CC BY
11сравнительно-историческое,
типологическое и сопоставительное языкознание
comparative-historical,
TYPOLOGICAL AND
comparative linguistics
DOI: 10.12731/2077-1770-2017-2-95-110 УДК 81' 374
CONTRASTIVE-COMPARATIVE ELECTRONIC DICTIONARY OF FIRE SCIENCE TERMINOLOGY
OF BOTH RUSSIA AND THE USA: STATE OF THE ART AND FUTURE PROSPECTS
Sofronova T.M.
Purpose. The article is devoted to the topical theme of lexicographic modeling of bilingual terminological dictionaries. The subject of study is the model of contrastive representation of the Russian and English forest fire science terminological system. The author aims to reveal the current state for the concept of a contrastive-comparative electronic dictionary of the Russian and US fire science terminology contributing to terminological coordination and harmonization and highlighting prospects for its development.
Methodology. The basis of the research is the definitional, conceptual and contrastive-comparative analysis and method of lexicographic modeling.
Results. The results of the study are that the author demonstrates the algorithm of effective semantization of scientific terms in the dictionary and transfer of the accumulated scientific experience with the preser-
vation of national terminological peculiarities. As a stepping stone for such dictionary creation the author suggests using her prototype of the contrastive-comparative bilingual electronic glossary of the Russian and USfire science terminology. In prospect this project should attract experience in terminology management of large international lexicographic projects through cooperation with the Russian and US terminology experts and improve the software for potential involvement of fire science terminologies from other countries to this project.
Practical implications. The results of the study can be applied in lexicographic workfor making specialized explanatory and translation dictionaries.
Keywords: lexicographic modeling; terminology; fire science; con-trastive-comparative analysis.
СОПОСТАВИТЕЛЬНО-КОНТРАСТИВНЫЙ ЭЛЕКТРОННЫЙ СЛОВАРЬ ПИРОЛОГИЧЕСКОЙ ТЕРМИНОЛОГИИ РОССИИ И США: СОВРЕМЕННОЕ СОСТОЯНИЕ И ПЕРСПЕКТИВЫ РАЗВИТИЯ
Софронова Т.М.
Цель. Статья посвящена актуальной теме лексикографического моделирования двуязычных терминологических словарей. Предметом исследования является модель контрастивного представления тер-миносистемы лесной пирологии в русском и английском языках. Автор ставит целью раскрыть современное состояние концепции со-поставительно-контрастивного электронного словаря пирологиче-ской терминологии России и США, способствующего упорядочению и гармонизации терминов, и представить перспективы ее развития.
Метод или методология проведения работы. Основу исследования образуют дефиниционный анализ, логико-понятийный анализ, сопоставительно-контрастивный анализ и метод лекси-кографирования.
Результаты. Результаты работы заключаются в том, что автор демонстрирует алгоритм эффективной семантизации научных
терминов в словаре и передачи накопленного научного опыта с сохранением национальных особенностей терминологии. В качестве задела для создания подобного словаря автор предлагает использовать разработанный им прототип сопоставительно-контрастивного двуязычного электронного глоссария пирологической терминологии России и США. В перспективе для реализации предлагаемого проекта необходимо привлечение опыта управления крупными словарными проектами на международном уровне через сотрудничество с ведущими специалистами в области терминологии России и США, а также усовершенствование программного обеспечения для потенциальной возможности привлечения пирологических терминологий других стран к проекту.
Область применения результатов. Результаты исследования могут быть применены в лексикографической практике при составлении отраслевых толковых и переводных словарей.
Ключевые слова: лексикографическое моделирование; терминология; пирология; сопоставительно-контрастивный анализ.
