis, but rather indicates that certain elements
of the culture associated with that Lexis are starting to deepen and become more
specific. As a result, the conditions under which knowledge may be dealt with more
objectively tends to reach a new level. That is the basis for the systemic nature of
terminological Lexis. When this basis has been established, it is then possible to tackle
the issue of strengthening, in formal terms, the system itself through which specialised
concepts can be expressed linguistically. The specific requirements for a Terminological
System to undergo such strengthening are the same as those needed for the
strengthening of high-register general-purpose language. This highlights the fact that it
is impossible to tackle terminological issues such as these in isolation from similar issues
found in general linguistics.
Overall, the subject matter covered by the theory of comparative subject-specific
terminology includes:
• The study of the formation and usage of specialised words within a given
language. This indicates the extent to which human knowledge in a particular
subject area has developed;
• The presence of certain characteristics common to all elements within a
terminological set;
• The process of finding the most effective ways of designating new terms and
Terminological Systems; and of making improvements to existing Terminological
Systems within a given language;
• The process of defining universal rules, which are generally applicable to
terminologies within various subject areas; and of sharing the findings of both
individual researchers and institutions.
Terms within different Terminological Systems are connected by extra-linguistic,
rather than linguistic, characteristics. There are a large number of definitions of the word
term in Russian and Kazakh linguistics. This reflects the different approaches taken to
that concept. However, the majority of research highlights the functional and
meaning-focussed side of the word, as well as agreeing on an understanding of terms as
words or collocations linked to a concept that belongs to a particular field of knowledge
or activity.
This thesis used the following definitions:
Term - a unit of language used for the designation of a specialised (research-based)
concept, which: has a strict definition; belongs to an appropriate Terminological
System; and displays a conventional and
standardisea function within the bounds of a particular specialised field of human
knowledge or activity. A term belongs to a defined terminology.
Subject-specific terminology (as a linguistic concept) - a set of terms within a particular
subject area, associated with a body of research about the formation, content and
operation of that set and its constituent terms (eg: economic, veterinary, socio-political,
linguistic terminology etc).
Subject-specific terminology (per se) - a relatively isomorphic system of signs within a
given field of human knowledge or activity, which serves a set of communicative
requirements. Contemporary Russian and Kazakh terminology was considered here as a
particular theory within the theoretical framework of general Russian and Kazakh
linguistics. Issues arising from the theory of subject-specific terminology are part of the
theory of general Russian and Kazakh linguistics.
The systemic method is part of a contemporary approach to research in general,
which focuses on identifying the properties of the elements within a given system.
Consideration of three main attributes within the system -substance, structure and
function within their dialectic unity - indicated that the systemic method is also an
integral method, aimed at understanding an object in its entirety.
The generally accepted definition of the word term contains two main aspects: first,
a term must designate a given unit of signification linked to a specialised concept; and
second, it must belong to a Terminological System within a given field of research or
technology. These two characteristics explain the highly systemic nature associated with
terminologies.
A Terminological System expresses a system of concepts within a given discipline.
In terms of content, paradigmatic links between terms enable the identification of
interrelated concepts and the construction of schemata of classification, which accord
with the system of concepts of that given discipline. In terms of expression, the systemic
nature of a terminology is constructed through morphological word structure, a defined
selection of models of word formation and particular aspects of inflection.
Two basic types of terminological set can be identified: a Terminology and a
Terminological System. The linguistic approach to analysing the characteristics of
terminology enabled us to posit that a Terminology is a linguistic creation composed of
spontaneously formed sets of linguistic units, which posses semantic commonality and
are similar in their formal structure. They fulfil the same function for specific purposes
in both Russian and Kazakh and denote the same concepts in their respective fields of
knowledge.
In contrast to a Terminology, a Terminological System possesses the following
characteristics: a series of generalised concepts, which all relate to one subject area; a
conceptual and research-based focus; the presence of a naturally occurring language (eg:
Russian or Kazakh) together with occurrences of
language for specific purposes (LSP). Unlike a Terminology, a Terminological System is
consciously created. There are two types of Terminological System: those created
immediately; and those, which develop from the restructuring of an existing
Terminology. The second type is tends to be found within fields of knowledge related to
the natural sciences, including veterinary medicine. Due to the differentiation that
occurred between zoonoses and anthroponoses the terminological set of nosological
linguistic units developed into a Terminological System. A Terminological System is
logical, systemic and ordered. Unlike Terminologies, Terminological Systems display a
higher degree of organisation among their constituent linguistic units. A Terminological
System is a way of sending signals about a specific theory relating to a specialised field
of knowledge. The constituent parts of a Terminological System are made up of the
linguistic units of a given language that are used for a specialised purpose. Its overall
structure mirrors the structure of the conceptual system of a given theory.
