Pragmatic deviations in translation of lexical blends within socio-political discourse

(4) However, since the implementation of Obamacare, jobs in the health care sector rose by 9% [Clinton: ObamaCare was originally 'HillaryCare', 2016].

'Проте з часу реалізації Обамастрахування [Obamastrakhuvannia] кількість робочих місць у сфері охорони здоров'я збільшилась на 9%' (authors' translation).

Transcription or borrowing can also be applied to Hillarycare that was derived from Obamacare - Гіларікер ([Hilariker] - Ukrainian transcription of Hillarycare), for example:

(5) "It was called Hillarycare, before it was called Obamacare", Clinton told a crowd of supporters at a country club in Vinton, Iowa [Clinton: ObamaCare was originally 'HillaryCare', 2016].

"II було названо Гіларікер [Hilariker] ще до того, як її почали називати Обамакер [Obamaker]", Клінтон сказала натовпу своїх прихильників у заміському клубі у Вінтоні, штат Айова' (authors' translation).

It should be noted that if Obamacare is a neologism relatively standard in US politics, Hillarycare is occasional, and therefore often in the context of a journalistic or political text, the meaning and essence of this phenomenon is revealed to the recipient by the author himself/ herself. This lexeme is most often used in the text next to Obamacare. The translator should consider this when translating and deciding whether providing a translational explanatory comment or any additional descriptive element is appropriate.

We use transcoding techniques (transcription/transliteration) also for the translation of the following political blends:

• Euroshima = Europe + Hiroshima - Євросима ([Yevrosyma] Ukr.) - this blend is a political term that emerged during the demonstrations against the deployment of a nuclear weapon in European countries and elimination of the threat of a new war that could turn Europe into a giant Hiroshima;

• Fritalux = France + Italy + Benelux - Фріталюкс ([Fritaluks] Ukr.) is a blend that combines in its structure the names of European countries to denote their union.

In general, the method of transcription/transliteration is not often used in the translation of blends. That may be due to the structural characteristics of the analyzed lexical units, which are often misunderstandable when translated by transcription or transliteration.

One of the ways to translate blends is tracing: translation by parts with their subsequent assembly into a single whole. This technique is sometimes used due to linguistic purism to avoid borrowing a foreign lexeme or its element. Blend tracing is an equal translation of the correlates of each blend component, then combining them into a semantically integral unit. The use of this translation technique is illustrated by the example of the following blends that occur in sociopolitical discourse: femaleader = female + leader - жінка-лідер [zhinka-lider] (leader woman); headministrator = head + administrator - головний адміністратор [holovnyi administrator] (chief administrator); polifluential = politically + influential - політично впливовий [politychno vplyvovyi] (politically influential), etc. The resulting translation version, however, does not give a complete and objective idea of the structure of an original lexeme, and therefore such a translation can not be considered a maximum equivalent.

In some cases, blends may be accompanied by a double version of the translation, which indicates the lack of strict rules for the use of techniques and the possibility of their choice by the translator to achieve specific goals. Thus, blends can be translated not only by tracing but also by descriptive translation: genopolitics - генополітика [genopolityka] / вивчення генетичної основи політичних поглядів [vyvchennia genetychnoi osnovy politychnykh pohladiv] (a study of the genetic basis of political views), Palintologist - Пейлінтолог [Peilintolog] / зацікавлений у особистості колишнього губернатора Аляски Сари Пейлін [zatsikavlenyi v osobystosti kolyshn'ogo gubernatora Alasky Sary Peilin] (the one who is interested in the personality of the former governor of Alaska Sarah Palin), etc.

The descriptive, or explicative, translation technique is the most universal and can help the translator in the most challenging situations. It is vital if, in the translation language, there is no corresponding concept for various social, geographical, or national reasons [Зацний, 2008, p. 12]. If the above examples of socio-political blends can be translated both by tracing and descriptively, some lexemes can be translated only descriptively. For instance, prebituary = preliminary + obituary can only be translated in descriptive translation, considering the pragmatic, linguistic, cultural, structural, and semantic difficulties analyzed above. Using the descriptive translation, we have the variant прогнозований провал кандидата на виборах [prohnozovanyi proval kandydata na vyborakh] (a predicted election failure of the candidate). Some other examples of the descriptive translation of blends are: politickle = policy + tickle, which due to structural and semantic peculiarities can be translated only as політична дискусія/ політичні дебати, спрямовані на критику і підпорядкування політичних позицій опонента власній позиці, шляхом спекуляції на його непрактичності та виставленні його ідей в гумористичному світлі [politychni debaty, spriamovani na krytyku i pidporiadkuvannia politychnykh pozytsiy oponenta vlasniy pozytsii shlakhom spekulatsii na yogo nepraktychnosti ta vystavlenni yogo idei v humorystychnomu svitli] (a political discussion / political debate aimed at criticizing and subordinating the opponent's political positions to one's own, by speculating on his/her impracticality and presenting his/her ideas in a humorous light); guesstimate = guess + estimate - надання політичної оцінки, не спираючись на повну чи чітко висвітлену інформацію, таким чином переносячи її результат на рівень інтуїції та суб'єктивного досвіду; інтуїтивний розрахунок, політична здогадка [nadannia politychnoi otsinky, ne spyraiuchys' na povnu informatsiiu, perenosiachy ii rezultat na riven' intuitsii ta subiektyvnogo dosvidu; politychna zdogadka] (providing a political assessment not based on complete or clearly covered information, thus transferring its result to the level of intuition and subjective experience; intuitive surmise; political conjecture), adhocracy = ad hoc + bureaucracy - гнучка організаційна система [hnuchka orhanizatsiyna systema](a flexible organizational system).