Introduction
It is known that the issues of lexicographical modeling of bilingual and multilingual terminological dictionaries occupy a special place in the wide range of terminographic works [20]. Different aspects of lexicographical modeling are disclosed in the works by the following scientists: VP. Berkov [3], L.V. Szczerba [30], A.S. Gerd [11], S.V. Grinyov [14], Yu.N. Marchuk [21], V.V. Dubichinskiy [6], V.D. Tabanakova [31], I S. Kudashev [16], I.A. Sternin [29], H. Bergenholtz [2], M. Brekke [5], R.R.K. Hartmann [15], S.E. Wright, G. Budin [33], L. Zgusta [34], and others. However, none of these studies individually, or their combination can claim to be a complete and universal scheme of stages of work on a dictionary. In each case, project development should take into account special features of a terminology, requirements of potential users, and working conditions.
The theory and practice of modern terminography attaches a great importance to contrastive descriptions ofthe meanings of words from differ-
ent semantic categories and different languages [see: 29]. Among recent works in this direction is A.M. Bobunov's contrastive dictionary of Russian and English language folk songs [4]. Such dictionaries are valuable for contrastive presenting of non-terminological words, since creation of a contrastive dictionary of scientific terminology requires systematic analysis of interlingual terms and scientific concepts behind them both at the level of comparable subsystems (comparison), and at the level of parallel pairs of terms (contrasting). This dictionary should be focused not only on the linguistic, but also on the extralinguistic information, on how scientists perceive the world through the prism of scientific concepts.
Of paramount importance is lexicographic description of young terminologies, which have developed their distinctive features in different countries and scientific schools and have never been subjected to linguistic research. Among them is fire science terminology (FST). Having originated from the depths of the forest management terminology in the middle of the XX century, it has incorporated a considerable number of terms from various forest science disciplines (forestry, forest inventory, etc.) and other sciences such as ecology, geography, soil science, climatology, meteorology, chemistry, engineering sciences, etc.
Theoretical Framework
When considering the history of the formation of Russian and English FST we distinguish three similar stages in its development [25] and conclude that the modern fire science is at an extraordinary stage of development [17]. The latter implies unwanted terminological confusion as a result of distinctive terminology development in different countries, in different scientific schools, thus preventing mutual understanding of scientists from different scientific schools and countries. Therefore, coordination and harmonization of terms and notions is a long overdue problem in the modern fire science.
When disclosing the degree of order in modern FST, we have found that this terminology is poorly ordered and poorly harmonized [26]. The Russian terminology faces the following issues: (a) absence of fire science dictionaries; (b) low quality of state standards on fire
management terminology (e.g., lack of coordination in the extraction of generic terms, variability in definitions, erroneous definitions). The English terminology is characterized by: (a) absence of formal ideographic dictionaries in Fire Science; (b) national specific features of the English FST in the United States, Canada and Australia. Harmonization of the Russian and English FST is interfered by poor quality of translation dictionaries, which is proved by: a) partial cover of fire science terms in forestry dictionaries [19; 7; 32]; b) presence of artificial translation equivalents [22]; c) presence of several translations of a term without disclosing their distinguishing features and presence of terms with erroneous translations [1]. This situation is due to disparity of the Russian and English terminological fields, which is caused by unique national term formation, variability in understanding of terms by different scientists and scientific schools and misleading terms. Mechanical comparison of terminological systems with unique segmentation of the area of knowledge only increases terminological confusion [see: 10]. In 2006-2007, scientists of the St. Petersburg Research Institute of Forestry in collaboration with Canadian colleagues attempted to harmonize the Russian and English FST, but the results of their work remained unpublished. In 2012, European scientists created an English-language European Wildfire Glossary [8], which is a mixture of different terminologies of European countries and is suitable mainly for practitioners working at the international level. For scientists, every scientific term is associated with a specific terminological system, and scientific concepts do not remain static over time. Therefore, this confusion of terminologies can only hinder the development of the scientific thought.
The analysis of approaches to modeling bilingual terminological dictionaries showed that prototyping is an important stage in modeling of electronic lexicographical products [9, pp. 252-253; similarly, see: 23]. Our functional prototype of fire science glossary [27], which reflects the shape, design and operation principles of the conceptual model is the first stage in the development of the full version of the bilingual dictionary of the Russian and US fire science terminology.
