Corpus-Based Analysis of the Slovak Term Naratív as an Example of Determinologisation

Terminologija / Terminology 2025, vol. 32, pp. 1–24 Contents link / Turinio nuoroda ISSN 2669-2198 (online / elektroninis) Copyright © 2025 Jana Levická. Published by the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. // Išleido Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Šis straipsnis yra atviros prieigos, platinamas pagal „Creative Commons‚ priskyrimo licencijos sąlygas, leidžiančias neribotai naudoti, platinti ir atkurti turinį bet kokioje laikmenoje, nurodant autorių ir šaltinį. Received: / Gauta: 2025-09-22. Accepted: / Priimta: 2025-10-29. 1 CORPUS-BASED ANALYSIS OF THE SLOVAK TERM NARATÍV AS AN EXAMPLE OF DETERMINOLOGISATION Slovakiško termino naratív tekstyninė analizė: determinologizacijos pavyzdys JANA LEVICKÁ Ľ. Štúr Institute of Linguistics, Slovak Academy of Sciences E-mail: [email protected] ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6027-604X Fields of research: terminology, corpus linguistics, history of terminology. https://doi.org/10.35321/term32-04 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ABSTRACT This study aims to analyse the use of the Slovak term naratív ‚narrative‛ both in specialised and journalistic texts included in corpus databases, with the aim of identifying linguistic indicators of its potential determinologisation. The first part of the paper deals with a frequency analysis of the term, while the second one compares its collocations with adjectives in specialised and journalistic texts. Specifically, attention is paid to the number and semantic content of the term’s collocating adjectives, especially to anomalous ones. The author argues that this methodology can reveal differences in usage of the term between specialised and general communication. Furthermore, corpus data demonstrate that, in certain cases, the term can be replaced without altering the meaning of the statement. KEYWORDS: determinologisation, collocation, corpus, adjective, association measure. ANOTACIJA Šio tyrimo tikslas – išanalizuoti slovakiško termino naratív („naratyvas‚) vartojimą specializuotuose ir žurnalistiniuose tekstuose, įtrauktuose į tekstyno duomenų bazes, siekiant nustatyti jo potencialios determinologizacijos lingvistinius rodiklius. Pirmoje straipsnio dalyje nagrinėjamas termino vartojimo dažnis, o antrojoje lyginamos jo kolokacijos su būdvardžiais specializuotuose ir žurnalistiniuose tekstuose. Ypatingas dėmesys skiriamas šių kolokacijų skaičiui ir semantiniam turiniui, ypač anomalijoms. Autorė teigia, kad tokia metodika gali atskleisti termino vartojimo specializuotoje ir bendrojoje komunikacijoje skirtumus. Be to, tekstyno duomenys rodo, kad kai kuriais atvejais terminą galima pakeisti nepakeičiant teiginio prasmės. ESMINIAI ŽODŽIAI: determinologizacija, kolokacija, tekstynas, būdvardis, asociacijos matas. 2 Although determinologisation is not an unknown phenomenon in terminology or linguistics, it is a relatively marginal topic of research 1 . It is generally characterised as a process whereby a specific terminological unit, originally functioning in a narrowly specialised communication sphere, enters everyday language. It is one of the manifestations of the dynamic relationship between terminology and general vocabulary. This study aims to analyse the use of the Slovak term naratív ‚narrative‛, which appears frequently in the media. We will focus on its occurrence in both specialised and journalistic texts included in corpus databases, with the aim of identifying linguistic indicators of its possible determinologisation. DEFINITION OF DETERMINOLOGISATION 2 In Slovak linguistics, the concept of determinologisation was probably first mentioned by Ján Horecký in his 1956 Základy slovenskej terminológie [The Fundamentals of Slovak Terminology], albeit in the form of a verb in quotation marks: ‚It is not uncommon for even such highly ‘technical’ terms to enter common usage and thus become ‘determinologised’‛ (1956: 36). In the collective work Dynamika slovnej zásoby súčasnej slovenčiny [DVCS, Dynamics of the Vocabulary of the Contemporary Slovak], this term was defined as ‚the process by which a term that was originally narrowly specialised, with a precisely defined meaning and place in a certain system of concepts, is selected from the system of concepts, enters into widespread use and thus loses its definitional and systemic unambiguity‛ (DVCS 1989: 260). Julie Humbert-Droz et al. emphasise the multidimensional nature of this linguistic phenomenon, using the term not only to refer to the process itself, but also to its result (2019: 2). Běla Poštolková (1980: 56) points out that determinologisation occurs gradually and under the influence of frequent use of a given terminological unit and, in some cases, its popularity also plays a role. The user perspective of the determinologisation process is highlighted by Ingrid Meyer and Kristen Mackintosh (2000: 112), according to whom determinologisation occurs when a term begins to ‚capture the interest of the general public‛. This emphasis on users is evident in several French definitions: Louis Guilbert (1975: 82, cited in Humbert-Droz 2021: 10) states that when a term passes from one 1 Exceptions include Běla Poštolková’s 1984 monograph Odborná a běžná slovní zásoba současné češtiny [Specialised and Common Vocabulary of Contemporary Czech]. One of the most cited studies is the work by Ingrid Meyer and Kristen Mackintosh, ‚When terms move into our everyday lives” (2000), but we should also mention the recent Czech work by Zuzana Honová (2020), Le terme dans sa variabilité [The term in its variability], and the French dissertation by Julie Humbert-Droz (2021): Définir la déterminologisation: approche outillée en corpus comparable dans le domaine de la physique des particules [Defining determinologisation: a tool-based approach in comparable corpus in the field of particle physics], in which this phenomenon is linked, among other things, to the issues of knowledge transfer, lexicography and neologism. 