However, despite the widespread use of descriptive translation to convey blends of English socio-political discourse in the Ukrainian text, this translation method should not be used often. We explain our point of view by the verbiage of the definitions obtained due to this technique. The positive moment of this method is its potential to provide an accurate idea of the translated blend meaning, giving a detailed interpretation of its content. It contributes to a better understanding of the innovation by recipients of the translated text. Still, it reduces or even nullifies the pragmatic communicative value of such a blend in the political text. In our opinion, descriptive translation should be used if translation by other techniques that could preserve the pragmatic, linguistic, and cultural characteristics of a blend is not possible.

A very popular blend translation technique is the translation using an analogical model, which tends to preserve the original structure of the blend. The analogical model means reproducing the language unit's original structure in translation. The analogy is a similarity caused by the influence of some language elements, which form a more productive and widespread model, on other correlated elements, which occurs rarer [Зацний, 2008, p. 19]. A typical example of blend translation using an analogical model is Franglais, based on correlates French and Anglais. In Ukrainian, such a lexeme is translated by the form of an analogical word-forming type unit - франглійський ([frangliis'kyi] - Ukrainian transcoding, taking into account inflections in the Ukrainian language).

We consider the translation of political blends by an analogical model the most appropriate, as it provides an opportunity to preserve both the structural properties of these lexical items and more accurately convey their pragmatic political component. We suggest our analogical model versions of some political blends:

1) Manufactroversy = manufactured + controversy (used to denote an unnatural, nonexistent conflict fabricated by politicians who deceive and use false arguments to achieve their goals) - полемікація (polemikatsia) = полеміка (polemika - "polemic") + фальсифікація (falsyfikatsia - "falsification");

2) politainer = politician + entertainer (a politician who was or is a show business person, former athlete, etc., or participates in entertainment programs, especially during the election campaign) - шоулітик (shoulityk) = шоу (shou -"show") + політик (polityk -"politician");

3) Chindia = China + India (China and India united by economic or market relations) - Кин- дія (Kyndia) = Китай (Kytai -"China") + Індія (Indiia - "India");

4) politainment = politician + entertainment (a concept that means the tendency to broadcast political news and events in the media by using elements of show business and pop culture to simplify political information and reduce tensions when broadcasting unpleasant political topics) - шоулітика = шоу (shou -"show") + політика (polityka - "politics");

5) politicianaire = politician + millionaire (a politician who enters politics for enrichment, as well as a politician who has entered politics due to wealth and the status of an influential businessman) - полігарх = політик (polityk -"politician") + олігарх (oliharh - "oligarch");

6) regonomics = region + economics (the concept to denote focus on a particular economic region development) - регіономіка (regionomika) = регіон (region) + економіка (ekonomika - "economics");

7) slowflation = slow + inflation (a concept that means slow growth or even stagnation in the country's economy together with high inflation rates) - інфлесія (inflesia) = інфляція (inflatsia - "inflation") + економічна регресія (ekonomichna regressia -"economic regression"); інфлиза (inflyza) = інфляція (inflatsia - “inflation") + криза (kryza - "crisis").

It is known that translators of socio-political journalistic texts rarely use such a method of conveying blends. It is due to the need to involve considerable effort from the translator, who, in this case, should use creative and analytical skills to decode the original structure, analyze its components, and reproduce the appropriate word-formation model in the translation language. However, in many cases (as mentioned above), translators manage to generate translation language units that produce the original model of the source language.

The influence of blending on the derivational possibilities of the Ukrainian language

The metacognitive needs of society contribute to the dynamic development of the language system, affecting changes in linguistic means of explication and the creation of new forms within the structural and semantic capabilities of the language. Blending, as a way of forming new lexical units to denote the latest artifacts and phenomena by means of the English language as an analytical system, which overflooded the Internet, where socio-political discourse occupies one of the primary places thanks to the media, could not but affect other language structures of the world, Slavic including, despite the synthetic, flexible nature of their structure. The Ukrainian language has also undergone such changes, both as a need to translate English-language blends (which we encountered when analyzing the empirical research material in the previous section) and as a reaction to the needs of 21st-century new nominations, particularly socio-political concepts.

The process of updating the Ukrainian language vocabulary at the expense of non-standard lexical units, not typical for the system of Ukrainian word formation, has become the subject of research by domestic linguists. Conceptually and structurally, the features of derivational neologisms are discussed in the works by N.V. Stratulat [2011], word-forming innovations in Ukrainian socio-political naming are analysed in the works by S.S. Lukyanenko [2009], innovations in the language of the press are studied by O.M. Turchak (2013), etc.

The Internet texts most actively respond to social changes with new words and concepts appearing. The blogosphere systematically gives rise to new occasional entities, which over time, acquire mass use. The political confrontation of the last decade has its linguistic explanation. In the socio-political discourse of modern Ukrainian-language media, we observed innovations recently introduced into the vocabulary of Ukrainians (кримнашівц'і - [krymnashivtsi], Путлер - [Putler], Лугандон - [Lugandon], Домбабве - [Dombabve], алкомайдан - [alkomaidan], etc.). Such derivational innovations should be considered according to their structural and semantical features, especially under the translation process into an English-speaking environment (without such concepts).