Statement of the Problem
Prior to our research, the terminology of forest fire science had never been involved in the linguistic studies and had never been subjected to systematic comparative and lexicographical analysis. Russia has no special dictionaries in this field of knowledge yet. There are only general reference materials on forestry and forest management covering the FST only partially. The first brief glossary of fire science terms was published by Prof. N.P. Kurbatskiy [18] in the 1972 collection of articles. About three hundred of terms with brief definitions were given there in the thematic and alphabetical order.
The US have official glossaries of fire management terminology, which, however, do not always reflect the modern development of the scientific thought in the field offire science [12; 13]. In 2007, a US electronic fire science glossary FireWords [24] was created. It was aimed at clarifying understanding of 300 fire science terms. Unfortunately, the work on the project was terminated for financial reasons, and about 25% of the terms were not provided with glossary entries, but the results of this work were published on the website: http://www.firewords.net/. During our Fulbright training, the authors of the FireWords kindly provided the accumulated material as a legacy and software for use in the prototype of the bilingual glossary of the Russian and US FST.
The goal that we set before us is development of a comparative-con-trastive dictionary of the Russian and US fire science terminology at the high modern technological level.
Methodology
Creation of any bi- or multilingual lexicographical product involves comparative and contrastive studies. They are based on the general principles of terminology analysis such as the principles of comparability, consistency, sequence of analysis of a linguistic material. Their main difference lies in the level of description of the object of study and the sequence of comparison: comparative analysis is conducted at the level of subsystems, fields, groups, independently with the following comparison, and contrastive analysis is conducted at the level of individual
terminological units in the direction from a unit of one language to its possible correspondences in other languages [29].
Effective semantization of scientific terms in the dictionary and transfer of the accumulated scientific experience with the preservation of national terminological peculiarities is possible through realization of the algorithm, the key elements of which are: a) terminological system modeling through comparable logical-conceptual schemes; b) diachronic analysis of the development of scientific concepts in dictionary entries and synthesis of definitions based on the accumulated scientific expertise; c) translation commentary which takes into account the current scope of the term concept in multilingual terminological systems and offers a contrastive analysis of relative term equivalents or suggests artificial equivalents in case of non-equivalent terminology.
The prototype of the comparative-contrastive bilingual electronic glossary of the Russian and US FST (Fig. 1 and 2) [28] developed according to the algorithm will serve as a stepping stone for the realization of the full version of the Russian and US fire science dictionary. This dictionary will combine the parameters of translation, explanatory, encyclopedic, ideographic and student's dictionaries and should be a means of harmonization of the FST in the Russian and English languages.
Macrostructure Microstructure
theme/ scheme
/ definition on
i
glossary entry -«Terences
hypertext
- ^ translati on/ original \ translator's comments
notes
Fig. 1. Model of the bilingual fire science glossary
Fig. 2. Interface of the bilingual fire science glossary prototype
Thus, the main project objectives include: 1. Obtaining theoretical experience in management of large international terminographic projects through collaboration with leading experts in the field of terminology. 2. Improving the software for the full version of the contrastive-compara-tive bilingual dictionary of the Russian and US fire science terminology on the basis of the elaborated prototype of the bilingual fire science glossary. 3. Preparing relevant project documents for the implementation of the concept of the contrastive-comparative bilingual dictionary of the Russian and US fire science terminology, which could clearly guide efforts of fire scientists and translators/terminologists in Russia and the United States, and could potentially involve other languages and countries to this project. 4. Development of a demo version of a specialized site on the dictionary project with information about the status of work, the latest updates and lexicographic products available for download.