2 In anglophone linguistics, the variant term de-terminologisation can be found; in French linguistics, other (quasi)synonymous terms denoting this phenomenon are used: banalisation, dédomanialisation, vulgarisation, déspecialisation/dé-specialisation. 3 terminology or specific vocabulary to another, it acquires a new meaning that is not solely determined by its relationship to the new referent, but also by the new professional environment of the speakers (1973: 23, cited in Humbert-Droz 2021: 10). Robert Galisson (1978: 9) further argues that this process is more or less conscious and aims to facilitate communication between experts and laypeople. However, only a few authors mention the consequences of determinologisation at the conceptual level – determinologisation causes a term to lose its place (Poštolková 1980: 55), thereby also losing its relationships within the partial terminology system (Mikelionienė, Berkmanienė 2018: 238). Poštolková specifies that a terminological unit consequently acquires features typical of common words. By this she means the so-called flexibility (probably combinability) in particular, and the unit becomes involved in relationships common in non-specialised vocabulary (1980: 55). Naturally, the semantic aspect features most prominently in definitions of determinologisation. The extent of modifications of the original terminological meaning is perceived in various ways: as a loss of specialised meaning (Masár 1991: 150), the disappearance of specific semantic features (DVCS 1989: 266), a loss of semantic certainty (Buzássyová 1983: 135), a loss of precision of meaning (Poštolková 1980: 55), the acquisition of new connotations (Nová 2018: 387), ‚stretching‛ or even ‚dilution‛ of meaning (Meyer, Mackintosh 2020: 115), or the emergence of an entirely different meaning of the original term (Nová 2018: 387). As Klára Buzássyová summarises, the meaning of a term ‚becomes less specific, more general, it weakens or shifts‛ (1983: 135). The semantic content of the original term thus changes and in some cases may result in the emergence of a new meaning. Both processes occur simultaneously. An extreme case is the complete loss of ‚specialised features‛, whereby the given lexical form only fulfils an expressive function and its figurative meaning is created in non-specialised contexts (Mikelionienė, Berkmanienė 2018: 239). Linguistic practice shows that the terminological and non-terminological meanings often function in parallel – one in the original technical communication sphere and the other in general language (Poštolková 1980; Buzássyová 1983). Poštolková refers to this as inter-system homonymy (Poštolková 1980: 56). Finally, when a term moves from a specialised field into the media, ‚sometimes even to the colloquial communication, it acquires expressiveness and more diverse combinability in texts‛ (Buzássyová 1983: 135). Several authors distinguish between two types of determinologisation: 1. in the broad sense (Poštolková 1984: 106) or sensu lato (Holubová 2001: 158), which refers to popular terms that often appear in the media and thus enter the language of laypeople, who use them in a similar way to experts, with the only difference being the degree of their understanding of the original concepts (Meyer, Mackintosh 2000: 114): 2. in a narrower sense (Poštolková 1984: 106) or sensu stricto (Holubová 2001: 159): the result of this type is the creation of a separate meaning for the terminological unit 4 (Meyer, Mackintosh 2000: 115). The lexical form no longer refers to the original concept and, in rare cases, it may even become part of a phraseologism. From the overview of the theoretical issues on determinologisation, we can derive two tasks for our corpus analysis: 1. given that determinologisation results in a term being used by most of the language community, increasing its frequency in everyday communication, we will check the frequency of naratív in journalistic texts; 2. given that a determinologised term tends to increase its combinatory potential, we will compare its combinability in specialised and journalistic texts. Specifically, we will examine a) the number and b) the nature of collocating adjectives. When analysing these, we will focus on their semantic content and connotation, as well as anomalous collocates (see part 3). However, we are fully aware of the fact that the process of determinologisation has fuzzy boundaries and is one of the linguistic phenomena characterised by scalability. This is enhanced by the transition of terminological units into everyday communication, and by the uncertainty of lay people when using more conceptually vague terms. This results in their further ‚conceptual instability‛. The media also play a role here. While they enable the dissemination of scientific results and the penetration of terms into everyday language, they also contribute to the emptying of their semantic content and the construction of new meanings in everyday communication (Humbert-Droz 2021: 27). This is precisely the case of the term narrative, which is considered ambiguous in literary studies, as we will outline in the next section. NARRATIVE 3 The term narrative has its origins in the structuralist literary theory of storytelling, i.e. narratology, which developed from the mid-1960s. In his text “Boundaries of Narrative”, the prominent French structuralist, Gérard Genette states that narrative is a translation of the French term récit, meaning ‚story‛ and defines it as ‚representation of a real or fictitious event or series of events by language, and more specifically by written language‛ (Genette 1976: 1). Furthermore, the term narrative has undergone considerable development within its discipline and it is now understood much more broadly as ‚a mental image or cognitive construct that can be activated by various types of signs‛ (Ryan 2003; 2014). Until around the 1990s, the term narrative belonged almost exclusively to the terminology of literary studies, but this changed radically at the end of the 20th century with the so-called ‚narrative turn‛ in the humanities. Moreover, this method, originally focused 3 More detailed information on the origins, history and transformations of narratological research can be found in The Living Handbook of Narratology (2014), or J. Dvorský’s 2017 publication Od naratívnej gramatiky k interdisciplinarite naratívu [From Narrative Grammar to Narrative Interdisciplinarity] or in the 2025 online Hyperlexikon literárnovedných pojmov [HLT, Hyperlexicon of Literary Terms]. 