CC BY
141
19. Newmark L. & Hubbard P. & Prifti P. (1982). Standard Albanian, A Reference Grammar for Students. Stanford, California, CA: Stanford University Press.
20. Likaj E. & £abej M. (2013). Morfologji e shqipes standarde (Ribotim i plotesuar dhe i permiresuar). Tirane: Julvin.
21. Kabashi J. (2000). English Grammar Morphology. Prishtina: University of Prishtina.
22. Quirk R., & Greenbaum S. (1973). A University Grammar of English. (Abridged edition). London: Longoman.
23. Palmer R. (2003). The Good Grammar Guide. London, New York, NY: Routledge.
24. Biber D., Johansson S., Leech G., Conrad S., & Finegan E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20534/EJLL-17-1-14-19
Mammadova Jala Rafig, Azerbaijani University of Language E-mail: [email protected]
Semantic correlation of English and Azerbaijani-ecological terms
Abstract: in the present article some theoretical questions related to the determination of polysemy, Homonymy and synonymy in the system of ecological terminology have been presented. Before analyzing the above mentioned problems it is necessary to put emphasis on different types of relationships of language and environment. Some of the resent trends in language studies have focused on the correlation between the biological processes of the brain and language, as well as the mental processes occurring in mind and their influence on the linguistic system (cognitive linguistics). Lately also the relationship between the peoples' environment and their language arouse interest concerning language and environment expressed by Edward Sapir and are now known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis which states that the language which a person speaks influences the way the word is perceived and interacted with. In this article semantic correlation of ecological terms is investigated on the basis of comparative-typological method the research work deals with the leading semantic component in the semantic structure of a word.
In the next part of the article called "Homonymy" different view-points of the scholars of the world are enumerated and some considerations are made. Homonyms are two or more different words that coincide on spelling, pronunciation and grammatical design. (Forming M. I.1990 m. p. 68) in the last part of the article named "Synonymy" thoughts spoken on the problem of synonymy are illustrated both in English and Azerbaijani languages. Most of the authors have paid more attention to the determination of synonymy can be met. Having investigated the problem of synonymy different classification system for synonyms. As it was established by Academician V. V. Vinogradov there are three types of synonyms: Ideographical, Stylistic and Absolute. But we consider that more effective approach to the classification of synonyms may be based on the definition describing synonyms as words differing in connotations.
Keywords: Monosemy, systemic nature, semantic connection, terminology, concept
1.Introduction
Our goal in this article is to deal in detail with various types of semantic, correlation of English and Azerbaijani ecological terms. This is necessary not only because of the interest the various cases present in themselves, but also because a thorough knowledge of these possibilities helps to understand semantic structure of English and
Azerbaijani ecological terms at the present stage of their development. The scholars are right when they explain that the development and change of the semantic structure of a word is always a source of qualitative and quantitative development of the vocabulary. It is well-known that traditionally. Semantic correlation ofterms described will follow closely the dictionary classification ofM. Breal.
M. Breal was probably the first to emphasize the fact that in passing from general usage into some special sphere of communication a word as a rule undergoes some sort of specialization of its meaning. It becomes clear from the investigation that the founder ofAmerican structuralism. L. Bloomfield in his scientific work, called "Language", notes morphology as a field covering words and parts of words, but he marks syntax as a field forming phrases [4]. Dealing with the general problems of terminological. System professor S. Sadiqova notes dia-chronically and synchronic approaches to the study of terminology. She also mentions context, Its types and its role in determination of different meanings of words at the same time. She suggests the comparative study of different meanings of polysemantic words in different languages. When talking about semantic correlation of ecological terms (English and Azerbaijani) extra linguistic causes of semantic changes should also be investigated. The extra linguistic causes are determined by the social nature of the language: they are observed in changes of meaning resulting from the development of the notion expressed and the thing named and by the appearance of new notions and things. It is clear that all the languages are powerfully affected by social, political economic, cultural change. Structural features of linguistic units: ecological terms can also be influenced by these factors.
2. Method Of investigation
It Should be noted that in the study of the problems on typological linguistics, usage of one method of investigation is not appropriate. It is due to the fact that the thesis put forth in the article is not categorically proved. In this case the investigators move from inhibitory doubts born of surprises disagreements and the like and to reach a secure belief being on that, on which the authors are prepared to act. That is why we the authors of this article like other authors having carried out research works in terminological fields, have chosen the usage of method of tenacity within the Pragmatic model. To follow the systematization of theory and practice the method of dedication used as well.
