Metonymy in scientific linguistic discourse

Alla Gabidullina; Anastasiia Sokolova; Elena Kolesnichenko; Marina Zharikova; Oleh Shlapakov

doi:10.21744/lingcure.v5nS4.1556

Authors

Alla Gabidullina
gabidullina7619@tanu.pro
Horlivka Institute for Foreign Languages, Donbas State Pedagogical University, Bakhmut, Ukraine
Anastasiia Sokolova Horlivka Institute for Foreign Languages, Donbas State Pedagogical University, Bakhmut, Ukraine
Elena Kolesnichenko Horlivka Institute for Foreign Languages, Donbas State Pedagogical University, Bakhmut, Ukraine
Marina Zharikova Horlivka Institute for Foreign Languages, Donbas State Pedagogical University, Bakhmut, Ukraine
Oleh Shlapakov Horlivka Institute for Foreign Languages, Donbas State Pedagogical University, Bakhmut, Ukraine

Keywords:

discursive metonymy, lexicalized metonymy, scientific discourse, scientific linguistic

Abstract

The purpose of the article was to show the features of the functioning of different types of metonymy in scientific linguistic discourse, which is understood as a verbalized epistemic situation common to the scientific sphere of communication, taken in the entire totality of linguistic and extralinguistic factors and enshrined in the form of texts (oral and written ones). The article deals with metonymy from the point of view of langue / parole: lexicalized metonymy in langue is a semantic transposition mechanism on contiguity and carries out a terminological nomination; discursive metonymy in parole becomes the result of syntagmatic contiguity of syntactic constructions. Linguistic metonymic terms are grouped by types of knowledge: declarative and procedural ones. The shifts of meaning between the logical terms “object”, “subject”, “general” and “specific”, “abstract” and “concrete”, “form”, “content”, etc., directed towards each other, are observed in metonymic terms of declarative type. Metonymy can reflect the processes due to the causality between adjacent objects. Transitional phenomena between lexicalized (linguistic) and discursive (speech) metonymy reflect those models that contain onyms; they are related to the designation of the subject of knowledge (linguist) and his scientific discovery.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akhmanova, O. S. (2004). Dictionary of linguistic terms. Moscow: Editorial URSS.

Aripov, M. P. (2021). Semantics of wishes/applause/prayers associated with religious terms. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, 7(4), 274-278.

Bibri, S. E. (2018). A foundational framework for smart sustainable city development: Theoretical, disciplinary, and discursive dimensions and their synergies. Sustainable Cities and Society, 38, 758-794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.12.032

Brdar-Szabó, R., & Brdar, M. (2012). The problem of data in the cognitive linguistic research on metonymy: A cross-linguistic perspective. Language Sciences, 34(6), 728-745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2012.04.012

Dictionary of Sociolinguistic Terms. (2006). Ed. by V.Yu. Mikhalchenko. Moscow: Russian Academy of Linguistic Sciences.

Gabidullina, A. R. (2016). Metonymic terms in popular science linguistic discoursein: In: The world of Tukay: Philosophy, aesthetics, language (pp. 140-145). Uralsk: Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Gabidullina, A. R. (2016). Metonymy in popular science linguistic discourse. East Slavic philology. Linguistics, (29), 88-94.

Ginzburg, R. S. (1978). Fundamentals of lexicological research. Moscow: Nauka.

Gorokhova, N. V. (2012). Metonymy as an actual semantic way of forming English-language terms of pipeline transport. In: Omsk Social and Humanitarian Readings-2012 (pp. 279-281). Omsk: Omsk State Technical University.

Gubanov, S. A. (2012). Adjective metonymy in artistic discourse (based on the work of M.I. Tsvetaeva). Bulletin of the Northern (Arctic) University. Series: Humanities and Social Sciences, 5, 81-86.

Ikonnikova, V. A. (2011). Metaphor and metonymy in the formation of eponymous terms (based on English legal terminology). European Social Science Journal, 10(13), 214-222.

Kolesnichenko, O. L. (2018). Trails in popular science text. In: Scientific Linguistic Discourse: Addressee Factor (pp. 229-250). Slovyansk: Donbass State Pedagogical University.

Kong, L., & Qin, H. (2017). The development of manner of speaking markers in English and Chinese: Pragmaticalization, grammaticalization and lexicalization. Journal of Pragmatics, 107, 16-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.11.005

Kosova, M. V. (2004). Terminology as a lexico-semantic process. OSU Bulletin, 2, 42-48.

Krymets, O. M. (2010). Metaphor and metonymy as factors of creation and development of Ukrainian technical terminology. Bulletin of the National University “Lviv Polytechnic”. Series “Problems of Ukrainian Terminology”, 675, 23-27.