5 on literary studies, has gradually penetrated into other sciences and become significantly interdisciplinary (HLT 2025). This suggests that narrative is not an easy term to define for two reasons: 1. according to Svatava Machová’s typology (1995: 144), it can be perceived as a pseudoprescriptive term, i.e. one whose conceptual boundaries are determined by the perception or opinion of a specific author, school or group. Machová points out that, when processing this type of term (which includes most of terminologies in the humanities), a terminographer can never be certain of the conceptual meaning of a given term in a specialised text. In the context of literary studies, this is confirmed by several literary scholars who emphasize that narratological terms were conceptually ambiguous as early as the structuralist period (Dvorský 2017: 14); 2. as a result of the so-called narrative turn, narratological research has gradually acquired an intermedia, transmedia and even multidisciplinary character. Over the last two decades, narrativity has also been studied in disciplines that can be classified as (predominantly) non-verbal, such as pantomime, film, or music. In these disciplines, the focus has shifted from the original constitutive elements of narrative (characters, narrator, perspective, time and space) to the plot as the fundamental feature of narrativity (Dvorský 2017: 104). While we will not discuss different perceptions of narrative in these disciplines in detail, it is important to note that narrative – in political science and political marketing – can merge with story, shifting the interpretative perspective significantly towards the author. As Alžbeta Hanuliaková (2021: 31) states, ‚the role of narratives is to influence society's perception and, ultimately, its understanding of reality by telling convincing stories‛. It seems that the issue of the interpretation of narrated events or stories and their impact on the recipient might play a significant role in journalistic texts. ANALYTICAL PART Generally, determinologisation can be observed with loanwords (DVCS 1989: 266– 267). The first reason for this is that they have a less clear meaning for the general public; the second reason is their more frequent use in newer scientific fields. According to research by Václava Holubová (2001: 156), terms that were determinologised in Czech belonged to the fields that came to the forefront of general interest after 1989, such as economics, political science, technology and natural sciences. However, this is not the case for the term naratív 4 , since its original discipline – literary studies – has never been widely discussed in everyday communication. On the contrary, we would rather place the term on the periphery of general vocabulary. Nevertheless, we believe that its interdisciplinarity and widely applied narratological methods, particularly in history and political science, have stimulated its more general and frequent use leading to its penetration into journalistic communication. The 4 Hereinafter we will use the Slovak equivalent. 6 increasing frequency of its use in the last decade is also indicated by the fact that, whereas the authors of the Slovník cudzích slov [Dictionary of the Loanwords, 2005] did not include it in their dictionary, it features in the third volume of the Slovník súčasného slovenského jazyka M – N [Dictionary of the Contemporary Slovak Language M–N, 2015] with the label odb. ‚specialised‛. The criterion for including a term in this dictionary is ‚primarily the prevalence of the term beyond the boundaries of the field, as evidenced, among other things, by its occurrence in various types of texts‛ (Jarošová et al. 2006: 14). According to Patrick Hanks, dictionary entries provide a vague, impressionistic representation of the meaning of a word and rather indicate its meaning potential (Hanks 2013: 88). He argues that the analysis of corpus evidence does not provide direct evidence of the meaning of a given unit, only indirect clues about patterns of its use. We intend to apply Hanks’ theory of lexical norm, i.e. the prototypical use of a lexical unit by the great majority of users, which is also reflected in its statistical significance, and its creative use in speech, known as exploitation (Hanks 2013: 211). When examining the collocations of the analysed term with adjectives, we will attempt to identify any evidence of creativity, e. g. any deliberate anomalies, shifts or departures from the collocation norm (Hanks 2013: 147), which can occur for various reasons, such as linguistic economy or to name an unusual phenomenon or situation, or for communicative effect. Description of corpus databases Our analysis will be based on the prim corpus of the Slovak National Corpus (SNK) 5 , version 11.0-public-all, which contains over 1.859 billion tokens. This allows us to search specifically in journalistic and specialised data separately, either within the specialised subcorpora (prim-11.0-public-prf and prim-11.0-public-inf), or by filtering the search query to relevant texts. A significant advantage, not only for our corpus linguistic analysis, is that the year of publication of each text included in the selected corpus is recorded. Naratív in specialised texts When searching for word forms of the term naratív in the specialist subcorpus prim10.0-public-prf (217 million tokens), two facts must be considered: 1. the possibility of a certain percentage of incorrect lemmatisation 6 , since naratív is a loanword of Latin origin adopted into Slovak. For this reason, we decided to first search for the string naratív.