С. Д. Шелов. Термин. Терминологичность. Терминологические определения

C. JĮ, Vienna. Tepmuh. TEPMHHOJIOTHAHOCTb. YOU'RE OUT OF THE WORLD! Gunonornueckuit paxynsrer Caukr-IleTepOyprekoro rocy1apcTBEHHOTO YHUBCPCUTETA Cankr-IletepOypr, 2003, 280 c. Sergei Selov, a member of the Russian Research Committee on Scientific Terminology, is recently and well known to terminology specialists. With renewed strength, Russian terminology is also drawing on scientific experience from abroad, without undermining the principles of the creators of its terminology foundations. Such ideas can be seen in S. Shelov’s latest monograph Term. Thermal. Definitions of terms. As stated in the introduction of the book, this philological study is a new version of the monograph published in 1998, which has been substantially revised and supplemented by two chapters. In this work the author presents a new approach to term and terminology. New answers are given to important questions: what is a term, the definition of a term, what are the types and requirements of term definitions, the conceptual structure of terms recorded in definitions. All terminologists would agree with S. Shelov’s opinion that terms are the most interesting and quite extensive part of the vocabulary of modern languages. Linguistic problems of the term, its history are presented by such researchers as A. Khayutin, V. Danilenko, V. Leichik, V. Nikiforov, A. Superanskaya and others. Theoretical questions are inevitably related to terminology management and standardization (D. Lottė, I. Volkova). There are works in which the term as a unit of science theory is studied from a scientific or philosophical point of view (E. Mamchuras, E. Mulchenko, V. Nalimovas). The logical direction is taken by P. Achinsteinas, V. Karpovičius. The definition of the term "fermion" varies widely in the literature. However, the basic requirements for terms, as special words and word combinations, are established in the terminology of many countries and are named: accuracy of the conceptual semantics of the term, unambiguity of the term, stylistic neutrality and avoidance of expression, nominativity (nominalism), systemicity of the term. Some of the most important requirements of terms in Lithuanian terminology theory are correctness (Gaivenis 2002: 36), unambiguity (Keinys 1980: 28). In linguistic literature, there is extensive discussion of the term systemicity. A large number of researchers recognize it as the term mark'Sergei Shelov. Deadline. Thermal. Definitions of terms, St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University, Faculty of Philology, 2003, 280 p. 160 (A. Khayutin, B. Gorodecky and V. Raskin and others). But, according to S. Shelov, it is difficult to call the specific manifestations of systematicity reliably established. A quite categorical conclusion is drawn regarding the first four characteristics of the term (uniformity, accuracy, absence of sensuality and expressiveness, nominativeness) — they cannot be called such as by which terms are characterized as special words and distinguished from the lexicon of the general language (p. 22). Systematics is already emphasized as the most important characteristic of a term, forming a word or a combination of words precisely as a term. More categorical thoughts are expressed by B. Gorodetsky and V. Raskin: the term, taken separately, is fiction. It exists only in the system of terms. Other authors emphasize the functional systematism (R. Budagovas), according to thirds, it is a set of terms, in which the terms are related to each other in conceptual, lexical-semantic, word formation and grammar terms, having connections with a certain field of science, problem, topic, school, etc. (F. Berezinas, B. Golovinas- ). S. Shelov emphasizes first of all the connection of the term with the concept and the accuracy of its conceptual semantics. The main feature of the term, according to S. Shelov, is the ability to express the concept. The fundamental question is how to distinguish a special concept from a non-special one. The words earth, ceiling, father also express a concept, and how will they differ from terms? According to the author, this difference is shown by a definition that meets the requirements of logic and linguistics. The latter are discussed by S. Shelov in a separate (IV) chapter. Based on various opinions, S. Shelov presents a twofold approach to the meaning of the word — lexicological and terminological. In the second case, the meaning of the term is its concept. According to the linguistic requirements of the terms, the author distinguishes two closely related characteristics. This is the unambiguity of the term and its semantic, conceptual strictness or accuracy. The accuracy and inaccuracy of the disclosed category. The question of accuracy goes beyond the problem of terminology. In mathematics, accuracy is mandatory, because there can be no "almost triangle" and similar designations. Lotte often discusses the phenomenon of the inaccuracy of terms — the situation when a term is wrongly oriented to one or another object. The author of the monograph gives accurate examples of the accuracy and inaccuracy of semantic content of terms: child, teenager, young man, middle-aged person, elderly person, aged person; short height, medium height, tall height. There is no common opinion on the possible or impossible moment of sensuality of the term. S. Šelovas presents A. Reformatski’s opinion that it is necessary to distinguish non-term field terms (e.g., in artistic style texts), i.e. terms that have undergone a transfer of meaning or stylistic connotation. 