The article dealing with two languages (English and Azerbaijani) belonging to different systems among the languages of the world, the usage of typological compar-ative-contrastive method of investigation is inevitable, thanks to which a common decision for the broth languages can be made.
3. Consideration of the theory of Semantic correlation of English and Azerbaijani ecological terms
Having studied the history of semasiology we discover that different approaches exist on the determination
of semasiology as a branch of lexicology. Some linguistics preference is given to semiology as the word semantics is often used to designate one of the schools of modern idealistic philosophy and is also found as a synonym of meaning. The name comes from the Greek samsara "Signification" (from seam sing semantics significant and logos "learning") as to M. Qasimov in his book "Bases ofAzerbaijani terminology " [6] semantics as concerned with the meanings of words is the basic of lexicology. There is no need to stress the importance of studying semantics. Its value in linguistics makes itself quite evident. But Aat J.N in his book «Scientific terminology" considers the process by which words change in meaning are varied. There are a number of recognized words in which words change in meaning knowledge of the nature these changes help to master the language. So, having studied the works of foreign and native investigators on the determination of semantic correlation of terms (words) it becomes clear that the meaning of a word implies not only the reflection of reality but the altitude of the speaker towards reality. Semantics is the meaning of words expressions or grammatical forms. Talking about the semantic correlation of ecological terms (English and Azerbaijani) It should be mentioned that meaning is the most important characteristics of the word. It can be more or less described as a component of the word through which a concept is communicated. It is suggested that semasiology has for its subject matter not only the study of lexicon, but also of morphology syntax and sentential semantics
Professor, Quliyeva A.K in her book «Scientific style of joined terminology" [3] considers that meaning is one of the most controversial terms in the theory of language. She suggests that terms in English and Azerbaijani ecological system should be studied from different points of view.
1) Through establishing the interrelation between words and concepts, which they donate the so called referential approach.
2) Through the observation of the functional use of a word in speech the functional approach. It must be noted that the meaning of a word is closely connected. with the concept, but is not identical approach. According L. Bloomfieldy classic formula [4] the word itself is defined as a minimum free form. which may consist of one or more morphemes. It follows that semantic problems will arise not only at the word level, but also below and above it, below at the level of bound morphemes (suffixes, prefixes root) and above it at the level of proses and the higher combinations into which they enter. It is
necessary to mention that most of the distinguished linguists H. Sweet, V. Admony, V. Kodukhov, G. Surov, V. Bulakova, D. S. Lotte. A. V. Superanskaya, S. Sadiqova, L. Qasimov and others have told very valuable thoughts about words, and terminological systems. They mention that the meaning of a word is closely connected with the concept, but is not identical with it. The linguistic science at present is not able to put forward a definition of meaning which is conclusive. Lotter D.S in his book "Background of scientific terminology" [2] especially indicates that the study of meaning in a permanent interest of scholarship. It has been perused in all the languages of the major civilizations and in ancient times, especially in Sanskirit, Greek and Latin there are many other ways of applying the word meaning in English and Azerbaijani. For Example: Bog-bataqliq Chroline-Khlor Flooding-Dashqin Pollution-Chirklanma Marsh-Bataqliq Relief-Relyef Stream-Achin Wave-Dalqa and so on
It should also be mentioned that the terms form a rather complex semantic unity, which is called the semantic structure of the word. There fore the property of words of several meaning is called ambiguity or polysemy. Some linguists meet a lot of difficulties delimit homonymy and polysemy.
Superanskaya A.B writes in her book that homonyms in vocabulary system are two or more different words that coincide in spelling, pronunciation and grammatical design [1]. Many terminologist come to the conclusion that the lexicon of scientific and technical texts belongs to homonymous terms not polysemous.
For Example: tear [tea]-to pull apart by force-par-clanmaq, a drop of water that comes from the eyes-goz ya§i damgisi. Talking about the semantic correlation of ecological terms (English Azerbaijani) V. V. Vinogradov writes in his book "Problems of modern terminology" [8].That synonymy should be recognized as a phenomenon in terminology. And in his classification system there are three types of synonyms: ideographical, stylistic and absolute.
For Example:
Bloomm-blossom-ciklanma Overflow river-flood-da§qin fume-smoke-tustu sludge-slurry-9okm3, hopma
4. Polysemy
The lexical composition of scientific and technical texts is characterized by a wide use of terms (words, collocations, phrases), which is an instrument by which to operate with scientific and technical concepts, and a relatively small variety of lexical groups.
The terms should preserve such features as abstracted character, uniqueness and systemic nature.