The lexicalization process of a single concept through combining several meanings is structurally diverse. For example, due to agglutination:

within the limits of lexical-syntactic derivation, names are formed by combining the components of word phrases into a complete lexical unit. For example, "noun + pronoun": Krymnash - formed from the phrase "our Crimea" - means a sarcastic name for financial reforms in Russia after the annexation of Crimea (the new tax introduced by Russia was called "Krymnash" by Internet users). In this case, the appellation is also characteristic, since the onym Krym loses the features of its name and is used as a structural component of a neologism-appellation, which further leads to the creation of blending units by analogy. For example: Namkrysh (formed from the expression "nam kryshka" - "it's our end") is used to explain the situation of the "Crimeans" after the introduction of sanctions and the beginning of the anti-terrorist operation.

Nowadays, in Ukrainian socio-political discourse, we can find many conceptual derivations formed through the structural blending of different union types with varying segments of words:

Лугандон - [Lugandon] - the name is formed by a combination of the initial segments of the toponyms Luhan-sk + Don-etsk (used ironically to refer the so-called “Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics"; Укроп - [Ukrop] (homophone to “dill" in Ukr., but means Ukr-ainskyi Op-ir - “Ukrainian national defense organization"), кацапульта - [katsapulta] - kats-ap (pejorative nomination of Russians) + cat-ap-ult-a); олімпіард - [olympiard] (olympia-da + milia-rd) dollars, Гейропа - [Geyropa] (gay-s + Eu-ropa), окупендум - [occupendum] (occup-ation + refer-endum), Домбабве - [Dombabwe] (Do-netsk + Zi-mbabwe) composition of the truncated initial segment of one word with the final segment of another.

In some cases, there is an overlap between words, which consists in the fact that a part of the stem of another word is superimposed on the end of the stem of one word. A vivid example is: Путлер - [Putler] (Pu-t-in + Gi-t-ler) (It is noteworthy that such a nickname for the Russian president first appeared in Russia itself, where a poster with the inscription “Putler kaput!" was unfurled during a rally in Vladivostok in 2009. As a result of a linguistic examination conducted by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, the word was recognized as having a “clearly expressed emotional assessment of the personality or activities of V.V. Putin as a representative of state power and has an offensive character") [Кирилюк, 2020];

as well as: майдауни - [maidaun] (mai-da-n (square) + da-un (patient with Down's disease), КРИМіналітет - [KRYMinalitet] (Crim-ea+ Crim-(ean)-inalit-y), Кримль - [Kryml] (Crim-ea + Kr- (e)-ml) - used in the sense of “Crimea occupied by Russia"; Дондурас - [Donduras] (D-on-etsk + G-on-duras), Луганда - [Luganda] (Lu-han-sk + U-gan-da).

The explosive wave of linguistic creativity observed in today's Ukrainian media discourse, especially in social networks, should be considered a reaction to the full-scale military invasion of the Russian Federation into Ukraine on February 24, 2022. In this regard, the desire to resist Russia's information war gives rise to pejorative pragmatics in the verbalization of the emotional and psychological state of the society:

могилізація - [mogilizatsia] (mo(g)il-a (grave) + mo(b)ilizat-ion);

Госдура - [Gosdura] (Gos-du-ma (Parlament of the Russian Federation) + du-ra (stupid)); путриот - [putriot] (Put-in + pat-riot);

Бомбас - [Bombas] (to b-omb + D-ombas-s);

дегенерал(ы) - [degeneral] (de-gener-ate (someone who deviates in his behavior and mental qualities) + general);

бомжахед - [bomjahed] (bom-zh (homeless person) + mu-jahed-din); зомбиленд - [zombilend] (zombi-e + Disney-land)

A large number of innovations with a negative evaluation, which nominates events, phenomena, and individuals, anyway connected with military events in Ukraine, indicates the axiological orientation of the creative efforts of speakers and requires a separate analysis of the Ukrainian language word-forming potential, which determines the relevance of further research.

As the structural-semantic variety of examples of Ukrainian-language sociopolitical discourse shows, in addition to typical cases of telescopic derivation/blending (a careful study of which structure is presented by J. Algeo (English blends), Ye.O. Redko (Ukrainian blends), etc.), there are atypical (deviant) cases of innovative word-creation. For example, word combinations sometimes become the basis for the formation of lexical blends, in particular in the Ukrainian language, considering its inflectional system. In such cases, the process of blending metacognitive models is correlated with the operations of conceptual fragmentation (according to Garmash [2018]), being especially important in translation, in our opinion. Hence, conceptual fragmentation - the mental operation of extracting fragments from the verbal content of concepts, which are further included in the processes of conceptual derivation - becomes the basis of the translation from Ukrainian to English, particularly as the language of international media. The difference in the structural system of these two languages causes the most incredible difficulty in translation and the impossibility of finding an equivalent in the target language, particularly in English. Therefore, the method of transcoding, which is often used when translating blends from English to Ukrainian, taking into account the worldwide popularity of English, does not work in this case and mostly requires additional explanations.

Moreover, one of the main advantages of lexical blending in the original language, the economy of form and sense, not speaking of stylistic and expressive loads, turns, on the contrary, into burdensome redundancy. In this case, translation requires an in-depth linguistic-mental process of the perception adequacy and decoding the implication of different blending lexical components regarding its semantic, contextual, stylistic, pragma-discursive, and extralingual aspects This, for example, is currently being tested by student translators at the LinguaStar Translation Center of Sumy State University through work with Op-Ed articles of Internet publications..

Conclusions

The socio-political discourse is an integral part of contemporary society, the development of which constantly continues, particularly the sphere of politics always retains its relevance. Thus, it is a phenomenon functionally aimed at forming in recipients (voters, as a fact) a specific fragment of their worldview or even the whole picture of the world. Accordingly, a new linguistic and mental environment is created, conditioned by qualitative changes at the cognitive level, which requires the latest nominations, but considering the structural and semantic capabilities of the language for the representation of innovative metacognitive models. Therefore, we can observe a change in the verbal explication of new concepts, changes in the semantic spectrum of the concept, the visual image of the concept, and the establishment of new correlations in the concept system as a whole.