Discussion
The theoretical significance of this study lies in realization of the strategy for comparative-contrastive lexicographic modeling of the dynamically evolving terminology of a relatively young fire science that
is a definite contribution to the theory of bilingual terminography. This strategy of an electronic bilingual dictionary modeling makes it possible to disclose the variability in understanding of terms by different scientists and scientific schools, to correct or logically synthesize definitions, leaving a user the right to their own conclusions in the analysis of the discussion section.
The practical importance of the project lies in the versatility of the lexicographical product being developed that may be addressed to fire scientists, translators/interpreters, and students of forestry departments majoring in forest fire protection. Development of the full bilingual dictionary of systematized and harmonized Russian and US fire science terms and concepts should improve mutual understanding and exchange of information and experience among scientists of both countries, and also should help involve them in the process of systematization of their national terminology and in the discussion of problematic aspects of its harmonization with the terminology of another country. As a result, such an electronic bilingual FST dictionary may become the basis for an international project to develop an electronic multilingual fire science dictionary. Creation of such a dictionary should facilitate (and, possibly, automate, to some extent) translation of scientific works, which remain untranslated or poorly translated.
Conclusion
Since the started work requires international team efforts for its logical completion, the main idea of this article is to attract attention of the global community to the need for a uniting, organizing and conceptual link in promotion of the international project on coordination and harmonization of the Russian and US fire science terminology and for the support of recognized international experts in Terminology Studies and Terminology Management. Our ambition is to obtain experience in terminology management of large international lexicographic projects through cooperation with terminology experts and to improve the software for implementation of the concept of the contrastive-compar-ative electronic dictionary of fire science terminology in Russia and
the US. The proposed dictionary is meant to: 1) combine features of translation, explanatory, encyclopedic, ideographic and student's dictionaries; 2) help to treat each national fire science terminology with care preserving the uniqueness of each system of knowledge; 3) enable comparison of both countries' scientific terminologies for their harmonization (at the level of systems through terminology comparison and at the level of individual terms through terminology contrasting); 4) suggest joint ways of solving translation issues by terminology translators and fire science experts from both countries; 5) reflect dia-chronic development of a scientific notion behind a term and existing approaches to its explanation; 6) be open for updating and editing; 7) provide potential involvement of fire science terminologies from other countries to this project.
References
1. Anglo-russkiy i russko-angliyskiy lesotekhnicheskiy slovar' [English-Russian and Russian-English Dictionary of Forestry]. Comp. D.V. Mozhaev, B.N. Novikov, D.M. Rybakov. Moscow: Rousseau, 1998. 857 p.
2. Bergenholtz H., Tarp S. Manual of Specialized Lexicography. The Preparation of Specialized Dictionaries. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1995. 254 p.
3. Berkov V.P. Dvuyazychnayaleksikografiya [Bilingual lexicography]. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg University Press, 1996. 248 p.
4. Bobunov A.M. Kontrastivnyy slovar' yazyka russkogo i angliyskogope-sennogo fol 'klora kak baza krosskul 'turnogo issledovaniya [Contrastive dictionary of the English language and Russian folk songs as the basis of cross-cultural studies]: Dissertation thesis. Voronezh, 2012. 22 p.
5. Brekke M. LSP Lexicography and Terminography: A Complementary View. Proceedings of The 12th European Symposium on LSP "Language for Special Purposes: Perspectives for the New Millennium". Gunther Narr Verlag, 2001, pp. 179-187.
6. Dubichinskiy V.V. Iskusstvo sozdaniya slovarey. Konspekty po leksik-ografii [Art of dictionaries. Abstracts on lexicography]. Kharkov: KPU, 1994. 102 p.
7. Entsiklopediya lesnogo khozyaystva [Encyclopedia of Forestry. V. 1]. V. 1. Moscow: VNIILM, 2006. 424 p.
8. European Glossary for Wildfires and Forest Fires, October 2012 (1st Edition). http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/literature/EUFOFINET-Fire-Glos-sary.pdf (accessed July 2, 2016).
