Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Intercultural Approach of Professional Lexicon
.pdf
general concepts, attributes, categories, and relationships in various specialised fields of
human knowledge and activity. In this way, the nominative function of terms is realized
in the recording of specialised knowledge. Unless an object of specialised knowledge is
named by a defined term, its perception and study in the specialised field are
impossible.
The characteristics of nomination (the choice of the object of nomination) are
defined by the characteristics of the specialised field. 'A distinctive facet of professional
terminology is that it always comes about through a defined practical need. The global
continuum that encompasses humankind is of course articulated by different languages
in different ways. But among all the variations there is an established law; that the
degree of intensity of articulation is governed by practical usage. The more it happens
that people come into contact with a defined segment or sphere of reality, the more
intensely it is articulated in their language' (1970:149).
The nominative function of terms is closely connected to their significative function. A
term's significative function can be called its sign-oriented function, as it is traditionally
accepted that while terms express concepts, the attributes of the concept are contained in
the term's literal meaning. In order to analyse the significative function of terms, we
must also look at the means of signification, the form of linguistic signs according to
their motivation or non-motivation, and the relationships between signs and types of
objects. The significative function of terms is distinct from that of other lexical items in
the way we explain the signification by linguistic signs of particular objects or classes of
objects; the correlation between the process of signifying an object or class of objects, and
the concept of the object itself.
As well as looking at the aforementioned functions of terms, the problem of
precision must also be considered, being a further requirement of terms. Contemporary
terminology scholars, particularly T.L.Kandelaki, in his best known work Semantics and
The Motivation of Terms (1993:167), claim that the precision of terms is the result of their
composition; it is achieved in the process of cognition, by selecting from all the available
possibilities. Currently the most significant work on precision is in the
cognitive-discursive approach of cognitive terminology. The process of cognition enters
the discussion when we talk of creating term-generating texts. Here, texts perform an
intermediary function on the path to knowledge (cognition), where terms are 'names
given to clusters of ideas' (ibid). The level of clarity and completeness of the theory
defines the level of precision and definitiveness of the term, and the level of realisation of
the nominative and significative functions of the term.
It is traditionally accepted that while terms express concepts, the attributes of the
concept are contained in the term's literal meaning (Lotte, 1961:24-28). Strictly speaking,
terms are inherently definitive and are not interchangeable with each other, because
they have different logical functions and linguistic
structures. For example, the term immunodiagnostic sera, defined as 'sera from the blood
of animals, immunised by microbial antigens'; or therionosis, defined as 'any disease
where the source of the pathogen is a wild animal.' A term may change its definition,
just as a definition may change its term. This judgement draws upon V.V.Vinogradov's
observation that 'terms primarily perform a nominative or definitive function, i.e. they
are either the means of distinctive signification, and are thus simple signs, or they are the
means of logical definition, in which case they are scientific terms' (1986:12-13). But in
the decades since the publication of this work there has been significant development in
the semiotic aspects of language and formal logic. This has aided the development of
theory on the distinction between terms and definitions (i.e. the left and right sides of the
definition) and it has been proved that they are not interchangeable, having different
logical functions and linguistic structures. Definitive term is an inaccurate name for all
motivational terms. The definitiveness of a term, the expression of a concept by a term, is
an elective attribute of the term. The nature of the realisation of the nominative and
sign-oriented functions of terms is different: all terms are different, and name concepts
with a different level of comprehensiveness and precision. As such it is possible to say
that not all terms express concepts. But equally, the very ability of terms to express
concepts should always be remembered and emphasised, as it is one of the specific
characteristics of the functional structure of terms which distinguishes them from simple
words. In contrast with non-term words, terms possess the specific characteristic of
being able to express concepts, along with the correlations between motivational terms
and their higher correlation to motivational lexical items which are non-terminological
in nature.
The third function of terms is the communicative function. This function presents a
word as a means of transferring to the recipient substantive and stylistic information
with a necessary feedback loop. In terms, this information serves as the means of
transferring specialised concentrated knowledge in space and time and can also serve as
the site of creative conceptualisation, adjustment or even the generation of new terms. In
the process of instruction, specialised knowledge is transferred into the form of
standardised, normalised terms. The pragmatic function of terms is closely connected to
their communicative function and is defined by the discrete conditions of the field of
communication. The communicative function could be called informational. This function
has been studied in detail in the works of M Volodina (2000). There is a distinction
between the socio-communicative and individual-communicative functions of linguistic
signs. By performing an informational function, terms serve as a means of
communicating specialised knowledge in space and time. In the process of exchanging
specialised knowledge between specialists, manufacturers, and administrators,
knowledge users use the scientific, technical, societal, and culturological terms in
which that knowledge is embedded. Here,
unaerstanding depends on some measure of the precision of terms. In the process of
communication, information may undergo precision as it is transferred in space. This is
the case in the transfer of any hypothesis as yet unverified by scientific theory.