Hence, a significant part of non-standard cases of the lexical unit formation in a language, represented by innovative metacognitive models, in mainly, conceptual telescopic / blending derivation, considering the structural and semantic capabilities of the language, are the result of qualitative changes at the cognitive level of the corresponding linguistic environment.

Thus, semantic derivatives are formed under regular word-forming mechanisms of verb creation at the synchronic level of the language, which contributes to generating units of secondary nomination. At the same time, extralinguistic and linguistic factors are mutually determined by the immanent structure. The essence of lexical blending lies not only in wordforming but in pragmatic functions. The analysis of the socio-political English-language discourse, regarding the pragmatically colored blending units, shows, that the language system's organization principles are closely correlated with the dynamics of the development of the society itself.

As pragmastylistic means, lexical blends are typical for English socio-political discourse, and their use, especially in recent years, has been growing. It is explained by the fact that such lexical units vividly reflect changes in the political sphere of society and reveal the lack of equivalent means to denote new realities and concepts. An important factor is the adaptation of blends to modern socio-political discourse: complex concepts that exist in contemporary politics can be conveniently expressed through blends, which combine several words and have the potential to enhance the pragmatic significance of the text. Due to their expressiveness and informative capacity, blends exert the most significant influence on the message's recipient.

Taking into account the focus of socio-political discourse on speech influence, the conveying of blend stylistics and the transfer of linguistic and cultural realia that form the basis of the blend implication and strengthen the socio-pragmatics of the given text cause difficulties both in the comprehension of the English original and translation variants. The study of the translation aspect of blends within socio-political discourse revealed a lot of challenges, such as the need for a definite means for conveying blend semantics in the translation language, the complex nature of blend explication, and the problem of their interpretation.

Among the translation techniques that are most effective in overcoming the outlined translation difficulties of socio-political blends, such ones should be mentioned first: transcription, transliteration, tracing, and creating an analogical model. We consider the descriptive translation method inappropriate when translating socio-political blends because such a technique does not allow conveying pragmatics of blends and implement them in the translation language as expressive lexical and stylistic units that are components of speech influence on the addressee, that is, society as a whole. The principles of the techniques studied in the article can be used for further research as being universal for translating English blends in inflectional languages, where such a phenomenon is non-typical; hence, promoting the creation of lexical blended innovations in such languages for nominations of everyday-born concepts within socio-political discourse.

The translation of blending vocabulary (in our case, from English into Ukrainian and vice versa) in many cases is a process of lexicalization of the newest units in the absence of equivalents within the translation language, which involves a mandatory method of step-by-step decoding of the constituent blends at both the structural and semantic levels, up to the lexicalization of the whole of the concept through the deverbalization of the combination of meanings within the original unit (source language), thereby filling the linguistic-mental gaps through the creation of lexical blending innovations (translation language), through “conceptual derivations". This process is currently being actualized in the socio-political discourse within the Internet mass media, which requires significant interpretive knowledge and skills on the part of translators (both in translation from English to Ukrainian and vice versa, which is currently urgent due to geopolitical aspects).

The conducted research provides grounds for further studies: modern media texts demonstrate the extraordinary activity of innovative blends as an informational weapon during the Russian-Ukrainian war. The variety of structural and semantic models of the analyzed blending derivatives testifies to the high creative potential of speakers and the productivity of word-forming methods, particularly in the Ukrainian language. As evidenced by the results of our previous observation studies, the dynamic nature of the system of the Ukrainian-speaking linguistic and mental environment is based on the principal general provisions of synergy since the potential of the self-organization of the language system (Ukrainian including) is at the center of its attention. It should be emphasized that intrasystem deviant phenomena do not reduce the internal balance of the language system but only indicate flexibility and ability to self-organize.

Bibliography

political discourse translation

Белова, А.Д. (2003). Лингвистические аспекты аргументации. Київ: Логос.

Гармаш, О.Л. (2017). Англомовні морфологізовані метаконцепти в процесах концептуальної деривації (на матеріалі мовних інновацій кінця ХХ - початку ХХІ ст.). (Дис. док. філол. наук). Запорізький національний університет, Запоріжжя.

Гармаш, О.Л. (2018). Семантична складова мережи англомовних концептуальних структур. Наукові записки Національного університету «Острозька академія»: серія «Філологія», 1 (69/1), 104-106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25264/2519-2558-2018-1(69)/1-104-106

Єнікєєва, С.М., Єнікєєв, Д.С. (2017). Антропонім DONALD TRUMP як основа для створення лексичних інновацій в сучасній англійській мові. Нова філологія, 70, 66-70.

Єнікєєва, С.М. (2007). Роль телескопії у збагаченні арсеналу словотвірних засобів сучасної англійської мови. Науковий вісник Волинського державного університету ім. Л. Українки. Філологічні науки, 5, 264-270.

Єнікєєва, С.М. (2011). Синергодериватологія: синергетичний аспект дослідження вер- бокреативних процесів. Мова і культура, 14 (7), 442-448.

Жлуктенко, Ю.А. (Ред.). (1983). Английские неологизмы. Київ: Наукова думка.

Зацний, Ю.А., Янков А.В. (2008). Інновації у словниковому складі англійської мови початку ХХІ століття. Англо-український словник. Вінниця: Нова Книга.

Зацный, Ю.А. (2013). О некоторых инновационных процессах и механизмах в лексикосемантической системе английского языка. Новая филология, 58, 63-74.