161 There are also differences in the definition of the term. G. Vinokuras and A. Reformatskis recognize only noun terms, while V. Danilenko tends to include not only adjectives but also adverbs and verbs in the terminology. S. Šelovas agrees that the term may not necessarily be a noun. The author does not delve into this topic in more detail, he chooses only noun terms or terms whose main focus is a noun for the analyzed material. Chapter I —Definitions of terms: types and meaning. It is not for nothing that S. Shelov quotes the words of R. Descartes: "Apibréz the meanings of words and you will free the world from half the errors". The presence of a definition for some researchers is a necessary sign of recognition of the term. In 1972, J. Kruopas wrote in his article More attention to terminology: “Now we have the task of moving from the inventory of terms to the creation of terminology systems, to the definitions of terms, by preparing extensive, systematic, explanatory dictionaries of terms” (Kruopas 1998: 528). The study of the content of the term, fixed by the definition, becomes the most important in the study of all fundamental questions of terminology theory — the semantics of the term, the structure of the term concepts, the term system, the motivation of the terms, etc. (p. 32). The definition is not the only way to record the meaning of a special lexical unit. Interpretation of the meaning is possible and descriptive, characteristics, comparison, etc. by way of. However, the advantage of the definition is compliance with the requirements of logic and linguistics. S. Šelovas fully agrees with the view that the set of characteristics of an object recorded in the explanatory dictionary of terms is sufficient to distinguish it from other objects, and other characteristics are already encyclopedic knowledge about that object. The task of definition is not to confirm and not to describe, but only to determine, define the object and distinguish it from others (p. 33). Next, the author takes up the typology of terms definitions. Introduction to definition function, structure, classification of definitions. In addition to logical problems, definitions also have linguistic characteristics (morphology, syntax, construction, semantics), as well as the necessary lexicographic technique. The book of S. Shelov is oriented to that nomenclature of definitions that is in logic. 1. Classification definitions (ponoBHIOBbIE HJIH KJIaCHOKIOKHpYPONIHE OTIpeenenus, p. 37). The definition distinguishes between the relative concept and its specific characteristic, which allows to limit the corresponding rising concept and declare the meaning of the term defined by it. Definitions of this type, the history of which begins with Plato and Aristotle, can be found in all explanatory dictionaries of terms. Classification definitions are divided into 1 partitive (not specifying the level of classification of the relative concept) and total (forming a concept from species or partityviniy representatives according to one or another feature). 162 2. Enumerative definitions (niepeduciauTenbHbIe Oripezejienua, p. 45). The name itself says that in this case the conceptual content of the term is fixed by listing the elements that represent it. For example, the main parts of a sentence are the “subject and predicate”. 3, The contextual definitions are of a completely different nature (kxoHTeKCTyanbLHBIe oripejejeHHa, p. 51). They are described as a precise list of all contexts that indicate the meaning of the term to be defined, e.g. : Stylistics studies the linguistic forms described by grammar and lexicography. The boundaries of such a definition text — the beginning and the end — are very defined: the longer the context required for the identity of the conceptual content of the unit to be defined, the greater the terminology of this unit must be revealed. This is why the exact boundaries and length of the contextual definition are so important. Non-axiomatic contextual definitions can be found, according to S. Shelov, in dictionaries of the quote type, e.g. Jluneeucmuueckuū cnosapv Ilpanacckot wmxonot (Prague School Dictionary of Linguistics, 1964), E. Hamp Crnosape amepuranckoti iuneeucmuueckoti mepmunonozuu (American Dictionary of Linguistic Terms, 1964) and others. Operational definitions (onepanvoHanbHbie onpeaencHus, p. 62). This type of definition differs from the previous ones in that it implements some non-verbal procedures. Operational definitions are always associated with a certain imperative directed to the person who perceives the text of the definition in order to create, to form an object — do this, observe this! It reflects operational activity, so such definitions are typical of the physical and mathematical sciences, for example, acid-base indicator —“an organic compound that changes color in a certain pH range” (ChŽ 1997), 5. Monomorphic and polymorphic definitions (MoKoMopObunbie H nojimMopObHbIe onpejejienus, p. 67). This is a summary subsection where all