Otherwise, specialised knowledge is transferred in the process of instruction and
uses standardised, normalised terms. The instructional function of terms, being the
realisation of the communicative function of a linguistic sign, is distinct from the
function of knowledge exchange, which is another form of the realisation of the general
communicative function.
An important function of terms is the transfer of specialised knowledge in time.
Social, scientific and technological progress offer continuity of knowledge. The
apprehension of knowledge through terms by successive generations is carried out
without the possibility of a feedback loop. The growth of scientific knowledge is
characterised by new understandings of objects, signified terms and term systems. Old
terms experience re-generation through new meanings. In this way one can trace the
chain of renewal in terms as follows: change of meaning ^ inclusion in new term system ^
substitution by a different term.
The communicative function of terms is closely connected to their pragmatic function.
The pragmatic function involves the connection of signs to participants in the act of
communication and to the distinctive conditions of the field of discourse, and depends
on the orientation chosen by the language producer to influence the language receiver; to
persuade them, to impel them towards some particular action. It must be pointed out,
though, that with terms the limits of this orientation are not as wide as they are for
normal words. In veterinary terminology the orientation of terms is rather narrow. But
in political terminology the pragmatic function may fully manifest itself, as it is for the
most part emotionally expressive. For example the terms political prostitute, and renegade.
The pragmatic function of terms can consciously perform the function of disinformation
(false-motivational terms). But this function is applied in the battle of ideas - in debate and cannot be used in any scientific discussion of scientific theories.
Unlike words, terms also perform a heuristic function, pertaining to the discovery of
new information. This function involves constructing definitions and classifying
concepts where there is an unambiguous correlation between concepts and the terms
signifying them, and highlighting imperfection and imprecision in partially defined
concepts. This function may be employed in so-called preemptive terms. In veterinary
medicine, for example, zoonotic terms used in describing forms of medication in the
process of development and the differential diagnosis of complex nosological systems
are preemptive terms. In specialist veterinary literature we read that:
Until recently, there was no particular movement in veterinary medicine
for research into the study of pathology in reptiles. Accordingly, no theoretical
approaches have been developed for the study of patterns in the development of
pathological processes, the mechanisms of emergence, duration and conclusion
in internal diseases; the etiology and morphogenesis of infectious and invasive
processes in the surgical pathology of reptiles. The lack of a theoretical basis has
prevented the development of a comprehensive system of methodology in
reptile veterinary medicine. The first new nosological forms described in reptiles
were idiopathic fibrous osteodysplasia in iguanid lizards, ossifying spondylitis,
idiopathic ileus in iguanas, leptomonas colitis in chameleons, and amyloidosis in
caimans... (Vasiliev, 2004:34).
On another level, the names used in describing any range of innovative
mechanisms, processes, and machines are also preemptive terms, as many of these
innovations are not fully realised.
3.2. The classificatory function of terms
Specialised terminology is characterised by its ability to perform certain functions
not communicable to wider society. An example of this is the classificatory function,
involving the heuristic ordering of object classifications. As N.V.Yushmanov correctly
writes: 'If you know the term, then you know its position within a system; if you know
its position in a system, then you know the term' (1968:79). Within the problem of term
and text, terminological theory differentiates scientific, technological, business and artistic
texts. Following this theory, we may distinguish between term-generating, term-using and
term-fixing texts (V.M.Leichik's terms). The particular criteria for organising any given
speech segment are connected with the following typology of textual situations:
informative-summary, analytical, polemical, descriptive-illustrational, instructive, heuristic,
problematical, ironical. Their division is governed by four criteria: 1. communicative
framework; 2. function; 3. form of exposition; 4. nature of linguistic material. Veterinary texts
can be seen to validate this model. The structural-conceptual framework of veterinary
articles exhibits this same arrangement into parts, with their connections to each other
and to the overall theme, the general idea and its application and meaning. Veterinary
articles, like other texts, are constructed according to the rules of logic, which is to say
they are divided into title, introduction, main section and conclusion. Propositions are
put together according to defined rules (linearity, sequence of proposition, logical integrity,
connectivity etc.) in paragraphs and communicative blocks. All this is summarized in
table 1 below, where the communicative units are marked as structural-conceptual
components in the construction of veterinary medical articles, along with their
corresponding speech types. The number of
paragraphs within a single communicative unit is also indicated.
