(1336-1573), - (1573-1603) (1603-1868)
㳿 -, . , .
| 25.11.2023 | |
| 28,2 K |
. ,
, , , , .
http://www.allbest.ru/
http://www.allbest.ru/
(1336-1573), - (1573-1603) (1603-1868)
˳ ,
,
㳿 (1336-1573), - (1573-1603), (1603-1868). 330 -, . - . , . . , . 182 ( 56%) . 68 ( 20,6%). , , 33 ( 10%). 29 (8,7%), 13 (4%), 5 (1,5%).
XIV-XIX . 㳿 , , , , . , , 㳿 -.
: , , , .
Lidiia Anistratenko, Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor at the Department of Japanese Language and Translation Borys Grinchenko Kyiv University (Kyiv, Ukraine)
RESEARCH OF TERM FORMATION METHODS IN PROFESSIONAL LANGUAGE OF JAPANESE LITERARY STUDIES OF THE MUROMACHI (1336-1573), ADZUCHI-MOMOYAMA (1573-1603) AND EDO (1603-1868) PERIODS
This paper studies the methods of term formation of Japanese literary terminology of the Muromachi (1336-1573), Adzuchi-Momoyama (1573-1603) and Edo (1603-1868) periods. Based on the material of 330 terminology units, a quantitative relationship between lexical-semantic, morphological, and syntactic methods of term formation has been established. Among different kinds of lexical-semantic method of term formation narrowing of the meaning and metaphorization have been analyzed. The morphological method of term formation among specialized units of Japanese literary studies is presented by root-adding, stem-compounding and affixation. The syntactic method of term formation has been studied as well. Most of identified units of syntactic method are phrases formed via conjunction . With the help of quantitative analysis method narrowing of the meaning has been established to be the most productive way of term formation 182 units (or 56%) among the source base. Root-adding terms constitute 68 units (or 20,6%). Terms formed via metaphorization constitute 33 units (or 10%). Terms formed by stem-compounding are represented by 29 units (8,7%), syntactic 13 units (4%), affixal 5 units (1,5%). The research focuses the fact of domination of meaning narrowing above other methods of Japanese literary studies professional vocabulary of XIV-XIX centuries formation. Productivity of meaning narrowing is not typical neither for Japanese literary terminology in general nor for most of other termsystems of Japanese language, because the major part of terms in Japanese language constitute root-adding units which comply with most of requirements for new term formation that is conciseness, semantic transparency etc. This paper suggests the explanation of the reasons for quantitative domination of the units formed via meaning narrowing above those formed by root-adding in Japanese literary terminology of the Muromachi-Edo periods.
Key words: terminology, Japanese language, term formation, Japanese literature.
. , - , , , - . , , , , . , , , , .
. (710-794), (794-1185), (1185-1333) (Anistratenko 2022). ϳ (' 2000; 2008; 2009; Faber 2022), (Kitagawa 2021; Nagano 2018; Sherly 2023; Wakaki 2009; Zaw 2020). 㳿 -, , .
330 㳿 -, 㳿 ( 2012).
, 㳿 -. :
㳿 , (, , ), - ( , ) ;
.
( ) ( ).
в
- . , - , ( 2006: 283). - , , , .
- - 㳿: * (, .: ) - ' , ' , ; * (ڽ, .: ) - , ; * (Y, .: ) - -, ; * (ڂ, .: ) - 1) - , , ; 2) , ' , ; * (, .: ) - , ʳ곴 .
-;
* (軯, .: ) - 糿 , .
, , , - - 182 , 56%. XIV-XIX . 糿 , 㳿 .
- 㳿 㳿 - - . ³, - , 쳿, , , ( 2006: 326). : * (\, .: ) - , ʳ ʳ ʳ ; * (r, .: ) - , س , , (), (); * (ʮ˹, .: ) - , (- ) (- );
* (ɫ, .: ) - 糿 , ; * 쳳 (, .: ) - , () (); * - (, .: , ) - - , ; * (, .: ) - , V . ;
* (ĵ, .: ) - , ʳ곴 ; * (, .: , ) - , ', -, .
33 ( 10%), .
㳿 -, , . ϳ , , . , Ʊ - : , , , , . Ʊ V ., , .