A significant proportion of the words, collocations, and word groups in the
general-purpose vocabulary of contemporary Russian and Kazakh are also used for
specialised purposes. From a lexical viewpoint, they can be divided into various classes:
common nouns, designators and proper nouns. Common nouns tend to correspond to
generalised concepts; units of designation tend to correspond to particular concepts,
while specific proper nouns tend to correspond to unitary concepts. Within ^ ach field of
knowledge and/or activity, specific and specialised concepts are to be found. They
display various levels of commonality, from the very largest classes (sorts) to the very
smallest distinctions at the bottom of typological hierarchies. They also include concepts
that reflect aspects of those classes, such as sort- and aspect-concepts. The varied ways in
which common nouns, proper nouns and units of designation are classified bears
witness to the rich depth of modern language, including when it is used for specialised
purposes. It demonstrates an ability to express the more detailed nuance of thought and
feeling, and is the result of painstaking observation of both the reality of the natural
world, and the inner world of mankind. Terms are multi-functional and interrelated.
Terms are based on units of language, so that the full range of a word's functions also
constitutes the basis of a term's functions (those of designation, signification,
communication and pragmatics). It is important to note that classifications, which take
into account context and signification are much rarer within general-purpose language.
Metalanguage within subject-specific terminology is present in a range of
fundamental concepts, which express fully developed models of reality, and are
reflected in both macro- and micro-Terminological Systems. Examples include: term,
terminology, Terminological System, definition of a term, structure of a term, system of term
function, typology and classification of a term, language for specific purposes, terminological
collection, terminologisation, standardisation of terms
terminological norms, terminological ordering, national-level terminology harmonisation,
subject-specific terminography etc.
The world research map (WRM) discussed in chapter 1, could be said to be identical
for everyone across the world, given that research tends to display higher degrees of
objectivity. It is possible to posit that the WRM (including in Russian and Kazakh) takes
on national-level specificities, partly because of the formation of national-level
Terminological Systems.
Subject-specific terminology in the Russian and Kazakh linguistic communities
have traditionally played a role in developing existing and discovering new areas of
knowledge, as well as preserving and passing on that knowledge. Therefore, the core
aspects of WRMs can be expressed in both Russian and Kazakh. Within a given
linguistic community, WRMs can be developed in full, partially, or not at all, depending
on that community's specific academic traditions, as well as on the presence of research
institutions.
This thesis covers complex issues, amongst which the fundamental principles of the
development of subject-specific terminologies in Russian and Kazakh could be argued to
be:
1. A degree of borrowing from already-developed terminologies. This is because
the relevant terms (eg: proper nouns in veterinary medicine) are either an
integral part of the terminology of that field of knowledge, or, as is the case with
a number of generalised veterinary terms are used in their entirety, as an
independent collection of terms;
2. The full-scale use of the linguistic resources available in Russian and Kazakh
together with the use of borrowings or internationalised words and phrases;
3. The transfer of words used in general-purpose language into terminologies,
without those words being redefined. (This only takes place for terms from
certain fields of knowledge, when they change status from being considered a
pre-term to a term in the full sense of the word);
4. The full-scale exploitation of the complex nature of subject-specific
terminology, and its position on the cusp of both general and particular fields
of research. This principle enables secondary and complex terms, as well as
set-groups or combinations of terms, which are found in such large numbers
across academic discourse, to be created or adopted into the mainstream.
(Work continues within both applied and theoretical research on these terms).
The underlying principle of the development of subject-specific terminology is a
linguistic tendency, the basis of which is an emphasis on a language user's
mother tongue. How today's key principles m the development o
subject-specific terminology came to the fore is predicated on a number of sources,
which touch on history, logic, political discourse and the structure of language.
The process of term formation is particularly closely related to the classification of
concepts on several levels. Further terms must be formed to designate concepts at each
level of classification. This is because terms from the same level should, as far as
possible, be formed from one model of term formation. Terms do not just designate
concepts (ie: serve as the name by which they are known). To an extent, they also reflect
the content of the concept they designate.
This thesis has presented an analysis of terms relating to veterinary medicine. It
suggests that a given Terminological System has essential peculiarities that are common
to all Terminological Systems, as well as its own specific means of term formation, based
on an internal system. The fundamental source of linguistic structure within
terminology is the systematic nature of morphology and word formation.
The comparative aspects of this thesis have provided evidence that, linguistically,
Russian and Kazakh veterinary terminology has been predominantly built up from
ancient Greek and Latin roots, resulting from the semantic precision and terminological
motivation of those two languages. Within both Russian and Kazakh, the common
method of term formation, used for the creation of individual linguistic units, could be
described as a particularly consistent approach to the way in which those methods are
chosen.