Uniqueness or monosemy is the property of words to have one meaning. The following terms of the lexical-semantic field <<air Ecology>>can be referred to unambiguous or monosemic terms:
• aeropathy-aeropatiya-hava acini;
• airshed-ankar-hava tutumu;
• atmosphere-atmosfer;
• sandstorm-qum firtinasi;
• airfluent (containing hazardous components) -zaharli component;
• ambient-maximum permissible concentration in the air-hava konsentrasiyasi;
• raindown-sel;
• hazy atmosphere and etc., - zaharli atmosfer.
These words are contrasted with another group of
words, no less extensive in modern vocabulary (lexicology) — words that are polysemantic or multivalued, and the very property of words of several meanings is called ambiguity or polysemy.
All the meanings of the word are related in one way or another, forming a rather complex semantic unity, which is called the semantic structure of the word. Semantic connections within a multivalued word organize the systemic nature of vocabulary (lexicon), which is most clearly manifested at the level of one word (Fomina M. I., 1990, P. 45).
The naming of several concepts belonging to a particular subject area, a common lexical form is one of the important terminological problems, since it occurs in almost all fields ofknowledge and leads to the ambiguity and inaccuracy of the meaning of the term, which makes communication difficult between specialists and scientists.
An example of the use of a single lexical form to denote several concepts is the term pressure, which has the following meanings in the general literary language:
1) pressure, compression, squeezing;-taziq;
2) impact;-tasir;
3) cramped, difficult circumstances;-aqir tabii çarait;
4) oppression;
5) atmospheric pressure,--atmosfer taziqi;
6) pressing;-sixma - açma;
7) voltage;-enerji;
8) intensive operation.-intensiv istismar.
From the above mentioned meanings of the term pressure in the lexico-semantic field <<air Ecology>> can be attributed as the meanings of N-5, N-7, N-8, which indicates that in this case, a single lexical unit is called several concepts within a single conceptual field. Such cases can be qualified as polysemy (the ambiguity of the word) or the homonymy of the word.
For a number of years in the terminological literature there have been fluctuations in the attribution of this phenomena (phenomenon).In the beginning, it was viewed as a multivalued term. Then, in the 1970's many terminologists developed the notion that there cannot be such a phenomenon as polysemy in terminology. These ideas were based on the fact that if one lexical form is used for naming several special concepts, then due to the clear limitation and strict certainty inherent in scientific and technical concepts, the meanings of the corresponding terms will also be clearly limited and detached. Therefore, such forms should be considered not the meanings of one term, but the homonymous terms, especially since when forming terms with the help of a metaphor, the semantic similarity or community is emphasized and realized only at the time a new term is formed, and then recedes into the background. The affiliation of such terms to different special sublanguages contributing to the alienation of their meanings and their confirmation in the status of homonyms (Grinev S. V., 1993, P. 100).
Conducted studies of lexemes, terms and terminology <<air Ecology>> revealed the presence of polysemy for a number of terms:
• airway-hava xatti;
• fume - <<vaporization, moisture>>,<<strong (pungent) smell>> - zaharli maye;
• exhaust-zaharli qaz.
The word does not immediately acquire ambiguity: other meanings appear in the process of functioning in speech, then become a fact of language, that is, they enter the lexical system of the language. In this case, sometimes the initial (direct) meaning becomes either less common, or even disappears from the active composition of the dictionary, and secondary (portable) meanings become the main ones. This way probably passed the following terms of the lexical-semantic field <<air Ecology>>.
• air - <<air environment>>,<<atmosphere>>,<<a irspace>>; - hava-atmosfer;
• dust - <<insecticide>>; - tor-dust;
• exhaust air - <<traffic fumes>>; - zaharli hava;
• mixture - <<composition>>,<<structure>>; -tarkib, qari§iq;
• simulated atmosphere - <<artificial climate>>; -suni hava;
• aeration - <<ventilation>>. - vintilyasiya-aeratsiya.
5. Homonymy
The delineation of homonymy and polysemy, as already noted, causes a lot of difficulties cannot always be carried out unambiguously. Lexical homonyms are two or more different words that coincide in spelling, pronunciation, grammatical design (Fomina M. I., 1990, P. 68). The main characteristic distinction of homonyms from polysemantic terms is that homonyms are the facts of different semantic fields. This fact made many terminologists come to the conclusion that the lexicon of scientific and technical texts belongs to homonymous terms, not polysemous.
The emergence of homonyms is due to a number of reasons. One of them is the semantic splitting of the word, the disintegration of polysemantic terms. Homonymy can be the result of the coincidence of sounding, writing, and full or partial coincidence of the form-changing of the original word and the borrowed word.