: * (, .: ) - , س ; * (, .: ) - ղ .; * (ǰ, .: / /) - ;
* - (k|) - , () () .
㳿 -.
68 , 20,6% . XIV-XIX . , , 㳿 . ³, , , .
. ϳ 쳺 Z hZ.
, - ǂ () () - ǂݱ (.: ), XVIII-XIX . : * - (ԻZ, ) - V ., ;
* - (yb, .: ) - ; * - (O升킹, .: ) - , ; * (グ, g, .: , ) - - - , ; * (Ⴆ, .: ') - ' ' , ; , , - .
29 (8,7%), .
㳿 - , , -, -, .
, , - - . , B - (B莟, .: ) - . - - (ٽ, .: -' ) - , - . ٽ
-. .
- (, .: ) - , 18 , - (36 ). , , , - .
ճ- (țr, .: ) - ̳- ( ), , . , țr , - țr - . .
, , 㳿 XIV-XIX . 5 (1,5%).
. ³, - , , ( 2006: 547). , , -, , . : * - (̂, .: ) - - (), () , 5-7-5;
* - (Ȍo
, .: , ) - , ʳ ʳ ʳ ;
* - (c̱, .: ) - , -; * - (c) - , -; * - (, .: ) - , .
13 , ( 4%).
ϳ XIV-XIX ., (56%) 㳿 . 20,6%. , 10%. 8,7%, 4%, 1,5%.
1. . ., . . . : , 2012. 208 .
2. ' . ., P., 3. . : . : . KMAcademia, 2000. 218 .
3. . . ³ : 㳿. 2008. 620. . 3-5.
4. . . : . . . 2009. . 121. . 138-142.
5. . . : . : -, 2006. 716 .
6. Anistratenko L. S. Study of Japanese literary terminology in diachrony (Nara period /710-794/, Heian period /7941185/, Kamakura period /1185-1333/). Scientific journal of National pedagogical Dragomanov university. Series 9: Current Trends in Language Development. 2022. Vol. 23. P 5-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31392/NPU-nc.series9.2022.23.01
7. Faber Pamela, L'Homme Marie-Claude. Terminology and Lexicography Research and Practice. University of Granada University of Montreal, 2022. 598 pp. URL: https://doi.org/10.1075/tlrp.23https://benjamins.com/catalog/tlrp.23
8. Kitagawa C. Mechanisms of productivity in word formation: Transitivity alternations in Japanese, Glossa: a journal of general linguistics. 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1304
9. Nagano Akiko, Shimada Masaharu. Affix borrowing and structural borrowing in Japanese word-formation. Journal of Theoretical Linguistics. 2018, vol. 15, no. 2. (Tohoku University Masaharu Shimada, University of Tsukuba). URL: http://www.skase.sk/Volumes/JTL37/pdf_doc/04.pdf
10.Sherly F. Lensun, Susanti Aror, Amelia Sompotan. The Process of Japanese Compound Word Formation. Proceedings of the Unima International Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities: Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research. Indonesia, 2023. DOI: 10.2991/978-2-494069-35-0_188
11. Wakaki Hiromi, Fujii Hiroko. Abbreviation Generation of Japanese Multi-Word Expressions. Proceedings of the 2009 Workshop on Multiword Expressions. Singapore, 2009. P 63-70. URL: https://aclanthology.org/W09-2909.pdf
12. Zaw Min. An Analysis of Word Formation using Suffixes in Japanese Language. Mandalay University of Foreign Languages Research Journal. 2020. Vol. 11, No.1. 153-159. URL: http://www.mufl.edu.mm/mm/images/pdf/examresults/ 2020ZawMinWin153-159.pdf
REFERENCES
1. Anistratenko L. S., Bondarenko I. P Slovnyk yaponskykh literaturoznavchykh terminiv [Dictionary of Japanese literary terms]. Kyiv: Vydavnychyi dim Dmytra Buraho, 2012. 208 . [in Ukrainian]
2. Diakov A. S., Kyiak T. P., Kudelko 3. B. Osnovy terminotvorennia: Semantychni ta sotsiolingvistychni aspekty [Basics of term formation: Semantic and sociolinguistic aspects]. Kyiv: Vyd. dim KMAcademia, 2000. 218 . [in Ukrainian]