Table 1: Structural-conceptual components in the construction of veterinary medical articles
Communicative Unit
Speech Type
Introduction
A. Definition of disease
B. Contextualisation of problem
C. Classification of zoonotic term
Description
Argumentation
Description
Epidemiology
Argumentation
Argumentation with elements of description
Etiology
Description
Argumentation
Description
History of problem
Description
Description with elements of argumentation
Argumentation
Pathogenesis
Description
Description with elements of argumentation
Argumentation
Clinical Picture
A. Symptoms
B. Course of disease
C. Anamnesis
Description
Description
Narration
Diagnosis
Argumentation with elements of description
Prognosis
Argumentation with elements of description
Prophylaxis
Argumentation
Description
Medication
Description
Argumentation with elements of description
The listing in this table of communicative units, speech types and their arrangement
into paragraphs can be taken as more or less representative for texts in veterinary
articles.
There are several trends in the theory of applied terminology. The need to automate
the preservation and processing of large volumes of terms and specialised information
has led to terminology databases (TDs), where each term is furnished with
supplementary information on its meaning, equivalent terms in other languages, and
their synonyms. There is a specific bank of veterinary
86
medical terms. TDs are one way of automating searches of organised terminological
information (electronic and computerised dictionaries). Terminography developed as a
trend from the mid twentieth to early twenty-first century. Classification in
terminological dictionaries is based on differential attributes. Unlike philological
dictionaries, which tend to list external attributes, only single-field dictionaries give
definitions involving both the generic concepts and a list of all their special attributes.
That is to say, definitions in single-field dictionaries are systemic, like the terms
themselves, and collected together they reflect a system of of concepts; a terminology.
Authors of single-field dictionaries are guided by the 'concept to term' principle.
The unification of specialised terminology is reflected in regulatory dictionaries
(normative and non-normative) and collections of recommended terms. Practical
working methods for the unification of terms are described in many works of the soviet
and post-soviet periods: the production of collections of recommended terms
(Suleimenova, 1996); the standardization of terms at the international and regional level
(documents produced by the ISO). The unification of terms is necessary for scientific and
technological progress. The existing limits on time (up to five years), space
(countrywide) and function (different sorts of literature), recommended in the use of
normative documents on unified terminology prevent 'stagnation' in academic study. In
recent times the approach to selection in the unification of terms has become less strict
-justifying the use of a defined quantity of semantic and formal variations in texts and
standards is considered acceptable. Systematizing must also be recognized as a positive
influence of this trend in applied terminology. In the process of developing standards
and collections of recommended terms, each place in a terminology is occupied by one
lexical item, and to each lexical item one definition is applied, thus systematizing all the
sign vehicles of a defined field of knowledge.
3.3. Motivational aspect in the systemic description of
veterinary terminology
The linguistic theory of motivation is a new and developing one, though its
beginnings can be traced to the source of the definition of the word itself, to the question
of the origin of language and the interrelation of language and thought. All these
questions and problems go back to the ancient linguistic traditions (the Greco-Roman
tradition, the Mediterranean tradition) - the traditions of describing and investigating
language, emergent and existing in the Greco-Roman cultural era from the 7th century
BC. to the 6th century AD. The importance of these questions and the thousands of years
for which they have existed - their continuing relevance to this day - impels us to a
lengthy excursion in history.
The ancient linguistic tradition was conceived in the Mediterranean era during the
development of ancient Greek philosophy. Ancient scholars were on the one hand
interested in the 'nature of language' (the connection between the 'name' and the 'thing';
the origin of language) and on the other hand they studied written signs for the
purposes of education in reading and writing (the grammatical art). These two areas to a
certain extent determined the formation and development of linguistics across the whole
of the ancient world (the Indian linguistic tradition, the Chinese linguistic tradition). In
the 5th century BC significant attention was devoted to the problems of language by the
philosophers Heraclitus, Parmenides of Elea, Democritus, Protagorus and others. With
the work of Plato, a defined system of knowledge had emerged pertaining to sounds
and the grammatical construction of the Greek language, its lexical composition. Plato
addressed the problem of language both in his writings and numerous dialogues (Plato,
1968). But the true founder of the ancient linguistic tradition, who developed its
structure and fundamental trends, was Aristotle. The treatises in Categories, and Poetics
contain the logical and grammatical principles of an approach to the study of language
which was further developed in the ancient and then the European social sciences. The
ancient linguistic tradition was continued by the philosophical schools of the Hellenic
period in the 3rd to 1st centuries BC.