* and then use the negative filter function to exclude irrelevant lemmas from the search results, as well as typos. The search results show an absolute frequency of 2140 occurrences (9.85 ipm, ARF: 263.08) 7 ; 5 More information can be found at https://korpus.sk. 6 Lemmatisation is the result of manual or automated assignment of the basic form (lemma) to word forms in texts included in the corpus database. 7 The number 9.85 in brackets represents the relative frequency of naratív that expresses the average number of occurrences of the unit in a hypothetical text/corpus with the size of 1 million words and enables compari- 7 2. the existence of the term naratívum from the field of didactics, applied psychology and applied linguistics, quasi-synonym of naratív. However, we did not exclude it from the filtered concordances because we found out, thanks to manual verification, that the lemmatisation had resulted in a ‚crossing‛ of the naratív and naratívum paradigms. When assessing and analysing individual concordances, we only considered those with correct forms of the lemma naratív. In total, naratív appeared in 241 texts across almost twenty subdomains of the SNK corpus 8 . It was most common in literary science and criticism, followed by history, film, pedagogy and other fields. We would like to point out that the SNK prim corpus also includes articles from popular science and special interest magazines. From the perspective of our analysis, these represent a certain bias. In terms of time, the naratív first appeared in prim-10.0-juls-prf in 1996. In the texts of this subcorpus, its occurrence rate between 2013 and 2023 varies from 0.15 to 1,87 ipm. Finally, it should be emphasised that this subcorpus does not consist of quantitatively, qualitatively or temporally representative data; therefore, these statistics cannot be considered an accurate reflection of the real-world use of naratív in specialised language. Naratív in journalistic texts When searching for word forms of the term naratív in the journalistic subcorpus prim-11.0-public-inf (1.265 billion tokens), we took both factors into account, as in the previous subcorpus. The search yielded an absolute frequency of 1519 (1.20 per million, ARF 9 : 217.01). In this subcorpus, naratív appears in 20 different sources, primarily in data from the SME newspaper. However, this subcorpus is biased due to the inclusion of the magazine. Týždeň comprising not only journalistic, but also popular science texts. Let us focus on the SME newspaper data now – naratív occurs there 1018 times, most frequently in opinion pieces. This term first appeared in this source in 2001 and has been present ever since, with its relative frequency score (ipm) reaching 0.01 in 2014. Its ipm was 0.04 in 2018, 0.07 in 2019, 0.10 in 2020, 0.12 in 2021 and as much as 0.27 in 2022. In 2023, however, it reached only 0.10 since the subcorpus comprises the SME data from just the first five months of the year. son across corpora of different sizes (https://korpus.cz). The ARF score (average reduced frequency) is ‚a modified frequency which prevents the result to be excessively influenced by one part of the corpus (e.g. one or more documents) which contains a high concentration of the unit‛ (https://www.sketchengine.eu/glossary/arf/). 8 More information on style-genre annotation can be found in Debnár, Kmeťová (2017). 9 We would like to point out that the ARF score is skewed in this case, as it is distorted by the way SME documents are processed in this subcorpus. 8 Conclusion of the frequency analysis Based on the statistical data from the prim-11.0-public-prf and prim-11.0-public-inf and, in particular, from the SME newspaper, it can be concluded that the frequency of naratív has been on the rise over the last decade in written communication as such, and particularly in journalistic texts. The first prerequisite of determinologisation can therefore be considered fulfilled. COMPARISON OF CO-OCCURRING ADJECTIVES In accordance with the concept of the Slovník slovných spojení. Podstatné mená [Dictionary of Collocations. Nouns, 2017], we sought to identify the unique collocation potential of naratív, i.e. the number of unique words – in this phase adjectives – with which it can be combined, as well as its compatibility, i.e. the class of words with which it can be meaningfully combined (Ďurčo, Majchráková et al. 2017: 9). Unlike this specific lexicographical work, however, we recorded not only the most frequent and typical adjectives, but also the entire range of its combinability – from those adjectives with which naratív creates (potential) multi-word terms or usual collocations, to hapaxes, i.e. often only chance co-occurrences. We were particularly interested in so-called non-canonical collocations, i.e. those that are anomalous in some way in terms of their content (Hanks 2013: 219). However, Hanks (2013: 117) points out that deviation from the combinatorial norm is relatively low, at around 10%. At the same time, when analysing this type of data, a certain percentage of difficult-to-classify data occur. We have grouped these in the last and lexically varied group called miscellanea. Co-occurring adjectives Adjectives combining with naratív were queried using the Collocations function of the NoSketch corpus manager within a range of up to nine positions to the left. This wide collocation range was necessary due to the occurrence of naratív with multiple-modifier strings, particularly in specialised texts, e. g. dichotomous and schematic totalitarian-historical narrative or fragmented, mosaic-like, intertwined narrative. Based on the search results, it can be concluded that, despite differing absolute frequencies of naratív in both subcorpora, a comparable number of its collocating adjectives were found in them. In the specialist subcorpus (PRF), a total of 340 unique adjectival lemmas associated with the term were identified, while in the journalistic subcorpus (INF), a total of 305 unique adjectival lemmas were identified (only 11% more than in the PRF set). Division of co-occurring adjectives into lexico-semantic groups Due to the large number of adjectives identified and their semantic diversity, we grouped them based on their meaning resulting from the