Thus, it can be considered established in the terminology of the presence of both homonymy and polysemy, the commonality of which is that one lexical form is used for the name of several different concepts, but in the second case this difference is either not clearly understood or not at all realized. There are two main reasons called for this phenomenon: 1) the emergence of a concept, which has similar features to the concept already called this term, and 2) the development and modification of the concept itself, causing the need for a cleavage of the semantics of the term that calls it. In both cases, common semantics of concepts reflected by the same lexical form. In both cases, this form is assigned several meanings, each of which is the expression of the corresponding concept (in the first case) or the aspect of the concept (in the second case). Consequently, if as a result of splitting the meaning of the term or as a result of the transfer of the name to another concept in the semantic structure of the terms obtained, the common main semantics remains and the secondary semantics diverge, then ambiguity is formed: Ifthere is a coincidence ofthe secondary semantics, and the main semantics is splatted, then a semantic homonymy is formed (look at S. V., P. 101).
6. Synonymy
The lexical synonymy is closely connected with the phenomenon ofpolysemy. Lexical synonyms include similar or identical forms that differently call the same concept about an obj ect, phenomena, action, etc,. but differing from each other either in shades of meaning, or stylistic coloring, both signs at the same time (Fomina M. I., 1990, P. 94):
• airstream - airflow - hava axini - kutlasi;
• artificial atmosphere - controlled atmosphere -suni atmosfer;
• blowing dust - colian dust - toz burulgani;
• crisp air - fresh air - tamiz hava;
• dead air -foul air - <<stale air>> - olu - zaharli hava.
Some researchers recognize synonymy as a phenomenon in terminology (V. P. Danilenco, V. M. Leichik, T. R. Kiyak), while others deny (D. S. Lotte, A. B. Shapiro, V. K. Favorin, E. N. Tolikin). There is an opinion according to which synonymous relations in terminology are defined as undesirable and harmful. So if in the artistic text the use of synonyms allows the author to show some additional nuances and serves stylistic purposes, the presence of synonyms in the scientific text at the early stages of the formation of terminological systems is considered as the result ofvocabulary redundancy (Kry-zhansovskaya A. V. 1985, Kiev, P. 17).
Researcher S. I. Korshunov also notes that because of the inability to build a term from the elements ofhis language and in pursuit of brevity, a term that is often synonymous with an already existing foreign term is added (Korshunov S. I., M., 1995. P. 211-216). This phenomena is typical for terminologies that are in the process ofoccurring. This provision can be attributed to environmental terminology.
In a special vocabulary, synonyms arise easily due to borrowed terms, which are then assimilated in the current language not only phonetically and grammatically, but also lexically-they are synonymous.
Synonyms in special vocabulary arise from the search for a more rational designation, as a result of the formation of a new name for the existing concept by means of language and as a result ofborrowing a term from another language is formed. Thus, B. de Besse points out that any new invention generates a large number of neologisms denoting the same concept, since each laboratory and each consumer can create their own name (Besse B.De., M., 1979). Scientific and Technical language, in his opinion, reflects a stormy and disorderly creative activity. This applies mainly to developing branches of science and technology, in which the formation of terminology takes place. In support of this we quote the statement of V. P. Danilenko: <<Synonymy ... is especially characteristic for the early stages of the formation of the terminological system, when the own (and artificial) selection of a better term has not yet occurred and there are many proposed variants of the terminology>> (Danilenko V. P., M., 1971, P. 24).
Two or more lexical synonyms, correlated to each other in the designation of the same phenomena, objects,
signs, actions, etc., form a definite group in the language, otherwise called synonymous series. In the synonymic series, one word is allocated, semantically maximally capacious and stylistically neutral. It becomes the main, core, reference, it is called the dominant. So, for example, in the following synonymous series the dominant term is the surface layer (sath (ust) qat):
- surface layer-ground layer (torpaq qati)-bottom layer (alt qat)-surface air (sath (ust) hava)-ground air (torpaq hava) — << ground layer of air >> (havanin torpaq qati)
Sources of semantic equivalence in the terminology may be the megadialects of various scientific schools and idiolects of individual researchers, the depiction of the forms of the term (dust-loaded (toz dolu) air-dust (hava tozu)-laden air (dolmu§ hava), breathable air-breathing air (nafas havasi, tanaffusayararli hava), the use in the nomination of various aspects of one object (interface air (qov§aq hava)-ground (torpaq) — surface layer (ust qati)), modern and outdated term (air pipe (hava borusu)-air chimney (hava bacasi (tustu borusu)), full and short versions (domestic air-conditioner (daxili (i$) hava kondisioneri) -air-conditioner (hava kondisioneri)), etc.