Карпіловська, Є.А. (2022) Актуальні аспекти вивчення українського словотворення. Відновлено з: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6VvZnBnsCs

Кирилюк, О.Л. (2020). Структура асоціативно-семантичного поля «ворог» у дискурсі. Актуальні питання гуманітарних наук, 29 (2), 53-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24919/2308- 4863.2/29.209437

Клименко, Н.Ф., Карпіловська, Є.А., Кислюк, Л.П. (2008). Динамічні процеси в сучасному українському лексиконі. Київ: Видавничий дім Дмитра Бураго

Клименко, Н.Ф. (2000). Телескопія. В.М. Русанівський (Ред.), Українська мова. Енциклопедія (с. 680). Київ: Видавництво «Українська енциклопедія» ім. М.П. Бажана.

Колоїз, Ж.В. (2015). Неузуальне словотворення. Кривий Ріг: Астерікс.

Коробова, І.О. (2016). Новітні телескопізми сучасної української мови. Вісник Київського національного лінгвістичного університету: Філологія, 19 (2), 101-106.

Лук'яненко, С.С. (2009). Лексико-словотвірні інновації в українському соціально-політичному назовництві. (Дис. канд. філол. наук). Харківський національний університет ім. В.Н. Каразіна, Харків.

Мартинюк, А., Ахмедова, Е. (2022). (Sub)cultural specificity of fiction simile and the choice of translation strategy. Topics in Linguistics, 23 (2), 50-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ topling-2022-0011

Медвідь, К.М., Швачко, С.О. (2013). Лексична контамінація в сучасній англійській мові. Відновлено з: http://essuir.sumdu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/30536

Медвідь О.М. (2012). Мовні засоби впливу на реципієнта (на матеріалі політичного дискурсу). Науковий вісник Волинського національного університету імені Лесі Українки, 6 (231), 116-121.

Нелюба, А.М. (2014). Явища економії в словотвірній номінації української мови (системний вимір). Харків: Харківське історико-філологічне товариство.

Олексенко, В.П. (2021). Структурно-семантичні особливості неолексем на позначення культурно-мистецької сфери. Записки з українського мовознавства, 28, 149-168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18524/2414-0627.2021.28.235532

Омельченко, Л.Ф. (1980). Телескопия - один из малоизученных способов глаголоо- бразования современного английского языка. Филологические науки, 5, 66-71.

Попова, О.В. (2017). Впливова функція дискурсу ЗМІ Великобританії в процесі BREXIT. Наукові записки національного університету "Острозька академія". Серія "Філологічна", 64 (2), 91-94.

Прокопец, А.П. (2005). Типология словообразовательных контаминантов. Ученые Записки Таврического Университета им. В.И. Вернадского. Филология, 18 (57), 107-111.

Савчин, І.М. (2012). Телескопія як один із словотворчих засобів мовної економії англійської мови. Наукові записки. Серія "Філологічна", 26, 293-296.

Селіванова, О.О. (2008). Сучасна лінгвістика: напрями та проблеми. Полтава: Довкілля-К.

Стишов, О.А. (2005). Українська лексика кінця XX століття (на матеріалі мови засобів масової інформації). Київ: Пугач.

Стратулат, Н.В. (2011). Нові запозичення у словнику української мови як результат семантичного процесу метафоризації. Філологічні студії: Науковий вісник Криворізького державного педагогічного університету, 6, 448-455.

Тараненко, О.О. (2015). Актуалізовані моделі в системі словотворення сучасної української мови (кінець ХХ-ХХІ ст.). Київ: Видавничий дім Дмитра Бураго.

Таценко, Н.В. (2017). Реалізація емпатії в сучасному англомовному дискурсі: когні- тивно-сенергетичний аспект. Суми: СумДУ.

Тимошенко, Т.Р. (1975). Телескопия в словообразовательной системе современного английского язика. (Дис. канд. филол. наук). Педагогічний інститут іноземних мов, Київ.

Ткачик, О.В. (2013). Номінативні процеси в англомовному політичному дискурсі. Мова і культура, 16 (4), 224-230.

Трамп наказав послабити дію Obamacare. (2017). Українська правда, 13 жовтня. Відновлено з: https://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2017/10/13/7158192/

Турчак, О.М. (2013). Поняття «оказіоналізм» у мовознавчій літературі та його мовленнєва реалізація в українських періодичних виданнях кінця ХХ століття. Вісник Дніпропетровського університету імені Альфреда Нобеля. Філологічні науки, 2 (6), 299-305.

Час-^me: Трамп закликав республіканців не припиняти спроби скасувати "Обамакер". (2017). Голос Америки (VOA: Ukrainian Service), 30 липня. Відновлено з: https://ukrainian. voanews.com/a/3965169.html

Чумак Л.М. (2018). Лексичні інновації в англомовному медійному дискурсі початку ХХІ століття: структурний і лінгвопрагматичний аспекти. (Дис. канд. філол. наук). Київський університет імені Бориса Грінченка Київ.

Шевченко, И.С. (2008). Основы теории языковой коммуникации. Харків: Народна українська академія.

Шевченко, И.С., Морозова, Е.И. (2003). Дискурс как мыслекоммуникативное образование. Вісник Харківського національного університету імені В.Н. Каразіна. Філологія, 587, 33-3

Шевченко І.С. (2017). Концептуалізація комунікативної поведінки в дискурсі. І.С. Шевченко (Ред.), Як намалювати портрет птаха: методологія когнитивно-комуникативно- го дослідження мови (с. 106-147). Харків: ХНУ імені В.Н. Каразина.