occurrence with naratív and 9 broader context 10 . In several cases, it was possible to classify adjectives into more than one group, e. g. modernizačný ‚modernising‛ could feature in both the content and intention group. Conversely, dramatický ‚dramatic‛ can be found in two groups because it occurred in the INF in its first as well as figurative meaning ‚turbulent‛ but is counted only once. For clarity, we have ordered the co-occurring adjectives alphabetically and underlined those found in both subcorpora. Finally, we highlight possessive adjectives coined from proper names in author group in bold, as they represent an open set and are not included in the total number of collocating adjectives. All hapaxes from both subcorpora are included in the appendix. Table 1. Lexico-semantic groups of identified adjectives from both subcorpora with statistical data concerning their size, number of hapaxes and the extent of the shared adjectives Number of lemmas in the PRF Number of lemmas in the v INF Number of hapaxes in the PRF Number of hapaxes in the INF Number of shared adjectives 1. form 29 5 12 3 4 2. content 43 24 29 22 11 3. evaluation 49 64 24 36 17 4. author 17 + 13 14 + 17 10 8 4 5. ethnicity/politics/geography 29 46 19 21 15 6. history/ideology 34 46 23 35 12 7. intention 25 48 19 37 11 8. time 13 13 7 7 6 9. arts/genre/style 60 19 37 12 10 10. miscellanea 41 27 28 17 12 1. adjectives relating to the form of naratív and its organisation SPECIALISED TEXTS (total of 29 adjectives): dlhý ‚long‛, jednotný ‚uniform‛, koherentný ‚coherent‛, komplexný ‚complex‛, mediálny ‚media‛, obrazovo-textový ‚image-text‛, obrazový ‚visual‛, obrázkovo-textový ‚pictorial-text‛, obrázkový ‚pictorial‛, orálny ‚oral‛, rozsiahly ‚extensive‛, súvislý 10 For example, we have classified the adjective kolaboračný ‚collaborative‛ into arts group rather than intention group based on its meaning and occurrence in the field of digital games. 16 score, which tends to overestimate low-frequency pairs that may be mere chance cooccurrences. Two out of five shared adjectives have a comparable logDice score (nacionalistický ‚nationalistic‛ and dezinformačný ‚disinfomation‛), whereas the remaining three – konšpiračný ‚conspiratorial‛, prokremeľský ‚pro-Kremlin‛ and dominantný ‚dominant‛ differ by around two points. When comparing two logDice scores, a two-point difference indicates that the collocation with the higher score is approximately four times more frequent and, at the same time, statistically stronger (Rychlý 2008), e.g. adjective prokremeľský is statistically stronger and occurs four times more frequently with naratív in the INF than in the PRF. The adjectives in the table from the PRF fall into seven out of ten established lexicosemantic groups, whereas the adjectives from the INF represent only four of these groups, particularly the intention group (eight of them) and the ethnicity group (six of them). The polarity feature is present in the table 2 as well: there is one adjective with a positive prefix in the PRF part and four adjectives with negative polarity (two with a negative prefix and two with a negative connotation). In contrast, there are two adjectives with a positive prefix in the INF part and eleven adjectives with a negative polarity, representing more than half of the INF adjectives in the table (four adjectives with a negative prefix and seven with a negative connotation). CONCLUSION The overlap of adjectives from the two subcorpora represents 102 lemmas in total (30% from the specialised subcorpus’s perspective and 33.4% from the journalistic subcorpus’s perspective). The remaining 66.6% of identified adjectives in journalistic texts can, in our view, be considered an extension of the semantic compatibility of naratív, thus answering our second research question. It is also worth mentioning that it is the evaluation and intention groups that have the lowest share of adjectives, and, at the same time, that differ the most in polarity and colouring. Our semantic analysis identified only a few non-canonical adjectives; these adjectives happened to be nonce words. Conversely, the analysis helped to emphasize two semantic features in adjectives from the INF that are underrepresented in the PRF – expressed polarity and colloquial and pejorative colouring, which Buzássyová perceives as one of the symptoms of determinologisation (1983: 135). As previously mentioned, the conceptual content and contours of the term narratív are often described as vague by literary scholars themselves. In specific contexts, its precise equivalence is often problematic. In some cases, however, the author of the text indicates its synonym in parentheses (e.g. ‚individual interpretations of the past‛). In certain journalistic texts, this term can be substituted without altering the meaning of the statement – for example with the word príbeh ‚story‛, or presvedčenie, predstava “belief, idea‛. It could be argued that, in this kind of contexts, the original term loses its connection to its original, specific meaning and becomes a part of a specific synonymic series. 17 In conclusion, quantitative as well as qualitative analyses showed that the Slovak term naratív is determinologised in a broad sense, as it often appears in the media and in the language of laypeople, who use it with a different degree of understanding to experts. However, this argument must be supported by the analysis of two other key co-occurring parts of speech: nouns and verbs. REFERENCES Buzássyová Klára 1983: Dynamika v odbornej terminológii [Dynamics in the Specialised Terminology]. – Jazykovedný časopis 34, 132–144. Available at: https://www.juls.savba.sk/ediela/jc/1983/2/JC_1983_2_LQ.pdf. Debnár Marek, Kmeťová Beáta 2017: Bibliografická a štýlovo-žánrová anotácia dokumentov a textov v Slovenskom národnom korpuse [Bibliographic and Style-Genre Annotation of Documents and Texts in the Slovak National Corpus]. – Slovenský národný korpus. Texty, anotácie, vyhľadávania, Bratislava: Mikula, 33–159. Ďurčo Peter, Majchráková Daniela et al. 2017: Slovník slovných spojení. Podstatné mená [Dictionary of