There are reasons to assume that in the common vocabulary the total equivalence of the value is practically non-existent. A rather revealing in this respect is the definition of synonyms proposed by Akhmanov O. C. in the "Dictionary of Linguistic Terms": << ... synonyms are those members of the thematic group that: a) belong to the same part of speech and b) are so close in meaning that their correct use in speech requires an accurate knowledge of the semantic aspects that distinguish them and their stylistic properties >>. From this it follows that we have different, though close things within the meaning of the words. If the terms denote the same concept, then they are, as a rule, absolutely equivalent in meaning. Therefore, considering the completely different nature of synonymy in the common language and in special vocabulary, it was suggested to use terminology for this phenomenon the term <<doublednes (cutla^ma, qo§ala§ma)>>, which for a long time essentially pushed the term "synonymy".
7.Conclussion
Scientific investigation of the problem of semantic correlation of ecological terms (English and Azerbaijani) makes it possible for us to come to the following conclusion:
1) Determination of different meaning of terms should depend not only the reflection of reality but the altitude of the speaker towards reality. As we have already stressed the fact in conclusion that the viewpoints
Concept of «Multiculturalism» in the Discourse in the English Language
of linguists in determining establishing the interrelation between words and concepts which they denote the so called referential approach. Such kind of approach is disputable we consider that functional approach should also be analyzed. Because the meaning of a word is closely connected with the concept, but is not identical with it.
2)Many linguists have always tried to determine Why most frequently used words are characterized by the polysemy. According to their theory language never stable sounds constructions grammatical elements, terms and word meanings are all exposed to alteration and we consider that terms are known to be not units of single meanings. It is clear that words (terms) and their meanings underwent different changes in the course of the historic development of the languages. For a number of years many terminologists developed the nation that there cannot be such a phenomenon as polysemy in terminology. But we consider this idea to remains still disputable in lexicology. The frequency of polysemy in different languages is variable depending on a number of factors. All these factors still remain and need all-rounded investigation.
3) One of the notable aspects in the determination ofhomonymy is characteristic distinction of homonyms from polysemantic terms because they are the facts of
different semantic fields. This fact made many termi-nologist come to the conclusion that the lexicon of ecological terms to homonymy not polysemous therefore the problem of the emergency of homonyms is due to a number of reasons. We consider that all these reasons, form-changing of the original word and the borrowed word should be investigated separately.
4) It should be mentioned that the problem of synonymy as a phenomenon in terminology is recognized by some researches (V. P. Danilenko, T. R. Kiyak) while others deny it. (D. S. Lotter, A. B. Shopira, V. K. Favorin) is determined that synonyms are words different in sound and spelling but nearly alike or exactly the same in meaning. As a result of investigation we come to such a conclusion that semantic, stylistic and ideographic synonyms should be investigated. Besides, different sources of synonyms: borrowings, dialectics, word building needs additional investigation.
5)Having investigated this problem of semantic correlation of English and Azerbaijani ecological terminology we have come to the conclusion that the history of determination of semantic correlation of terms can't be considered as the final and complete consideration. We think that the mentioned problem still remains disputable and need all-rounded investigation.
References:
1. Superanskaya A. B. General problems of terminology. - M. - 1989.
2. Lotte D. C. Basic of scientific technological terminology. - M. - 1961.
3. Gulieva A. R. Scientific style ofjoin terminology. - B. - 1993.
4. Bloomfield D. "Language" - 1935.
5. Sadigova S. Development and progress of terminology in the Azerbaijan language. - B. - 2005.
6. Kandelaki T. L. Semantic characteristics of terminology. - M. - 1970.
7. AafJ. N. Scientific terminology. N.Y - 1954.
8. Vinogradov V. V. Problems of modern terminology. - M. - 2002.
9. Gasimov M. Sh. Basic of Azerbaijan terminology. - B. - 2006.
10. Kabre M. Gerera. Terminology: Theory and Methods. - B. - 1998.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20534/EJLL-17-1-19-24
Narmin Hasan Quliyeva, Azerbaijan University of Languages, Azerbaijan E-mail: [email protected]
Concept of «Multiculturalism» in the Discourse in the English Language
Abstract: The given article has been devoted to the most important problem of the modern society related to the concept of multiculturalism in Discourse. it is not occasional that as a subject matter of the