Algeo, J. (1977). Blends, a structural and systemic view. American Speech, 52 (1/2), 47-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/454719

Algeo, J. (1978). The Taxonomy of Word Making. Word, 29 (2), 122-131. DOI: https://doi.or g/10.1080/00437956.1978.11435654

Algeo, J., Pyles, Th. (2010/ The Origins and Development of the English Language. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Bat-El, O. (2005). Blends. K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (pp. 6670). Oxford: Elsevier.

Bauer, L. (2001). Morphological Productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486210

Cannon, G. (1986). Blends in English Word Formation. Linguistics, 24 (4), 725-753. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1986.24.4.725

Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalization. R.A. Jacobs, P.S. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar (pp. 184-221). Toronto & London: Ginn and Company.

Clinton: ObamaCare was originally "HillaryCare". (2016). The Hill, 21 January. Retrieved from: http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/266660-clinton-obamacare-was-hillarycare-first)

Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dufva, H. (1992). Slipshod Utterances: A Study of Mislanguage. Jyvaskyla: University of Jyvaskyla.

Enarson, A. (2007). New Blends in the English Language. Karlstad: Hostterminen.

Fauconnier, G., Turner, M. (2008). The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/244515975

Green, J. (1991). New Words. A Dictionary of Neologisms since 1960. London: Paragon.

Gries, S.Th. (2006). Cognitive Determinants of Subtractive Word-Formation Processes: A Corpus-Based Perspective. Linguistics, 17 (4), 535-558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ COG.2006.017

Hockett, Ch.F. (1968). A Course in Modern English. Language Learning. New York: Macmillan Company.

Lehrer, A. (2007). Blendalicious. J. Munat (Ed.), Lexical Creativity, Texts and Contexts (pp. 115-136). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Onions, C.T. (Ed.). (1966). Oxford Dictionary of English Etimology. New York: Oxford University Press.

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London & New York: Longman, 1779 p.

ReiR, K. (1976). Textyp und Ubersetzungsmethode. Der operative Text. Kronberg: Scriptor.

Thurner, D. (1993). Portmanteau Dictionary: Blend Words in the English Language, Including Trademarks and Brand Names. Jefferson (NC) & London: McFarland.

Wentworth, H. (1934). Blend-words in English. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

Why is Obamacare so controversial? (2019). BBC News, 29 March. Retrieved from: http:// www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-24370967

References

Algeo, J. (1977). Blends, a structural and systemic view. American Speech, vol. 52, issue 1/2, pp. 4764. DOI: http://doi.org/10.2307/454719

Algeo, J. (1978). The Taxonomy of Word Making. Word, vol. 29, issue 2, pp. 122-131. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1080/00437956.1978.11435654

Algeo, J., Pyles, Th. (2010). The Origins and Development of the English Language. Boston, Wadsworth Cengage Learning Publ., 364 p.

Bat-El, O. (2005). Blends. In K. Brown (ed.). Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Oxford, Elsevier, pp. 66-70.

Bauer, L. (2001). Morphological Productivity. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 245 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO97805H486210

Belova, A.D. (2003). Lingvisticheskiie aspekty argumentatsii [Linguistic Aspects of Argumentation]. Kyiv, Logos Publ., 300 p.

Cannon, G. (1986). Blends in English Word Formation. Linguistics, vol. 24, issue 4, pp. 725-753.

Chas-Time: Tramp zaklykav respublikantsivneprypyniaty sproby skasuvaty Obamaker. (2017). [TimeTime: Trump has urged Republicans not to stop trying to repeal "Obamacare"]. Voice of America, 30 July. Available at: https://ukrainian.voanews.com/a/3965169.html (Accessed 03 November 2023).

Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalization. In R.A. Jacobs, P.S. Rosenbaum (eds.). Readings in English Transformational Grammar. Toronto & London, Ginn and Company, pp. 184-221.

Chumak, L.M. (2018). Leksychni innovatsii v anglomovnomu mediinomu dyskursi pochatku XXI stolittia: strukturnyi i lingvopragmatychnyi aspekty. Diss. kand. filol. nauk [Lexical Innovations in the English-Language Media Discourse of the Beginning of the 21st Century: Structural and Linguopragmatic Aspects. PhD philol. sci. diss.]. Kyiv, 269 p.

Clinton: ObamaCare was originally "HillaryCare". (2016). The Hill, 21 January. Available at: http:// thehill.com/policy/healthcare/266660-clinton-obamacare-was-hillarycare-first) (Accessed 03 November 2023).

Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 229 p.

Dufva, H. (1992). Slipshod Utterances: A Study of Mislanguage. Jyvaskyla, University of Jyvaskyla Publ., 246 p.

Enarson, A. (2007). New Blends in the English Language. Karlstad, Hostterminen Publ., 120 p.

Fauconnier, G., Turner, M. (2008). The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/244515975 (Accessed 03 November 2023).

Green, J. (1991). New Words. A Dictionary of Neologisms since 1960. London, Paragon, 356 p.

Gries, S.Th. (2006). Cognitive Determinants of Subtractive Word-Formation Processes: A Corpus- Based Perspective. Linguistics, vol. 17, issue 4, pp. 535-558.

Harmash, O.L. (2017). Anglomovni morfologizovani metakontsepty v protsesakh kontseptualnoi deryvatsii (na materiali movnykh innovatsii kintsia XX - pochatku XXI stolittia). Diss. dokt. filol. nauk [English-Language Morpholized Metaconcepts in the Processes of Conceptual Derivation (on the Material of Linguistic Innovations of the Late 20th - Early 21st Centuries). Dr. philol. sci. diss.]. Zaporizhzhia, 525 p.