Subsequent interest in the problem of language was developed by the Stoics. In this
period many Greek scholars began working in Rome (Cicero, Julius Caesar). At this time
the old problem of the 'origin of names' was in debate: a dispute took place between
proponents of the connection between names and things (physei) and proponents of the
connection 'by statute' (thesei). In this way the category of thought was uncovered for the
first time and the influence of thought on language was established. Testament to this
was the philosophical approach to language so characteristic of ancient Greece, and
which the ancient world passed on to the whole of Europe in the Middle Ages
(Perlmutter, 1980:147-148).
In the 17th century, the famous German linguist, Wilhelm von Humboldt
(1767-1835) devoted his full attention to this problem. His profound interpretation of the
problem has exerted a powerful influence on all subsequent generations of linguists who
have dealt with it to some extent. At the beginning of the 19th century von Humboldt
wrote, 'Language is an organ that produces thoughts. Intellectual activity - wholly
intangible, and passing without a trace -materializes by virtue of speech sounds and is
thus made available to human apprehension. The activity of thought and language
therefore presents a continuous unity' (von Humboldt, 1984). 'Language is, as it were, an
external manifestation of the soul of a people; the language of a people is its soul, and
the soul of a people is its language'; 'Language is soul in all its complexity; it develops in
accordance with the rules of the soul" (ibid:71). The ideas of
riumDoiat were later adopted by H.Schuhara ana Jost Trier, who developed a theory in
the field of semantics which is successfully being developed in the present day.
A.Potebnja (1835-1891), a distinguished representative of Slavic language studies, lived
and worked around the same time. Owing to the breadth of problems he worked on, he
occupies a unique place in the history of language studies. Potebnja remarked on the role
of words as a method of 'transforming human thoughts' and pointed to the cognitive
function of language and words: 'language is a means not of expressing pre-prepared
thoughts, but of creating them it is not the reflection of an existing world view, but a
component of its activity'; '[...] words are a means of building concepts, and as such they
are not external [^], they are an essential infusion of the very nature of man' (1960:122).
These problems were later elaborated. Ferdinand de Saussure introduced to the
study of language the concept of motivational and non-motivational words (or what
Saussure called signs) conceiving these properties of words as either 'arbitrariness or
convention' (1988).
For Jan Baudouin de Courtenay a linguistic sign was characterised by a
psychological and physical antinomy in the operations of language (1963).
In this sign-oriented definition of language there are two possibilities: arbitrariness
and motivation. Two possible sources of motivation are identified -objective reality in the
form of signs, or the signs themselves. These views have been developed in semiotics in
the works of the American scholar Charles W.Morris and Kazakh L.K.Zhanalina. Morris
draws a distinction between the study of semiotics and those of semantics, syntactics
and pragmatics (Morris, 1983). Zhanalina adduces the following aspects of signs, which
determine the basis of their existence: 1. extralinguistic correspondence between
objective reality and a person's psychic reality; 2. correspondence between plane of
expression and plane of content; 3. connection with the subject; 4. connection with other
signs (1994:40). The fundamental aspects of language as a specialised system of signs is
investigated in Aleksei Losev's sign theory of language. Losev distinguishes different
modes of existence: 'the functioning sign explicates human thought and serves as a
means of 'the living community of people''
(Losev, 1982).
Terminological systems give names to objects endowed with linguistic signs using
these embedded concepts: denotatum, designatum, abstractum, and extension (l.Vardul,
L.Novikov, N.Arutiunova, G.Kolshansky). The sign produced corresponds to the object
identified. It is estranged from the subject of study and isolated from reality by the
definition of a combination of distinctive attributes. Gnoseological activity clarifies the
fragments of the real world, which is to say it introduces them into the world of
conscious thought. ln looking at the relationship between sign and thing, Zhanalina
(1994) remarks that 'in the stasis of language motivation and arbitrariness are inherent
attributes of signs', which reflect the nature of their connection with the object and with
other signs. 'ln
dynamics, they are always motivated, if only partially' (ibid), because part of them loses
its determination, the solvability of the connection between their form and content
(ibid:40).
