Some Anthropocentric Parameters of Terminological Nomination (Based on the Material of Nanotechnology Eponymic Terms)
Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Cited by 2 publications
References 0 publications
The article is devoted to the study of the English-language Digital Photography terminological units by building a terminological network, namely, identifying key categories of special notions and system relations between the corresponding terminological units to prove that the analyzed terminological system is mainly applied. These features of the terminological system are identified and classified by building a terminological network. The primary task was to determine the main categories of special notions that are frequentlyverbalized by the English-language Digital hotography terminological units drawing on the example of the analysis of definitions of key terms, as well as to calculate the types of relations between the designated categories. In this regard, the study of a term as a system unit that occupies a clearly defined place in the subsystem of professional lexis becomes possible with the help of a terminological semantic network, which shows that the relationships and categories which the correlating terms belong to are not random. Digital Photography terminological units in the modern English language, which have been taken from the English-language online dictionaries, reference books, glossaries, and Internet portals dedicated to the topic in question, have served as the material for the research. Terms of one category can be associated with the representatives of other categories by means of recurrent system relationships, thus forming prototypical schemes of interaction between terminological units. During the work the two groups of terms have been allocated: the first one consists of “material” terminological units, verbalizing natural objects/phenomena, natural / artificial substances, loci (places, locations), instruments and tools (parts of tools), simple and complex mechanisms and their components, natural / artificial materials, artificially created loci (places) or constructions. The second group includes non-material terms that nominate the category “actor”, processes, situations, characteristics, ideal phenomena. The predominant categories of notions in the sphere of Digital Photography are components of mechanisms /tools, processes, ideal phenomena, complex mechanisms, characteristics / parameters, which indicates the fact that the Digital Photography terminological system is mainly applied. The study has revealed that the most frequent types of system relations between notions and their verbalizers-the corresponding English-language Digital Photography terms are: AKO (system relations between hyperonym and hyponym), ISA (system relations of coincidence or inclusion in a set), SR (system relations between referents which make up the subject of influence and the result obtained within the same process), which also indicate the predominantly applied nature of the Digital Photography terminological system
The article is devoted to the study of the English-language Digital Photography terminological units by building a terminological network, namely, identifying key categories of special notions and system relations between the corresponding terminological units to prove that the analyzed terminological system is mainly applied. These features of the terminological system are identified and classified by building a terminological network. The primary task was to determine the main categories of special notions that are frequentlyverbalized by the English-language Digital hotography terminological units drawing on the example of the analysis of definitions of key terms, as well as to calculate the types of relations between the designated categories. In this regard, the study of a term as a system unit that occupies a clearly defined place in the subsystem of professional lexis becomes possible with the help of a terminological semantic network, which shows that the relationships and categories which the correlating terms belong to are not random. Digital Photography terminological units in the modern English language, which have been taken from the English-language online dictionaries, reference books, glossaries, and Internet portals dedicated to the topic in question, have served as the material for the research. Terms of one category can be associated with the representatives of other categories by means of recurrent system relationships, thus forming prototypical schemes of interaction between terminological units. During the work the two groups of terms have been allocated: the first one consists of “material” terminological units, verbalizing natural objects/phenomena, natural / artificial substances, loci (places, locations), instruments and tools (parts of tools), simple and complex mechanisms and their components, natural / artificial materials, artificially created loci (places) or constructions. The second group includes non-material terms that nominate the category “actor”, processes, situations, characteristics, ideal phenomena. The predominant categories of notions in the sphere of Digital Photography are components of mechanisms /tools, processes, ideal phenomena, complex mechanisms, characteristics / parameters, which indicates the fact that the Digital Photography terminological system is mainly applied. The study has revealed that the most frequent types of system relations between notions and their verbalizers-the corresponding English-language Digital Photography terms are: AKO (system relations between hyperonym and hyponym), ISA (system relations of coincidence or inclusion in a set), SR (system relations between referents which make up the subject of influence and the result obtained within the same process), which also indicate the predominantly applied nature of the Digital Photography terminological system
The analysis of the semantics and semantic oppositions of terminological units is one of the most productive ways to understand the systemic nature of terminological phenomena. The article is devoted to the study of semantic features of English- and Russian-language musical terminological units, namely, to the identification of the semantic structure of terms and semantic oppositions that arise between them. Within the semantic structure of musical terms, in the aggregate of their connections and relationships that form the musical terminological system, the core, semantic periphery and additional semantic area are distinguished and classified according to the presence of these components into uninuclear proper, uninuclear with the periphery and uninuclear with the periphery and additional semantic area. At the first stage, a selection of musical terms in modern English and Russian has been compiled, at the second stage, the semantic structure of terminological units has been analyzed, and at the third stage, the key aspects of nomination have been identified, according to which explicit and implicit oppositions are being formed. The material for the study comprises a selection of the English- and Russian-language musical terminological units with the total volume of 1000 units (500 units of each language), selected by the method of continuous selection from electronic and printed sources, including dictionaries and glossaries, musical notations, monographs, textbooks and manuals, web portals on music topics. The research methods of the English- and Russian-language musical terminological units include the method of continuous selection, methods of component and definition analysis, the method of linguacognitive modelling, as well as techniques of quantitative analysis. Within the framework of the study, three groups of musical terms have been identified depending on their semantic structure: the first group includes uninuclear terminological units with the semantic periphery, the second group includes uninuclear terms proper, and the third group is formed by uninuclear terms with the periphery and additional area of semantics. The first group is predominant in terms of quantity, the number of terms in which is almost 2.5 times more than in the second one, and the third group is represented by a small number of terminological units. There are at least 6 frequent and 12 less frequent key aspects of nomination within the musical terminology. The frequent key aspects of nomination with the help of which explicit oppositions are formed are: «Minor / major», «Volume / pitch», «Direction», «Location (locus)», «Singularity / Multiplicity», «Quantity». Less frequent aspects of nomination are: «Weakness / strength», «Perfection / imperfection», «Colour», «Presence / absence of sound», «Structure», «Quantity / Completeness / Size», «Genre of music», «Material», «Recommendations for performing a piece of music», «Role», «Style of playing an instrument», «Type of musical instrument».
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
Contact Info
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Product
Resources
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.