3. Kyiak T. R. Vuzkohaluzevi terminy yak osnova formuvannia ta kvazireferuvannia fakhovykh tekstiv[ Narrow-field terms as a basis for the formation and quasi-referencing of professional texts]. Visnyk Natsionalnoho universytetu Lvivska politekhnika: Problemy ukrainskoi terminolohii. 2008. 620. . 3-5. [in Ukrainian]
4. Kyiak T. R. Fakhovi movy yak novyi napriam linhvistychnoho doslidzhennia [Professional languages as a new direction of linguistic research]. Inozemna filolohiia. Lviv: LNU im. I. Franka. 2009. Vyp. 121. . 138-142. [in Ukrainian]
5. Selivanova O. O. Suchasna linhvistyka: terminolohichna entsyklopediia [Modern linguistics: a terminological encyclopedia]. Poltava: Dovkillia-K, 2006. . 716. [in Ukrainian]
6. Anistratenko L. S. Study of Japanese literary terminology in diachrony (Nara period /710-794/, Heian period /7941185/, Kamakura period /1185-1333/). Scientific journal of National pedagogical Dragomanov university. Series 9: Current Trends in Language Development. 2022. Vol. 23. P 5-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31392/NPU-nc.series9.2022.23.01
7. Faber Pamela, L'Homme Marie-Claude. Terminology and Lexicography Research and Practice. University of Granada University of Montreal, 2022. 598 pp. URL: https://doi.org/10.1075/tlrp.23https://benjamins.com/catalog/tlrp.23
8. Kitagawa C. Mechanisms of productivity in word formation: Transitivity alternations in Japanese, Glossa: a journal of general linguistics. 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1304
9. Nagano Akiko, Shimada Masaharu. Affix borrowing and structural borrowing in Japanese word-formation. Journal of Theoretical Linguistics. 2018, vol. 15, no. 2. (Tohoku University Masaharu Shimada, University of Tsukuba) URL: http:// www.skase.sk/Volumes/JTL37/pdf_doc/04.pdf
10. Sherly F. Lensun, Susanti Aror, Amelia Sompotan. The Process of Japanese Compound Word Formation. Proceedings of the Unima International Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities: Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research. Indonesia, 2023. DOI 10.2991/978-2-494069-35-0_188
11. Wakaki Hiromi, Fujii Hiroko. Abbreviation Generation of Japanese Multi-Word Expressions. Proceedings of the 2009 Workshop on Multiword Expressions. Singapore, 2009. P 63-70. URL: https://aclanthology.org/W09-2909.pdf
12. Zaw Min. An Analysis of Word Formation using Suffixes in Japanese Language. Mandalay University of Foreign Languages Research Journal. 2020. Vol. 11, No.1. 153-159. URL: http://www.mufl.edu.mm/mm/images/pdf/examresults/2020ZawMinWin153-159.pdf
Allbest.ru
.... 1926 "- ". - .
[3,5 M], 16.10.2014ղ- . . "Fata morgana". .
[58,8 K], 05.03.2014- . , , .
[27,1 K], 24.04.2018(" ") - (1603-1867), XVIII XIX . .
[981,8 K], 18.11.2017. . . .
[39,3 K], 08.03.2012. . "".
[67,0 K], 29.05.2015.. . .. . 䳿 XX "Fata morgana".
[43,7 K], 24.05.2014. . "" . '.
[78,6 K], 12.03.2015, . , "", " ".
[24,3 K], 18.02.2014-. ղՖ30- . . - .
[76,5 K], 23.04.2015. . - . 糿 . .
[28,4 K], 27.02.2015. . 䳿. 䳿 "". 䳿.
[54,9 K], 23.11.2014. . "" . 㳿 " ".
[84,2 K], 09.04.2010. . . .
[14,4 K], 19.02.2012- . . .. . - " ", " ", " ".
[78,0 K], 18.05.2014. . ³ . . - .
[95,8 K], 30.07.2003. . . , .
[23,5 K], 24.11.2017, . -. . .
[51,5 K], 03.10.2014. . "". .
[63,0 K], 07.08.2017.. , . , . , 㳿 .
[45,7 K], 09.10.2009