9. Fähndrich U. Terminology project management. Terminology, no 11(2) (2005): 225-260.
10. FAO / GFMC Wildland Fire Management Terminology, 2003. http://www. fire.uni-freiburg.de/literature/glossary.htm (accessed August 28, 2016).
11. Gerd A.S. Osnovy nauchno-tekhnicheskoy leksikografii: Kak rabotat' nad terminologicheskim slovarem [Fundamentals of scientific and technical lexicography: How to work on the terminology dictionary]. Leningrad: Leningrad University Press, 1986. 73 p.
12. Glossary of wildlandfire management terms used in the United States. Society of American Foresters, 1990. 138 p.
13. Glossary of wildland fire terminology. National Wildfire Coordinating Group Incident Operations Standards Working Team, 2007. 186 p. http:// wwwnwcg.gov (accessed May 1, 2017).
14. Grinyov S.V. Vvedenie v terminografiyu [Introduction to terminography]. Moscow.: LPA, 1995. 161 p.
15. Hartmann R.R.K. Teaching and Researching Lexicography. New York: Longman, 2001. 211 p.
16. Kudashev I.S. Proektirovanie perevodcheskikh slovarey spetsial'noy leksiki [Development of translation dictionaries for specialized vocabulary]. Helsinki: Helsinki University Print, 2007. 443 p.
17. Kuhn T.S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Pr., 1962. 168 p.
18. Kurbatsky N.P. Terminologiya lesnoy pirologii [Terminology of forest fire science]. Voprosy lesnoy pirologii [Forest fire science issues]. Krasnoyarsk: ILiD SB RAS, 1972, pp. 171-231.
19.Lesnoe khozyaystvo: Terminologicheskiy slovar' [Forestry: Terminological dictionary]. Ed. A.N. Filipchuk. Moscow: VNIILM, 2002. 480 p.
20.Lingvisticheskoemodelirovanie [Linguistic modeling]: collective monograph. Tyumen: Vector Book, 2009. 186 p.
21. Marchuk Yu.N. Osnovy terminografii [Fundamentals of terminography]. Moscow: Moscow State University, 1992. 76 p.
22.Mezhdunarodnaya mnogoyazykovaya lesopozharnaya terminologiya: angliyskiy, russkiy, mongol'skiy, nemetskiy [International multilingual fire management terminology (English - Russian - Mongolian - German)]. Center for Global Fire Monitoring. URL: http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/literature/RUS-MON-GER-ENG-Glossary-Web.pdf (accessed May 1, 2017).
23. Papelis Y., Madhavan P. Modeling human behavior. Modeling and simulation fundamentals: theoretical underpinnings andpractical domains / edited by John A. Sokolowski, Catherine M. Banks. USA: John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2010, pp. 271-324.
24. Scott J.H., Reinhardt E.D. FireWords Version 1.0: Fire Science Glossary, 2007 [electronic]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). http://www.firewords.net/ (accessed May 1, 2017).
25. Sofronova T.M. Formirovanie pod"yazyka nauki o pozharakh v aspekte istorii [Formation of fire science sub-language in the aspect of its history]. Materialy VI Mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsiipo sravnitel'no-is-toricheskomu yazykoznaniyu "Yazykovye kontakty v aspekte istorii" [Proceedings of the VI International Scientific Conference on comparative historical linguistics "Language contacts in the aspect of history"]. Moscow: Lomonosov Moscow State University, 2008, pp. 101-102.
26. Sofronova T.M. Garmonizatsiya pirologicheskoy terminologii v russkom i angliyskom yazykakh [Harmonization of fire science terminology in Russian and English languages]. Materialy II Mezhdunarodnogo sim-poziuma "Terminologiya i znanie" [Proceedings of the II International Symposium on "Terminology and knowledge"]. Moscow: Azbukovnik, 2010, pp. 343-351.
27. Sofronova T.M. Model vs prototype in current Russian computer lexicography. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities and Social Sciences, no 9 (2015 8), pp. 1936-1945.