Collocations. Nouns], Bratislava: VEDA. Dvorský Juraj 2017: Od naratívnej gramatiky k interdisciplinarite naratívu [From Narrative Grammar to Narrative Interdisciplinarity], Ružomberok: Verbum. Gablasová Dana, Brezina Vaclav, McEnery Tony 2017: Collocations in Corpus-Based Language Learning Research: Identifying, Comparing, and Interpreting the Evidence. – Currents in Language Learning Series: Experimental, Computational, and Corpus‐Based Approaches to Language Learning: Evidence and Interpretation 67, 155– 179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12225. Galisson Robert 1978: Recherches de lexicologie descriptive, la banalisation lexicale: le vocabulaire du football dans la presse sportive, contribution aux recherches sur les langues techniques [Recherches de Lexicologie Descriptive, la Banalisation Lexicale: le Vocabulaire du Football dans la Presse Sportive, Contribution aux Recherches sur les Langues Techniques], Paris: F. Nathan. Génette Gérard 1976: Boundaries of Narrative. – New Literary History 8.1, 1–13. Glossary. Sketch Engine. Available at: https://www.sketchengine.eu/guide/glossary/. Hanks Patrick 2013: Lexical Analysis: Norms and Exploitations, London/Cambridge: The MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262018579.001.0001. Hanuliaková Alžbeta 2021: Stratégie politickej reklamy [Strategies of the Political Advertising], Trnava: Univerzita sv. Cyrila a Metoda v Trnave. Hyperlexikon literárnovedných pojmov [Hyperlexicon of Literary Terms], ed. R. Mikuláš, Bratislava: Ústav svetovej literatúry SAV, v. v. i. Available at: https://hyperlexikon.sav.sk/ Holubová Václava 2001: K pojetí determinologizace [On the Concept of Determinologisation]. – Termina 2000, ed. M. Žemlička, Praha and Liberec: Galén a Technická univerzita v Liberci, 157–160. 18 Honová Zuzana 2020: Le terme dans sa variabilité [The Term in its Variability], Ostrava: Ostravská universita. Horecký Ján 1956: Základy slovenskej terminológie [The Fundamentals of Slovak Terminology], Bratislava: Vydavateľstvo SAV. Available at: https://www.juls.savba.sk/ediela/zaklady_slovenskej_terminologie/zaklady_slovenskej _terminologie.pdf. Horecký Ján, Buzássyová Klára, Bosák Ján et al. 1989: Dynamika slovnej zásoby súčasnej slovenčiny [Dynamics of the Vocabulary of the Contemporary Slovak], Bratislava: Veda. Humbert-Droz Julie 2021: Définir la déterminologisation: approche outillée en corpus comparable dans le domaine de la physique des particules [Defining Determinologisation: a Tooled Approach in Comparable Corpus in the Field of Particle Physics]: PhD Dissertation, University of Toulouse – Jean Jaurès & University of Geneva. Humbert-Droz Julie, Picton Aurélie, Condamines Anne 2019: How to Build a Corpus for a Tool-Based Approach to Determinologisation in the Field of Particle Physics. – Research in Corpus Linguistics 7, 1–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32714/ricl.07.01. Jarošová Alexandra, Buzássyová Klára, Bosák Ján 2006: Východiská a zásady spracovania slovníka [Starting Points and Principles of Dictionary Processing]. – Slovník súčasného slovenského jazyka A–G, Bratislava: Veda, 13–47. Machová Svatava 1995: Terminografie [Terminography]. – Manuál lexikografie, ed. F. Čermák, R. Blatná, Praha: H&H, 13–47. Masár Ivan 1991: Príručka slovenskej terminológie [Handbook of Slovak Terminology], Bratislava: Veda. Meyer Ingrid, Mackintosh Kristen 2000: When Terms Move Into Our Everyday Lives: An Overview of De-terminologization. – Terminology 6, 111–138. Mikelionienė Jurgita, Berkmanienė Aušra 2018: Determinologisation of Lithuanian and English Technical Terms: The Case of Apparatus. – Readings in Numanities. Numanities – Arts and Humanities in Progress, eds. O. Andreica, A. Olteanu, 235–246. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66914-4_15. Nová Jana 2018: Terms Embraced by the General Public: How to Cope with Determinologization in the Dictionary? – Proceedings of the XVIII EURALEX International Congress: Lexicography in Global Contexts, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 387–398. Poštolková Běla 1977: K vlivu odborné terminologie na národní jazyk [On the Influence of Terminology on the National Language]. – Slovo a slovesnost 38, 112–120. Available at: http://sas.ujc.cas.cz/archiv.php?art=2439. Poštolková Běla 1980: K specifičnosti významu termínů [On the Specificity of the Meaning of terms]. – Slovo a slovesnost 41, 54–57. Available at: http://sas.ujc.cas.cz/archiv.php?art=2652. Poštolková Běla 1984: Odborná a běžná slovní zásoba současné češtiny [Specialised and Common Vocabulary of Contemporary Czech], Praha: Academia. 19 Přehled základních pojmů korpusové lingvistiky [Overview of Basic Concepts of Corpus Linguistics]. Available at: https://wiki.korpus.cz/doku.php/pojmy:prehled_pojmu. Ryan Marie-Laure 2003: On Defining Narrative Media. – Image and Narrative 6. Available at: https://www.imageandnarrative.be/inarchive/mediumtheory/marielaureryan.htm. Ryan Marie-Laure 2014: Narration in Various Media. – The Living Handbook of Narratology. Available at: https://www-archiv.fdm.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/node/53.html. Rychlý Pavel 2008: A Lexicographer-Friendly Association Score. – Proceedings of Recent Advances in Slavonic Natural Language Processing (RASLAN 2008), eds. P. Sojka, A. Horák, Brno: Masaryk University, 6–9. Available at: https://www.sketchengine.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/LexicographerFriendly_2008.pdf. Slovenský národný korpus [Slovak National Corpus] – prim-11.0-public-prf. Bratislava: Jazykovedný ústav Ľ. Štúra SAV 2025. Available at: https://korpus.sk. Slovenský národný korpus [Slovak National Corpus] – prim-11.0-public-inf. Bratislava: Jazykovedný ústav Ľ. Štúra SAV 2025. Available at: https://korpus.sk. Slovníkový portál Jazykovedného ústavu Ľ. Štúra SAV [Lexicographic Portal of the Ľ. Štúr Institute of Linguistics], Slovak Academy of Sciences. Available at: https://slovnik.juls.savba.sk/. The Living Handbook of Narratology 2014, eds. P. Hühn, J. Christoph Meister, J. Pier, W. Schmidt. Available at: https://www-archiv.fdm.