Leontiev, A. A. (1990). Travel on the map of the world's languages. Moscow: Prosveshcheniye.

Lopushanskaya, S. P. (1996). Semantic modulation as a speech-thinking process. Bulletin of the Volgograd State University. Series 2: Philology, 1, 6-13.

Lu, C., Bu, Y., Dong, X., Wang, J., Ding, Y., Larivière, V., ... & Zhang, C. (2019). Analyzing linguistic complexity and scientific impact. Journal of Informetrics, 13(3), 817-829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2019.07.004

Lyashchuk, N. A. (2018). Eurysemia and polysemy of linguistic terminology (based on the Ukrainian language). Universum: Philology and Art History, 10(56).

Markova, E. M., Kuznetsova, G. V., Kozlova, O. V., Korbozerova, N. M., & Domnich, O. V. (2021). Features of the development of linguistic and communication competences of future foreign language teachers. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S2), 36-57.

McLachlan, M. (2021). Neoliberal rules: A critical multimodal analysis of metonymy on high school webpages. Linguistics and Education, 65, 100957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2021.100957

Orlova, S. N., & Kuznetsova, E. V. (2018). The euphemistic function of metonymy in the English-language economic discourse. Modern Science: Topical Problems of Theory and Practice. Series: Humanities, 12(3), 114-117.

Pappas, C. C., Varelas, M., Barry, A., & Rife, A. (2002). Dialogic inquiry around information texts: The role of intertextuality in constructing scientific understandings in urban primary classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 13(4), 435-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(03)00004-4

Pastukhova, L. S. (2014). It's time to draw attention to punctuation marks, or something about punctuation. Simferopol: Vernadsky Crimean Federal University.

Plappert, G. (2019). Not hedging but implying: Identifying epistemic implicature through a corpus-driven approach to scientific discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 139, 163-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.09.001

Podoskina, T. A. (2008). Not boring Latin. Science and Life, 1.

Putrayasa, I. B. (2021). Political language variation: stylistic based study. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(1), 1-9.

Raevskaya, O.V. (2000). Metonymy in the word and in the text. Philological Sciences, 4, 49-55.

Rogach, L. V. (2000). Semantic basis of linguistic terms in Ukrainian and English languages. Kyiv: Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv.

Romanova, O. (2011). Metonymy in Ukrainian sewing terminology. Bulletin of the National University “Lviv Polytechnic”. Series “Problems of Ukrainian terminology”, 709, 47-50.

Rosenthal, D. E., & Telenkova, M. A. (1985). Dictionary-reference book of linguistic terms (3rd edition). Moscow: Prosveshcheniye.

Salager-Meyer, F. (2008). Scientific publishing in developing countries: Challenges for the future. Journal of English for academic purposes, 7(2), 121-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.03.009

Selivanova, O. O. (2011). Linguistic encyclopedia. Poltava: Dovkillya-K.

Shelov, S. D. (2003). Term. Terminology. Terminological definitions. St. Petersburg: Faculty of Philology of St. Petersburg State University.

Sigal, K. Ya. (2017). Dislocation-substantive metonymy (based on substantive-adjective phrases). Psycholinguistics Issues.

Smola, K. (2018). Community as Device: Metonymic Art of the Late Soviet Underground. Russian Literature, 96, 13-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ruslit.2018.05.002

Sokolova, A. E. (2018). Types of metonymy in popular science discourse. Pp. 250-275 in: Scientific Linguistic Discourse: Addressee Factor. Slovyansk: Donbass State Pedagogical University.

Suryasa, I.W., Sudipa, I.N., Puspani, I.A.M., Netra, I.M. (2019). Translation procedure of happy emotion of english into indonesian in k???a text. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 10(4), 738–746

Tatarinov, V. A. (1996). The theory of terminology: Moscow: Moscow Lyceum.

Usatyy, I. B. (2009). Terminology of parts of speech in modern Russian linguistics. Nizhniy Novgorod: Lobachevsky State University of Nizhniy Novgorod.

Volodina, T. S. (2014). Polysemy of linguistic terms (on the material of modern German). Linguistic and Conceptual Pictures of the World, 47(1), 229-237.

Yang, Y. (2013). Exploring linguistic and cultural variations in the use of hedges in English and Chinese scientific discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 50(1), 23-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.01.008

Yartseva, V. N. (1990). Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary. Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya.

Yunusova, S. M. (2021). Paraphrases related to the language of advertising. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, 7(4), 236-240.

Zarubina, D. N. (2019). Portrait in nature. Science and Life, 6.

Zherebilo, T. V. (2016). Dictionary of linguistic terms and concepts (6th edition). Nazran: Piligrim.