28. Sofronova T.M. Prototip dvuyazychnogo pirologicheskogo glossariya [Prototype of bilingual fire science glossary]: Version 1.0. Krasnoyarsk:
Siberian Federal University, 2012. (CD). State registration number 0321201925. ISBN 978-5-7638-2578-7.
29.Sternin I.A. Kontrastivnye issledovaniya i kontrastivnye slovari [Contrastive studies and contrastive dictionaries]. Voronezh State University, 2007. http://www.twirpx.com/file/511410/ (accessed May 1, 2017).
30. Szczerba L.V. Opyt obshchey teorii leksikografii [Experience in the general theory of lexicography]. Yazykovaya sistema i rechevaya deya-tel'nost' [Language system and speech activity]. Leningrad: Nauka, 1974, pp. 265-304.
31. Tabanakova V.D. Ideograficheskoe opisanie nauchnoy terminologii [Ideographic description of scientific terminology]. Tyumen: Tyumen State University, 1999. 200 p.
32. The Dictionary of Forestry. John A. Helms, editor. Bethesda, MD: The Society of American Foresters, 1998. 210 p.
33. Wright S.E., Budin G. The Handbook of Terminology Management. Am -sterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1997. 370 p.
34. Zgusta L. Manual of Lexicography. Prague: Academia, 1971. 360 p.
Список литературы
1. Англо-русский и русско-английский лесотехнический словарь / Сост. Д.В. Можаев, Б.Н. Новиков, Д.М. Рыбаков. М.: Руссо, 1998. 857 с.
2. Bergenholtz H., Tarp S. Manual of Specialized Lexicography. The Preparation of Specialized Dictionaries. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1995. 254 p.
3. Берков В.П. Двуязычная лексикография. СПб.: Изд-во СПб. ун-та, 1996. 248 с.
4. Бобунов А.М. Контрастивный словарь языка русского и английского песенного фольклора как база кросскультурного исследования: Автореф. дис. ... канд. филол. наук. Курск, 2012. 22 с.
5. Brekke M. LSP Lexicography and Terminography: A Complementary View. Proceedings of The 12th European Symposium on LSP "Language
for Special Purposes: Perspectives for the New Millennium". Gunther Narr Verlag, 2001, pp. 179-187.
6. Дубичинский В.В. Искусство создания словарей. Конспекты по лексикографии. Харьков: ХПУ, 1994. 102 с.
7. Энциклопедия лесного хозяйства. Т. 1. М.: ВНИИЛМ, 2006. 424 с.
8. European Glossary for Wildfires and Forest Fires, October 2012 (1st Edition). URL: http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/literature/EUFOF-INET-Fire-Glossary.pdf (accessed July 2, 2016).
9. Fähndrich U. Terminology project management. Terminology, no 11(2) (2005): 225-260.
10. FAO / GFMC Wildland Fire Management Terminology, 2003. URL: http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/literature/glossary.htm (accessed August 28, 2016).
11. Герд А.С. Основы научно-технической лексикографии: Как работать над терминологическим словарем. Л.: Изд-во Ленингр. ун-та, 1986. 73 с.
12. Glossary of wildland fire management terms used in the United States. Society of American Foresters, 1990. 138 p.
13. Glossary of wildland fire terminology. National Wildfire Coordinating Group Incident Operations Standards Working Team, 2007. 186 p. URL: http://wwwnwcg.gov (accessed May 1, 2017).
14. Гринев С.В. Введение в терминографию. М.: МПУ, 1995. 161 с.
15. Hartmann R.R.K. Teaching and Researching Lexicography. New York: Longman, 2001. 211 p.
16. Кудашев И.С. Проектирование переводческих словарей специальной лексики. Хельсинки: Хельсинки Юниверсити Принт, 2007. 443 c.
17. Kuhn T.S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Pr., 1962. 168 p.
18. Курбатский Н.П. Терминология лесной пирологии // Вопросы лесной пирологии. Красноярск: ИЛиД СО АН СССР, 1972. С. 171-231.