In terms of the way in which classification is carried out within any Terminological
System, this study indicated that: (a) classification, which tracks the evolution of
concepts, is the basis on which systems of subject-specific terms are formed; (b)
classificatory signs are involved in distinguishing relatively important signals, which are
capable of being expressed directly as terms; (c) words and their constituent parts can be
used in the formation of a subject-specific term; they may express the common aspects of
two or more related concepts, as well as expressing a term's specificity. The same
linguistic units can be considered under different headings, or within the bounds of
more than one system of classification. This thesis has adopted a systemic approach to
analysing Russian and Kazakh veterinary terminology. Results indicated that this field
of human knowledge is modelled on conceptual systems that, on the one hand, serve as
the constituent parts of the theory of a given subject area; but on the other, are explicitly
identifiable within two phenomena - the set of definitions for these concepts, and the set
of terms themselves. The Concept Set and Term Set are, for the purposes of veterinary
medicine, both considered as systems.
The way in which subject-specific terminology operates within professional
circles is related to both the level of development at which any given subject area finds
itself and the communication skills and professional competence of practitioners within
that subject area.
The understanding developed here of what is involved in the process of Motivation
and the designation of linguistic units highlighted that, as a linguistic phenomenon,
Motivation stretches well beyond the boundaries of the science of word formation. It
shifts our focus onto more fundamental, philosophical questions of how reality, thought
and language interrelate. The phenomenon of how terms are motivated is itself
becoming the subject of a wider range of studies, including questions of:
1. Terminological Motivation as a way of understanding the laws of the observable
world (the ontological essence of Motivation);
2. Terminological Motivation and its internal structures (a semantic view);
3. Terminological Motivation, its systemic significance, and the characteristics of
related paradigmatic and syntagmatic aspects of Motivated and specialised
linguistic units (the structure of systemic relations within terminological
vocabulary);
4. Terminological Motivation and the process of communication (a functional
view).
The relationship of terminological Motivation to the academic world on the one
hand, and its place in the overall system of language on the other, calls for an analysis of
designation processes that are internal to linguistic systems. This could complement our
understanding of the external functions of terms as linguistic signs, used to define in
language the intellectual content of a scientific concept.
Motivation could be seen as an integral aspect of what constitutes a term. This is
because it is based on the fact that Terminological Systems are systems of secondary
designation when compared to natural language. Once a unit of language has become a
term, it takes on linguistic Motivation, has a terminological meaning, and may occupy a
particular place in a Terminological System.
The main function of terminological Motivation is its ability to reflect the intangible
and factual properties of reality, as well as the results of human thought. This thesis has
approached the issue as a functional constant, which has enabled research to be
conducted on contemporary Russian- and Kazakh-language material.
The differences that this study highlighted between motivated veterinary medical
terms in Russian and Kazakh pointed to the different nature of agricultural activity
of the two linguistic communities during the
pre-revolutionary period - the nomadic lifestyle of the Kazakhs and the settled,
farming-focussed way of life, of Russian speakers. In terms of taxonomy, the more
detailed way in which Kazakh differentiates the names of animal diseases has no
parallel in the Russian 'semantic and linguistic map' and is a determining factor in the
distinction between the two cultures: the names of animal diseases could be said to
express part of Kazakh culture. Those that have no direct equivalent in Russian are
translated by a short Russian description. The examples quoted in this study of terms
which have no direct equivalent could be considered to be in the same category as
general-purpose words such as aul [mountain village], arik [irrigation canal] and yurt
[nomad's tent] which, to a degree, express central Asian culture. The contrasting value
of different terms is key to the specific distinctions which comparative studies highlight,
and within which, culturally specific characteristics can be discerned. This analysis of
the epizoological terminological system of veterinary medicine could indicate that, as
the basis of secondary designation, motivation is at the heart of any Terminological
System.
Veterinary medical terminology has developed over a long period of time. It
became most prominent as an applied discipline dealing with subjects, objects, aims and
tasks. Veterinary medicine (whose Latin root veterinaries means one who tends or heals
the flock) is a scientific discipline as well as a practical activity, focussed on: the
prevention and cure of animal disease; the protection of people from animal diseases
communicable to humans (anthropozoonosts); the production of good quality food
products (from a medical standpoint); and the protection of the environment from the
effects of animal disease. Today, the economic significance of veterinary medicine has
taken centre stage, given that animal husbandry is becoming one of the limiting factors
in food produced for human consumption. The critical and special relationship between
man and animal is equally important. These issues are themselves determining factors in
the continuing level of interest in the terminology of this subject area, for the amateur as
much as for the specialist.
Veterinary medical terminology is a terminological set which serves a purpose for
all branches within this field of knowledge. It displays the necessary requirements to be
considered a terminological set by being focussed, orderly and systemic.
The cognitive aspect of this (and indeed any other) terminology is a particularly
interesting aspect in the evolution of systems of specialised veterinary knowledge,
which have taken shape over a long period of time and have therefore been influenced
by internal and external socio-economic factors.
The Methodological principle of terminological research into zoonoses is based on a
logical combination of the results of linguistic analysis of zoonoses, the study of animal
biology and aspects of the classification of animal disease divided by individual
branches of veterinary medicine.
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]