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/index.html. Appendix Lexico-semantic groups of hapax adjectives 1. adjectives relating to the form of naratív and its organisation SPECIALISED TEXTS (12 adjective hapaxes in total) digitálny ‚digital‛, dichotomický ‚dichotomic‛, fragmentarizovaný ‚fragmented‛, implicitný ‚implicit‛, prepletený ‚intertwined‛, mozaikovitý ‚mosaic‛, písomný ‚written‛, rytmický ‚rhythmic‛, schematický ‚schematic‛, ústny ‚oral‛, virtuálny ‚virtual‛, vizuálnoverbálny ‚virtual-verbal‛ JOURNALISTIC TEXTS (3 adjective hapaxes in total) implicitný ‚implicit‛, schematický ‚schematic‛, úsporný ‚efficient‛ 2. adjectives relating to the content of naratív and its organisation SPECIALISED TEXTS (adjective hapaxes in total) antagonistický ‚antagonistic‛, cyklický ‚cyclical‛, eschatologický ‚eschatological‛, exponovaný ‚exposed‛, faktuálny ‚factual‛, faustovský ‚Faustian‛, femslashový ‚femslash‛, homogénny ‚homogeneous‛, ironický ‚ironic‛, komický ‚comic‛, konzistentný ‚consistent‛, kozmologicko-kozmogonický ‚cosmological-cosmogonic‛, kritický ‚critical‛, 20 magický ‚magic‛, minimalistický ‚minimalist‛, nefikčný ‚non-fiction‛, objektívny ‚objective‛, protichodný ‚contradictory‛, protirečivý ‚inconsistent‛, rozvinutý ‚advanced‛, samostatný ‚autonomous‛, sebareflexívny ‚introspective‛, spomienkový ‚commemorative‛, symbolický ‚symbolic‛, široký ‚wide‛, špecifický ‚specific‛, tragický ‚tragic‛, umelý ‚artificial‛, životný ‚life‛ JOURNALISTIC TEXTS (22 adjective hapaxes in total) analytický ‚analytic‛, antagonistický ‚antagonist‛, antideveloperský ‚anti-property developer‛, autonómny ‚autonomous‛, fiktívny ‚fictitious‛, homogénny ‚homogenous‛, jasný ‚clear‛, jednostranný ‚one-sided‛, katastrofický ‚catastrophic‛, komický ‚comic‛, modernizačný ‚modernising‛, mytologický ‚mythologic‛, nelogický ‚illogical‛, nespokojnostný ‚full of dissatisfaction‛, objavný ‚original‛, ostrý ‚significant, critical‛, prísny ‚consistent‛, protichodný ‚contradictory‛, sporný ‚debatable‛, široký ‚wide‛, špecifický ‚specific‛, tragický ‚tragic‛ 3. adjectives relating to the evaluation of naratív SPECIALISED TEXTS (24 adjective hapaxes in total) čudesný ‚strange‛, fádny ‚bland‛, charakteristický ‚caracteristic‛, kánonický ‚canonical‛, kodifikovaný ‚codified‛, kontroverzný ‚controversial‛, konvenčný ‚conventional‛, kvalitný ‚quality‛, negatívny ‚negative‛, nevýrazný ‚dull‛, normálny ‚normal‛, pochybný ‚dubious‛, pokrytecký ‚hypocritical‛, prijateľný ‚acceptable‛, prostý ‚plain‛, pútavý ‚engaging‛, rezonujúci ‚resonant‛, ukážkový ‚exemplary‛, učebnicový ‚textbook‛, ústredný ‚central‛, väčšinový ‚majority‛, výbušný ‚explosive‛, vydarený ‚delightful‛, zmysluplný ‚meaningful‛ JOURNALISTIC TEXTS (36 adjective hapaxes in total) agresívny ‚aggressive‛, bežný ‚common‛, bláznivý ‚foolish‛, hlboký ‚intense‛, chytľavý ‚catchy‛, iracionálny ‚irrational‛, jedovato-lživý ‚poisonously deceitful‛, kľúčový ‚key‛, mocný ‚mighty‛, módny ‚fashionable‛, mylný ‚erroneous‛, nebezpečný ‚dangerous‛, negatívny ‚negative‛, nekompatibilný ‚incompatible‛, nepekný ‚ugly‛, nevhodný ‚unsuitable‛, nevkusný ‚vulgar‛, nezmyselný ‚pointless‛, nudný ‚boring‛, plytký ‚flat‛, poklesnutý ‚damaged‛, povrchný ‚superficial‛, prirodzený ‚natural‛, referenčný ‚referential‛, scestný ‚misguided‛, správny ‚correct‛, stereotypný ‚stereotypical‛, škaredý ‚nasty‛, štandardný ‚standard‛, trollský ‚troll‛, tvrdý ‚hard‛, vhodný ‚suitable‛, vyšinutý ‚batshit‛, zákerný ‚wicked‛, zaujímavý ‚interesting‛, zúfalý ‚bloody‛ 4. adjectives relating to the author(s) of naratív SPECIALISED TEXTS (6 adjective + 7 possesive adjectives hapaxes in total) Andrejevov “Andrejev’s”, Dziakov “Dziak’s”, Grochov “Groch’s”, Hurbanov “Hurban’s”, Jarošov “Jaroš’s”, kolektívny ‚collective‛, ľudský ‚human‛, masarykovský 21 ‚Masaryk-like‛, mužský ‚masculine‛, neosobný ‚impersonal‛, Otčenášov “Otčenáš’s”, Robbe-Grilletov “Robbe-Grillet’s”, ženský ‚female‛ JOURNALISTIC TEXTS (8 adjective + 12 possesive adjectives hapaxes in total) Aničkin “Anička’s”, antisorosovský ‚anti-Soros-like‛, Babišov “Babiš’s”, Hegerov “Heger’s”, Hobbesov “Hobbes’s”, Kiskov “Kiska’s”, Kotlebov “Kotleba’s”, kolektívny ‚collective‛, Miklošov “Mikloš’s”, Pelleho “Pelle’s”, plickovskomartinčekovský ‚Plicka-Martinček-like‛, protikiskovský ‚anti-Kiska-like‛, putinovský ‚Putin-like‛, Salviniho “Salvini’s”, spoločný ‚common‛, Stalinov “Stalin’s”, Sulíkov “Sulík’s”, trumpistický ‚Trump-like‛, Zaľudného “Zaľudný’s” 5. adjectives relating to the etnicity, nationality or geographical entity SPECIALISED TEXTS (19 adjective hapaxes in total) antiizraelský ‚anti-Israeli‛, balkánsky ‚Balkan‛, etnický ‚ethnic‛, etnocentristický ‚ethnocentric‛, francúzsky ‚French‛, geopolitický ‚geopolitical‛, gréckocentrický ‚Greekcentric‛, lokálny ‚local‛, multietnický ‚multiethnic‛, nacionálny ‚national‛, patriotický ‚patriotic‛, politický ‚political‛, židovský ‚Jewish‛, proukrajinský ‚pro-Ukrainian‛, proruský ‚pro-Russian‛, protizápadný ‚anti-Western‛, pseudo-balkanistický ‚pseudoBalkanist‛, osmanský ‚Ottoman‛, slovensko-nemecký ‚Slovak-German‛ JOURNALISTIC TEXTS (21 adjective hapaxes in total) balkánsky ‚Balkan‛, geopolitický ‚geopolitical‛, juhoslovanský ‚Yougoslav‛, lokálny ‚local‛, národno-štátny ‚national state‛, patriotický ‚patriotic‛, proafrický ‚pro-African‛, proeurópsky ‚pro-European‛, promoskovský ‚pro-Muscovite‛, protibruselský ‚antiBrussels‛, protikremeľský ‚anti-Kremlin‛, protirómsky ‚anti-Roma‛, sovietsko-ruský ‚Soviet-Russian‛, stredoeurópsky ‚Central European‛, štátotvorný ‚state-forming‛, teheránsky ‚Tehrani‛, ukrajinský ‚Ukrainian‛, ultrapopulisticko-protizápadný ‚ultrapopulist-anti-Western‛, visegrádsky ‚Visegrád‛, vlastenecký ‚patriotic‛, západný ‚western‛ 6. adjectives relating to the historical period or event or to religious, political and ideological beliefs SPECIALISED TEXTS (23 adjective hapaxes in total) buddhistický ‚Buddhist‛, buržoázno-nacionalistický ‚bourgeois-nationalistic‛, dejepisný ‚historiographic‛, dejinotvorný ‚history forming‛, historicko-reflexívny ‚historical reflexive‛, ideologický ‚ideological‛, katolícky ‚Catholic‛, komunistický ‚Communist‛, kresťanský ‚Christian‛, ľavicový ‚leftist‛, ľudácko-autonomistický ‚HSĽSlike-autonomist‛, marxisticko-leninský ‚Marxist-Leninist‛, medzivojnový ‚inter-war‛, neoliberálny ‚neoliberal‛, normalizačný ‚normalising‛, osvietenský ‚enlightened‛, prostalinský ‚pro-Stalin‛, socialistický ‚socialist‛, stalinistický ‚Stalinist‛, stredoveký 22 ‚medieval‛, svetodejinný ‚world-shaking‛, trianonský ‚Trianon‛, veľkomoravský ‚Great Moravian‛ JOURNALISTIC TEXTS (35 adjective hapaxes in total) antiliberálny ‚antiliberal‛, antiúniový ‚anti-EU‛, cirkevnohistorický ‚churchhistory‛, cirkevný ‚Church‛, covidový ‚covid‛, dejinný ‚historical‛, džihádistický ‚jihadist‛, fašistický ‚Fascist‛, globalizačný ‚globalising‛, hegemonický ‚hegemonic‛, konzervatívny ‚conservative‛, kresťansko-konzervtívny ‚Christian-conservative‛, kultúrno-politický ‚cultural-political‛, ľudácky ‚HSĽS-like‛, ľavicový ‚leftist‛, nacistický ‚Nazi‛, národovecký ‚patriotic‛, neliberálny ‚illiberal‛, neoliberálny ‚neoliberal‛, osvietenský ‚enlightened‛, pokrokársky ‚progressive‛, pomanchesterský ‚post-Manchester‛, ponovembrový ‚post-November‛, povstalecký ‚rebel‛, protiepidemický ‚antiepidemic‛, provládny ‚pro-governmental‛, protisystémový ‚antisystemic‛, protiutečenecký ‚antiimmigration‛, republikánsky ‚Republican‛, režimový ‚regime‛, sekulárno-konzumný ‚secular consumer‛, sexistický ‚sexist‛, socialisticko-oslavný ‚socialist celebratory‛, stalinistický ‚Stalinist‛, stranícky ‚party‛, stredoveký ‚medieval‛ 7. adjectives relating to the intention of the naratív SPECIALISED TEXTS (19 adjective hapaxes in total) funkčný ‚functional‛, konkurujúci ‚competing‛, manipulatívny ‚manipulative‛, morálny ‚moral‛, mytologizačný ‚mythologizing‛, obetný ‚sacrificial‛, oslavný ‚celebratory‛, pragmatický ‚pragmatic‛, propagandistický ‚propagandistic‛, psychologizujúci ‚psychologizing‛, subverzívny ‚subersive‛, traumatický ‚traumatic‛, vplyvný ‚influential‛, univerzálny ‚universal‛, verejný ‚public‛, zástupný ‚substitutive‛, zavádzajúci ‚misleading‛, zjednocujúci ‚unifying‛, zrkadlový ‚mirror‛ JOURNALISTIC TEXTS (37 adjective hapaxes in total) bezpečnostný ‚security‛, dehumanizačný ‚dehumanizing‛, dodávajúci ‚giving‛, ekonomický ‚economic‛, funkčný ‚functional‛, interný ‚internal‛, korupčný ‚corrupt‛, kremeľsko-dezinformačný ‚Kremlin-disinformation‛, militaristický ‚militaristic‛, mobilizačný ‚mobilizing‛, mocenský ‚power-based‛, moralistický ‚moralistic‛, morálny ‚moral‛, moralizátorský ‚moralizing‛, mýtotvorný ‚myth-forming‛, nepripúšťajúci ‚not allowing‛, oslovujúci ‚appealing‛, podporný ‚supportive‛, podvratný ‚subversive‛, polarizačný ‚polarizing‛, polarizujúci ‚polarising‛, polyfunkčný ‚polyfunctional‛, popieračský ‚promoting the denial of the responsibility‛, porovnávací ‚comparative‛, predavačský ‚helping to sell the EU concept by emphasizing its benefits‛, pro-choice ‚prochoice‛, protestný ‚protest‛, reklamný ‚advertising‛, simplifikujúci ‚simplifying‛, spásonosný ‚saving‛, univerzálny ‚universal‛, takzvaný ‚so-called‛, triumfalistický ‚triumphalist‛, strategický ‚strategic‛, účinný ‚effective‛, vítačský ‚supporting the arrival of migrants to the EU in 2015‛, vzdorovitý ‚defiant‛ 23 8. adjectives relating to time or temporal phenomena SPECIALISED TEXTS (7 adjective hapaxes in total) budúci ‚future‛, dnešný ‚present-day‛, dobový ‚period‛, neskorý ‚late‛, novovznikajúci ‚newly emerging‛, súbežný ‚parallel‛, vznikajúci ‚emerging‛ JOURNALISTIC TEXTS (7 adjective hapaxes in total) aktuálny ‚current‛, denný ‚daily‛, dlhodobý ‚log-term‛, dnešný ‚present-day‛, dvestoročný ‚bicentennial‛, počiatočný ‚initial‛, živý ‚live‛ 9. adjectives relating to art and humanities, artistic forms, media, anthropological characteristics SPECIALISED TEXTS (37 adjective hapaxes in total) apologetický ‚apologetic‛, autobiografický ‚autobiographic‛, autopsívny ‚autopsy‛, bájkový ‚fable‛, beletristický ‚fictional‛, biblický ‚biblical‛, cestopisný ‚travelogue‛, denníkový ‚diary‛, deskriptívny ‚descriptive‛, detektívny ‚detective‛, diegetický ‚diegetic‛, dramaturgický ‚dramaturgic‛, epizodický ‚episodic‛, experimentálny ‚experimental‛, filozofický ‚philosophic‛, heroistický ‚hereoistic‛, herný ‚gaming‛, inscenovaný ‚staged‛, kolaboračný ‚collaborative‛, konverzný ‚conversion‛, lyrický ‚lyric‛, metadiegetický ‚metadiegetic‛, neo-romantický ‚neo-romantic‛, palimpsestový ‚palimpsest‛, pastorálny ‚pastoral‛, paternalistický ‚paternalistic‛, populárno-náučný ‚popular science‛, postmoderný ‚postmodern‛, pseudovedecký ‚pseudo-scientific‛, románový ‚novelistic‛, romantizujúci ‚romanticizing‛, satirický ‚satiric‛, seriálový ‚serial‛, spravodajský ‚news‛, subžánrový ‚subgenre‛, ťahací ‚pullling‛, teleologický ‚teleological‛ JOURNALISTIC TEXTS (12 adjective hapaxes in total) biografický ‚biographic‛, folklórny ‚folkloric‛, heroický ‚heroic‛, hudobný ‚musical‛, literárnohistorický ‚literary historical‛, ľudový ‚folk‛, mýtický ‚mythical‛, prírodopisný ‚natural history‛, rituálny ‚ritual‛, rozprávkový ‚fairy-tale‛, spoločenskovedecký ‚socio-scientific‛, vedecký ‚scientific‛ 10. adjectives relating to miscellanea semantic features SPECIALISED TEXTS (27 adjective hapaxes in total) analyzovaný ‚analysed‛, jediný ‚single‛, jednotný ‚unified‛, príbuzný ‚related‛, celý ‚whole‛, diferencovaný ‚differentiated‛, odlišný ‚different‛, ostatný ‚other‛, určitý ‚certain‛, úvodný ‚introductory‛, rozličný ‚various‛, rozmanitý ‚diverse‛, hotový ‚ready‛, výsledný ‚resulting‛, existujúci ‚existing‛, pravdepodobný ‚probable‛, príslušný ‚relevant‛, tradovaný ‚handed down‛, vytvorený ‚created‛, zmienený ‚mentioned‛, zodpovedajúci ‚corresponding‛, kultúrnospoločenský ‚cultural-social‛, mnohý ‚numerous‛, pretrvávajúci ‚persisent‛, závislý ‚dependent‛, pamäťový ‚memory‛, aktualizujúci ‚updating‛, 24 JOURNALISTIC TEXTS (16 adjective hapaxes in total) celkový ‚overall‛, existujúci ‚existing‛, hotový ‚ready‛, možný ‚possible‛, nevyhnutný ‚inevitable‛, odlišný ‚different‛, okrídlený ‚well-known‛, posledný ‚last‛, predchádzajúci ‚previous‛, priamočiary ‚straightforward‛, prvý ‚first‛, sebaistý ‚self‛, sprievodný ‚accompanying‛, výstupný ‚outgoing‛, zemitý ‚persisent‛, zvyškový ‚residual‛