The nominative nature of words arises from their conceptualisation as signs.
Everything that is perceptible by thought may be subject to signification by signs. Words
describe reality, being arbitrarily selected signs established as a result of the common
efforts of a distinct linguistic community. The word is the base element of a linguistic
sign system in the broad, semiotic context. The content of a linguistic item comes from
the exogenous world. The acquisition of content by a word occurs as the result of the
active influence of the whole corpus of knowledge accumulated by humanity. The
signification of individual realia depends on other realia and their representation by
humans. As with the emergence of any new lexical item, this signification is
manipulated by the full gamut of encyclopaedic and linguistic knowledge, which
regulate the external form of the word, the rules of its transformation and inclusion in
syntagmatic units of different lengths.
The semiotic sequence of words can be arranged according to their proximity to
what is signified in exogenous reality. The starting point in this sequence is
onomatopoeia, which reflects the closest connection between the word and what it
signifies. Onomatopoeia has its own group of names, which are semi-conventional
words. Next in the sequence comes basic vocabulary. These are ordinary signs, like
bread, fire, chair etc. What is peculiar to the words in this group is their total
non-motivation. These words are semantically opaque. The words 'bread', 'fire' and
'water' have their roots in the depths of the centuries: they were once used to describe
essential objects and phenomena whose motivations have been lost. We assume
vocabulary to be original when it is possible to trace the origin of a term, for example in
the naming of birds, animals, and parts of the body. The life of every people is carried
out in continuous contact with other peoples in trade and the exchange of material and
cultural assets. And along with objects and phenomena come their corresponding
names. The process of assimilation gives words a 'right of naturalization' in the new
linguistic system, and they lose their transparency.
Last in the sequence are words of secondary motivation. This is a specific group of
words, possessing qualities which separate it from common signs and signified things,
and it is governed by linguistic and extralinguistic characteristics. As we have seen, there
is an intermediary in the motivated group of any language's vocabulary between sign
and signified. This is the motivation of phenomena in words.
Our approach to the motivological analysis of terms is based on the semiotic nature
of language, the conception of language as a material-ideal construct formed by the
relation of motivation, signification and reflection to objective reality. From this conception
it follows that the formation of any naming system in
language is the result ot a process of motivation in sign-composition.
The act of naming, which is to say the appellation of real-world objects, is preceded
by motivation in a number of logical-conceptual processes; isolating the object to be
named from the surrounding environment, generalizing its constituent properties, and
admitting it into a group of similar objects. The outcome of this abstractive act of
consciousness is the formation of the logical concept, the linguistic stylisation of which
serves as the semantic base of the nominative unit. Its notional extension is a tripartite of
the linguistic sign (its graphic resemblance), denotatum (the object of thought), and the
codified thought attached to the sign. The motivation of a nominative unit objectifies the
concept, gives the property of signification in real-world objects, introduces naming by
linguistic items into the language system, and actualises it in the process of its
functioning. The application of motivation in naming to the language system is defined
as an act of intellectual construction, representing the attributes of a class of
homogeneous objects. The motivation of nominative units is considered in various
linguistic approaches to be an attribute of all real-world objects, modifying the
properties of the corresponding denotatum.
At the systemic level, the motivation of conceptual extension in naming is at the
threshold of the linguistic objectification of concepts and in particular their meaning, or
significatum. The realisation of the systemic possibilities of motivation in naming allows
us to crystallize the object of thought, or denotatum. Our understanding of how
motivation works in nominative items takes the problem of motivation as a linguistic
phenomenon outside the limits of the structured mechanisms of word-formation.
Central to our understanding is the basic philosophical question of how reality, thought
and language are connected. The phenomenon of motivation in terms has itself become
the subject of multifaceted analysis, including in particular the following relationships:
• the motivation of terms and understanding the laws of the objective world
(ontological properties of motivation);
• the motivation of terms and their internal form (semantic aspect);
• the motivation of terms and their systemic significancy, characteristics of the
paradigmatic and syntagmatic relationships between motivated specialised items
(organisation of systemic relationships in terminological vocabulary);
• the motivation of terms and the process of communication (functional aspect)
In its use in the academic world we can see motivation as being tied to a linguistic
system. It also requires us to analyse the nominative processes of recording as internal,
inward-facing language systems, and to look at the
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]