Harmash, O.L. (2018). Semantychna skladova merezhy anglomovnykh kontseptualnykh struktur [Semantic component of the network of English-language conceptual structures]. Naukovi zapysky Natsionalnoho universytetu "Ostroz'ka akademiiia" Filologiia [Scientific notes of the National University "Ostroh Academy" Philology], vol. 1, issue 69/1, pp. 104-106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25264/2519-2558- 2018-1(69)/1-104-106

Hockett, Ch.F. (1968). A Course in Modern English. Language Learning. New York, Macmillan Company, 648 p.

Karpilovska, Ye.A. (2022). Aktualni aspekty vyvchennia ukrainskoho slovotvorennia [Actual Aspects of the Study of Ukrainian Word Formation]. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6VvZnBnsCs (Accessed 03 November 2023).

Klymenko, N.F., Karpilovska, Ye.A., Kyslyuk, L.P. (2008). Dynamichni protsesy v suchasnomu ukrains'komu leksykoni [Dynamic Processes in the Modern Ukrainian Lexicon]. Kyiv, Dmytro Burago Publishing House, 336 p.

Klymenko, N.F. (2000). Teleskopiia [Telescope]. In V.M. Rusanivsky (ed.). Ukrains'ka mova. Entsyklopediia [Ukrainian Language. Encyclopedia]. Kyiv, Ukrainian Encyclopedia Publ., p. 680.

Kolois, Zh.V. (2015). Neuzualne slovotvorennia [Unusual word Formation]. Kryvyi Rih, Asterix Publ.,

454 p.

Korobova, I.O. (2016). Novitni teleskopizmy suchasnoi ukrains'koi movy [The Latest Telescopisms of the Modern Ukrainian Language]. Kyiv National Linguistic University Bulletin: Philology Series, vol. 19, issue

2, pp. 101-106.

Kyrylyuk, O.L. (2020). Struktura asotsiatyvno-semantychnoho polia "Voroh" u dyskursi [The structure of the associative-semantic field "Enemy" in the discourse]. Aktualni pytannia humanitarnyhk nauk [Actual Issues of Humanitarian Sciences], vol. 29, issue 2, pp. 53-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24919/2308- 4863.2/29.209437

Lukyanenko, S.S. (2009). Leksyko-slovotvirni innovatsii v ukrains'komu sotsialno-politychnomu nazyvnytstvi. Diss. kand. filol. nauk [Lexical and word-forming innovations in Ukrainian socio-political nomenclature. PhD philol. sci. diss.] Kharkiv, 208 р.

Lehrer, A. (2007). Blendalicious. In J. Munat (ed.). Lexical Creativity, Texts and Contexts. Amsterdam. John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 115-136.

Martyniuk, A., Akhmedova, E. (2022). (Sub)cultural specificity of fiction simile and the choice of translation strategy. Topics in Linguistics, vol. 23, issue 2, pp. 50-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ topling-2022-0011

Medvid, K.M., Shvachko, S.O. (2013). Leksychna kontaminatsiia v suchasnii angliis'kii movi [Lexical contamination in modern English]. Available at: http://essuir.sumdu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/30536 (Accessed 03 November 2023).

Medvid, O.M. (2012). Movni zasoby vplyvu na retsypienta (na materiali politychnoho dyskursu) [Linguistic means of influencing the recipient (on the material of political discourse)]. Naukovyi visnyk Volyns'koho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Lesi Ukrainky [Scientific Bulletin of Volyn National University named after Lesya Ukrainka], vol. 6, issue 231, pp. 116-121.

Nelyuba, A.M. (2014). Yavyshche ekonomii v slovotvirnii nominatsii ukrains'koi movy (systemnyi vymir) [Phenomena of Economy in the Word-Forming Nomination of the Ukrainian Language (System Dimension)]. Kharkiv, Kharkiv Historical and Philological Society., 184 p.

Onions, C.T. (ed.). (1966). Oxford Dictionary of English Etimology. New York, Oxford University Press, 1041 p.

Oleksenko, V.P. (2021). Strukturno-semantychni osoblyvosti neoleksem na poznachennia kulturno- mystetskoisfery [Structural-semantic features of neolexems for the designation of the cultural and artistic sphere]. Zapysky z ukrains'koho movoznavstva [Notes on Ukrainian Linguistics], vol. 28, pp. 149-168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18524/2414-0627.2021.28.235532

Omelchenko, L.F. (1980). Teleskopiia - odin iz maloizuchenykh sposobov glagoloobrazovaniia sovremennogo angliyskogo yazyka [Telescopy - One of the Little-studied Ways of Verb Formation of the Modern English Language]. Filologicheskiie nauki [Philological Sciences], vol. 5, pp. 66-71.

Popova, O.V. (2017). Vplyvova funktsiia dyskursu ZMI Velykobrytanii v protsesi BREXIT [Influential Function of British Media Discourse in BREXIT process]. Naukovi zapysky natsionalnogo universytetu "Ostroz'ka Academia". Seria "Filologichna" [Scientific Notes of the National University "Ostroh Academy". Philological Series], vol. 64, issue 2, pp. 91-94.

Prokopets, A.P. (2005). Tipologiia slovoobrazovatelnykh kontaminantov [Typology of word-forming contaminants]. Uchonyie Zapiski Tavricheskogo Universiteta im. V. I. Vernadskogo. Filologiia [Bulletin of Tauride National University named after V.I. Vernadsky. Philology], vol. 18, issue 57, pp. 107-111.

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London & New York, Longman, 1779 p.

ReiG, K. (1976). Textyp und Ubersetzungsmethode. Der operative Text [Text Type and Translation Method. The Operative Text]. Kronberg, Scriptor Publ., 212 p.