types of definitions are divided into two groups. The feature of monomorphic definitions is the strictly specified content of the term to be defined, without intermediate transitions, without characteristic features, gradation of quality and relationship. This type of definition does not recognise objects that denote "almost, more or less", for example: a single sentence — "a single sentence with one main part" (KTŽ 1990). Polymorphic definitions, on the other hand, allow for a more free interpretation of the semantics of the concept, e.g.: association — "connections of consciousness processes, when the rise of one image, concept, idea or emotion causes other similar, parallel and contrasting images, concepts, etc." (PT 1993). The regular type of polymorphism is expressed by the phrases "and so on", "and so forth" — such definitions can be easily interpreted. They are not sufficiently precise, and therefore, like synonymy and ambiguity, are not recommended in normative terminology. However, the role of the phenomenon of polymorphism is not always negative (p. 85), such terms cannot be excluded from the composition of terminology. Chapter II —Definitions of terms and conceptual structure of terminology: analysis of the classification hierarchy of concepts. New classes of definitions are introduced, namely general definitions (p. 128), which have no species characteristic and the entire | definition text consists of a relative fragment, and non-specific definitions, which do not record the species difference, the closest to the concept to be defined (p. 131). And only then the final classification of terms definitions (6 types) is presented. Chapter III —Definition and Motivation of Terms. As early as the 1930s, Lotte wrote that the meaning of the term, fixed in its definition, must be aligned with the linguistic structure of the term. V. Danilenko emphasizes the importance of examining the linguistic structure of the term and its definition as a whole, paying attention to their grammatical, verbal and other harmony. In this thesis, we have tried to justify the relationship between the structure of the term and the expression that defines it, as well as to clarify under what conditions such a relationship is only optional and under what conditions it is necessary. Chapter IV —Logic and Linguistics of the Definition of Terms. The degree of thermality. In 163 this chapter the author analyzes the feasibility of logical and linguistic requirements in terminology. The main focus is on those dictionaries in which these requirements should be met first of all – the normative dictionaries. Seven logical requirements for the definition of a term are listed: 1) the necessary proportionality of the definition (copa3MepHOCTL) — uniformity of the scope of the defining and defining; 2) the necessity of using per genus proximum et differenciam specificam in the definition; 3) the necessary specificity of the species difference; 4) a vicious circle (circulus vitiosus) is not allowed in the definition system; 5) the inadmissibility of logically contradictory definitions; (6) the necessary clarity and precision of definitions; 7. prohibited negative definitions. Of all the rules, the most common is the sixth requirement—the clarity and accuracy of the whole system. The following truths of old terminology are recalled: 1) the requirement of unambiguity of all lexical units used in the definition; 2) linguistic systematicity, i.e. parts of meaning must be expressed in uniform linguistic constructions. In his closing remarks, S. Shelov also looks to the future: it is expected that in the future the relationships of terminology will expand not only with traditional research directions, but also with the latest directions of language studies — with hermeneutics, cognitive linguistics, computational linguistics, etc. 164 Appendix to the book — characteristics of the definitions of terms and analysis of the hierarchy of classification concepts. This includes the list of terms, the term and its definition formulation, the formulation of the relative fragment, the type of definition, as well as an important part — notes on the procedure of analysis and the inaccuracies of the definition system. S. Šelovas is a representative of the semiotic terminology direction. As can be seen from the list of literature (in which the majority, eighteen, positions are occupied by the professor’s articles), S. Shelov himself has written a lot about the definitions of terms in the logical and linguistic sense. So far, we have relied on the works of T. Kandelaki, D. Lotte, A. Superanskaya and other famous Russian scientists, but now we will be able to learn from Professor S. Selov’s terminology guide. The relevance of the definition of terms in Lithuanian terminology is an old, but little realized thing. LITTERACY ChZ 1997: Explanatory Dictionary of Chemistry Terms, Vilnius. Gaivenis K. 2002: Lithuanian Terminology: Theory and Structure, Vilnius. Keinys St. 1980: Terminology alphabet, Vilnius. Kruopas J. 1998: Selected Writings, Vilnius. KTŽ 1990: Gaivenis K., Keinys St. Kalbotyros terminų žodynas, Kaunas. PT 1993: Pedagogikos terminai, Kaunas. Solvita LABANAUSKIENĖ Received 2005-11-02 Lithuanian Language Institute P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius E-mail solvital @one.lt 165