ENTOMOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE IN PERSPECTIVE OF THE MODERN TERMINOLOGY ISSUES
Introducton. English entomonyms constitute a special layer of the English vocabulary – the term system, that is a set of words and compounds, providing the nomination of the basic concepts of a particular area of knowledge and field of activity, connected by logical, semantic and other relations. Any term system is the object of study of terminology – a chapter of lexicology that studies principles of the organization of term systems, mechanisms for term creation, requirements to terms, as well as solves applied issues of ordering and codification of term systems and their correspondences in different languages.
The approach to investigating terms not only as elements of a term system, but also as a means of linguistic expression of scientific thinking in communication is of particular importance for developing semantics of the term; it is the most perspective direction in terminology.
Purpose. The article aims at establishing the issues of modern terminology in terms of the fundamentals of cognitive science, and delineating the main principles of term creation on the material of the English nomenclature insect names.
Results. Cognitive terminology is based on the theoretical potential of the traditional branch of terminology. However, despite the development of aspects of the latter, some issues remain controversial. Thus, the definitively insoluble issue of modern terminology is the definition of the term. Numerous attempts made by linguists to give definition to the term that would satisfy all conditions, proved to be unproductive, obviously because of the multifaceted nature of this phenomenon. In our research we adhere to the definition of the term on the basis of its properties to meet the needs of a particular sphere, taking into account the cognitive ability of this concept.
No less important in modern terminology is the traditional problem of requirements to the term. These are consistency; compliance with the designated concept; euphony, easiness in pronunciation; tendency to monosemy and concretization within a term system, as well as to transparency of internal forms considering high informative value; rigid conventionality; stylistic neutrality; involvement in appropriate system of concepts of a particular field; compliance with language standards; accuracy, etc.
The next controversial issue of traditional terminology is the distinction between the term and the nomen as a nomenclature sign. Nomenclature names differ from the terms by a number of features and formal characteristics: the object of designation, the method of designation, the function of designation, as well as the method of systematization and quantitative indicators.
The correlation between the nomenclature and the term system is still a controversial issue of terminology: in some cases, the nomenclature is opposed to the terminological system, and in others – former is included in the latter as its specific form.
The nomenclature insect names investigated in this article, are a part of the entomological term system in which these names coexist with the Latin names for designation of insect taxons (international names). In contrast, English entomonyms are considered as common names. Common names that exist to identify insects within the English language system are more stable. Thus, denying the general ambiguity and synonymy in terminology, scientists recognize the need to preserve national names along with international terms.
In order to ensure the stability, accuracy and universality of international names of living organisms, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature approved the rules for assigning such names to animals, in particular insects.
Originality. We were the first to investigate the English entomological nomenclature in perspective of the modern terminology issues.Conclusion. Formal syntactic requirements to national insect names, as well as to any term, do not define connecting mechanisms of their creation and correlation of form and content. In order to clarify this correlation with the scientific world view of a particular industry, it is necessary to apply the analysis of the motivational nature of term designation, which is established by using the method of cognitive onomasiological analysis.
Ivina L. V. (2003). Linguo-cognitive framework for the analysis of sectoral term systems (on the example of English terms for venture financing). Moscow : Akademicheskij Proect (in Russ.)
Novodranova V. F. Cognitive aspects of terminology. Materials of the 1st seminar school on cognitive linguistics, 1, 10-15 (in Russ.)
Lotte D. S. (1961). Fundamentals of scientific and technical terminology. Theory and methodology issues. Moscow (in Russ.)
Vinokur G. O. (1939). On some phenomena of word formation in Russian technical terminology. Materials of the Institute of history, philosophy and literature at Moscow: collection of articles on linguistics, 5, 3-54 (in Russ.)
Florenskij P. A. (1994). The Term. Istoriya otechestvennogo terminovedeniya. Klassiki terminovedeniya: Ocherk i khrestomatiya (The history of Russian terminology. Classics of terminology: Essay and anthology), 1, 359-400 (in Russ.)
Diakov A. S. (2000). Fundamentals of term formation: semantic and sociolinguistic aspects. Kyiv : Publishing House «КМ Academia» (in Ukr.)
Moiseyev A. I. (1970). On the linguistic nature of the term. Moscow : Nauka (in Russ.)
Barandeyev A. V. (1993). Fundamentals of scientific terminology. Moscow : Mir knigi (in Russ.)
Shpet G. G. (2005). The thought and the word. Selected works. Moscow (in Russ.)
Leichik V. M. (1974). The nomenclature – intermediate between terms and proper names. Voprosy terminologii i lingvisticheskoj statistiki (Issues of terminology and language statistics), 13-24 (in Russ.)
Aleksandrova G. N. (2006). The ratio of the iconic structure and function of terminological quasiterminological language units. Theses of Candidate of Philology 10.00.00 «Philological Sciences». Samara (in Russ.)
Kuzmin N. P. (1970). Normative and non-normative special vocabulary. Problems and methods of vocabulary normalization. Lingvisticheskiye problemy nauchno-tekhnicheskoj terminologii (Linguistic problems of scientific and technical terminology), 68-81 (in Russ.)
Gurney, A. B. (1953). An Appeal for a Clearer Understanding of the Principles Concerning the Use of Common Names. J. Econ. Entomol., 46, 207-211.
Selivanova, O. (2018). Linguistic and cognitive parameters of ethnic identity. Linguistic announcer. Cherkassy. Vol. 24–25. (In Ukr.)
Selivanova, O. O. (2018). Problems of meaning in linguistics. Visnyk Cherkaskoho universytetu (Bulletin of the University of Cherkasy), 2, 3–11. doi: 10.31651/2076-5770-2018-2 (in Ukr.)
Selivanova, O. (2009). Phenomenon of precedence in the processes of nomination. Scientific messages of Tavricheskiy National University. Scientific Journal. Philology and social communications. Simpheropol. 22 (61), 2. (In Ukr.)
Selivanova, O. (2009). Myth as source of nomination. Linguistics and Didactics in the 21st Century − Trends, Analyses and Prognoses II / Ed. by A. Pčolinská. − Prague : Kernberg Publishing. (In Russ.)
Selivanova, O. (2005). Opposition it / stranger in ethnic consciousness (on material of Ukrainian proverbs). Linguistics. Scientific Journal. 1. (In Ukr.)
- There are currently no refbacks.