Savchyn, I.M. (2012). Teleskopiia yak odyn iz slovotvorchykh zasobiv movnoi ekonomii angliis'koi movy [Telescopy as one of the word-forming means of the linguistic economy of the English language]. Naukovi zapysky. Seriia "Filologichna". [Scientific notes. Philological series], vol. 26, pp. 293-296.

Selivanova, O.O. (2008). Suchasna lingvistyka: napriamy ta problemy [Modern Linguistics: Directions and Problems]. Poltava, Dovkillya-K. Publ., 712 p.

Shevchenko, I.S. (2008). Osnovy teorii yazykovoy kommunikatsii [Fundamentals of the Theory of Language Communication]. Kharkiv, Narodna ukrainska akademiya Publ., 168 p.

Shevchenko, I.S. (2017). Kontseptualizatsiia komunikatyvnoipovedinky v dyskursi [Conceptualization of Communicative Behavior in Discourse]. In I.S. Shevchenko (ed.). Yak namaluvaty portret ptakha metodolohiia kognityvno-komunikatyvnoho doslidzhennia movy [How to draw a portrait of a bird: methodology of cognitive-communicative language research]. Kharkiv, Kharkiv National University named after V.N. Karazin Publ., pp. 106-147.

Shevchenko, I.S., Morozova, Ye.I. (2003). Diskurs kak myslekommunikativnoie obrazovaniie [Discourse as thought-communicative system]. Visnyk Kharkivs'koho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni V.N. Karazina. Filologiya [Bulletin of Kharkiv National University named after V. N. Karazin. Philology], vol. 587, pp. 33-38.

Stratulat, N.V. (2011). Novi zapozychennia u slovnyku ukrains'koi movy yak rezultat semantychnoho protsesu metaforyzatsii [New borrowings in the dictionary of the Ukrainian language as a result of the semantic process of metaphorization]. Filologichni studii: Naukovyi visnyk Kryvoriz'koho derzhavnoho pedagogichnoho universytetu. [Philological Studies: Scientific Bulletin of Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University], vol. 6, pp. 448-455.

Styshov, O.A. (2005). Ukrains'ka leksyka kintsia XX stolittia (na materiali movy zasobiv masovoi informatsii) [Ukrainian Vocabulary of the End of the 20th Century (Based on the Language of Mass Media)]. Kyiv, Pugach Publ., 387 p.

Taranenko, O.O. (2015). Aktualizovani modeli v systemi slovotvorennia suchasnoi ukrains'koi movy (kinets ХХ-ХХІ stolit') [Updated Models in the Word-Formation System of the Modern Ukrainian Language (End of the 20th - 21st Centuries)]. Kyiv, Dmytro Burago Publishing House., 248 p.

Tymoshenko, T.R. (1975). Teleskopiia v slovoobrazovatelnoi sisteme sovremennogo angliiskogo yazyka. Diss. kand. filol. nauk [Telescopy in the Word-Formation System of the Modern English Language. PhD philol. sci. diss.]. Kyiv, 176 р.

Turchak, O.M. (2013). Poniattia "okkazionalizm" u movoznavchii literaturi ta yoho movlennieva realizatsiia v ukrains'kykh periodychnykh vydanniakh kintsia XXstolittia [The concept of "occasionalism" in linguistic literature and its speech implementation in Ukrainian periodicals of the late 20th century]. Visnyk Universitetu imeni Alfreda Nobelya. Seriya: Filologicni Nauki [Alfred Nobel University Journal of Philology], vol. 2, issue 6, pp. 299-305.

Tatsenko, N.V. (2017). Realizatsiia empatii v suchasnomu anglomovnomu dyskursi: kognityvno- senergetychnyi aspekt [Realization of Empathy in the Current English Discourse: Cognitive-Synergetic Aspect]. Sumy, Sumy State University Publ., 357 p.

Thurner, D. (1993). Portmanteau Dictionary: Blend Words in the English Language, Including Trademarks and Brand Names. Jefferson (NC) & London, McFarland, 200 p.

Tkachyk, O.V. (2013). Nominatyvni protsesy v anglomovnomu politychnomu dyskursi [Nominative Processes in English Political Discourse]. Mova i Kultura [Language and Culture], vol. 16, issue 4, pp. 224-230.

Tramp nakazav poslabyty diiu Obamacare. (2017). [Trump ordered to weaken the action of Obamacare]. Ukrains'ka Pravda [Ukrainian Truth]. Available at: https://www.pravda.com.ua/ news/2017/10/13/7158192/ (Accessed 03 November 2023).

Wentworth, H. (1933). Blend-Words in English. Ithaca, NY, Cornell University, 5 p.

Why is Obamacare so controversial? (2019). BBC News, 29 March. Available at: http://www.bbc. com/news/world-us-canada-24370967 (Accessed 03 November 2023).

Yenikeieva, S.M. (2007). Rol' teleskopii u zbahachenni arsenalu slovotvirnykh zasobiv suchasnoi angliis'koi movy [The role of telescoping in enriching the arsenal of word-forming means of the modern English language]. Naukovyi Visnyk Volyns'koho derzhavnoho universytetu imeni L. Ukrainky. Filolohichni nauky [Scientific Bulletin of the Volyn State University named after L. Ukrainka. Philological Sciences], vol. 5, pp. 264-270.

Yenikeieva, S.M. (2011). Synergoderyvatologiia: synergetychnyi aspect doslidzhennia verbokreatyvnykh protsesiv [Synergoderivatology: the synergistic aspect of verb creative processes research]. Mova I kultura [Language and Culture], vol. 14, issue 7, pp. 442-448.

...