19. Лесное хозяйство: Терминологический словарь / Под ред. А.Н. Фи-липчука. М.: ВНИИЛМ, 2002. 480 с.
20. Лингвистическое моделирование: коллективная монография. Тюмень: Вектор Бук, 2009. 186 с.
21. Марчук Ю.Н. Основы терминографии: метод. пособие. М.: ЦИИ МГУ, 1992. 76 с.
22. Международная многоязыковая лесопожарная терминология: английский, русский, монгольский, немецкий. Центр глобального мониторинга пожаров. URL: http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/Hter-ature/RUS-MON-GER-ENG-Glossary-Web.pdf (дата обращения: 01.05.2017).
23. Papelis Y., Madhavan P. Modeling human behavior. Modeling and simulation fundamentals: theoretical underpinnings and practical domains / edited by John A. Sokolowski, Catherine M. Banks. USA: John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2010, pp. 271-324.
24. Scott J.H., Reinhardt E.D. FireWords Version 1.0: Fire Science Glossary, 2007 [electronic]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). URL: http://www.firewords.net/ (accessed May 1, 2017).
25. Софронова Т.М. Формирование подъязыка науки о пожарах в аспекте истории // Материалы VI Международной научной конференции по сравнительно-историческому языкознанию «Языковые контакты в аспекте истории», 29-31 января 2008 г., Москва. М.: МГУ им. М.В. Ломоносова, 2008. С. 101-102.
26. Софронова Т.М. Гармонизация пирологической терминологии в русском и английском языках // Материалы II Международного симпозиума «Терминология и знание» (Москва, 21-22 мая 2010 г.). М.: Издательский центр «Азбуковник», 2010. С. 343-351.
27. Sofronova T.M. Model vs prototype in current Russian computer lexicography. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities and Social Sciences, no 9 (2015 8), pp. 1936-1945.
28. Софронова Т. М. Прототип двуязычного пирологического глоссария [Электронный ресурс]: глоссарий / Сост. и авт. статей Т. М. Софронова; разраб. Центр обучающих систем ИнТК СФУ. Версия 1.0. Электрон. дан. (8 Мб). Красноярск: СФУ, 2012. .№ гос. регистрации 0321201925. ISBN 978-5-7638-2578-7.
29. Стернин И.А. Контрастивные исследования и юнтрастивные словари. Воронежский государственный университет, 2007. URL: http:// www.twirpx.com/file/511410/ (дата обращения: 01.05.2017).
30. Щерба Л.В. Опыт общей теории лексикографии // Языковая система и речевая деятельность. Л.: Наука, 1974. С. 265-304.
31. Табанакова В.Д. Идеографическое описание научной терминологии. Тюмень: Издательство Тюменского государственного университета, 1999. 200 с.
32. The Dictionary of Forestry. John A. Helms, editor. Bethesda, MD: The Society of American Foresters, 1998. 210 p.
33. Wright S.E., Budin G. The Handbook of Terminology Management. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1997. 370 p.
34. Zgusta L. Manual of Lexicography. Prague: Academia, 1971. 360 p.
ДАННЫЕ ОБ АВТОРЕ Софронова Татьяна Марковна, доцент кафедры английской филологии, кандидат филологических наук Красноярский государственный педагогический университет им В.П. Астафьева
ул. Лебедевой, 89, г. Красноярск, 660049, Российская Федерация [email protected]
DATA ABOUT THE AUTHOR Sofronova Tatiana Markovna, Assistant Professor, Department of English Philology, Ph. D. equivalent in Applied and Mathematical Linguistics
Astafiev Krasnoyarsk State Pedagogical University
89, Lebedeva Str., Krasnoyarsk, 660049, Russian Federation
SPIN-code: 8851-6219
ORCID: 0000-0002-9840-4657
ResearcherID: B-1193-2011
Scopus Author ID: 24438211400
