Deverbatives with Generalising Semantics of an Objectified Action or Process in “The Dictionary of Economic Terminology” by H. Kryvchenko, V. Ihnatovych

Olena Pchelintseva

Information about the author:  

Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor, Head of the Ukrainian language and general linguistics Department, Cherkasy State Technological University, Visiting researcher at the Johannes Gutenberg University (Mainz, Germany)

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4472-429X

e-mail: o.pchelintseva@chdtu.edu.ua

Liudmyla Sydorenko

Information about the author:  

Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Ukrainian Language and General Linguistics, Cherkasy State Technological University

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7148-6146

e-mail: milasidorenko2@gmail.com

Title: Deverbatives with Generalising Semantics of an Objectified Action or Process in “The Dictionary of Economic Terminology” by H. Kryvchenko, V. Ihnatovych

https://doi.org/10.37919/2221-8807-2025-8-29

Rubric: Terminology of Humanities and Economic Sciences

Abstract: The proposed article examines deverbatives with generalising semantics of an objectified action or process, recorded in the reprint edition of “The Dictionary of Economic Terminology” by H. Kryvchenko and V. Ihnatovych (1930). The study provides an opportunity for a comparative analysis of lexical units, characteristic of the early 20th century, with contemporary deverbatives, contributing to systematic refinement of economic terminology. It has been established that identical word-formation mechanisms are mainly used to denote similar concepts. In economic terminology, deverbatives with the suffixes -nnj(a)/-ttj(a) serve to express the generalising semantics of an objectified action or process. Deverbatives with a zero suffix are used to indicate the effectiveness of an action, which can be manifested as a locative value or a property value, which means the ability of a subject to manifest a certain action under external influence. The revealed trend indicates a tendency to separate designation of terms that differ in the nature of the course of the action. Lexicological resources compiled in the aforementioned dictionary will facilitate the development and standardisation of modern Ukrainian economic terminology.

Keywords: economic terminology, deverbatives, terminological apparatus, wordforming means, normalisation.

References:

Bulletin of the Ukrainian Soviet Encyclopedia, 1 (1931). Kharkiv: URE (in Ukr.).

Vakulenko, M.O. (2023). Modern Ukrainian Terminology: Methodology, Codification, Lexicographic Practice [Thesis for a Doctoral Degree in Philology, Ukrainian Lingua-Information Fund of NASU], Kyiv. (in Ukr.).

Hinzburh, M.D. (2012). Linguistic basis of the theory of presentation of process concepts in Ukrainian professional language. In Ukrainska naukova terminolohiia: Zbirnyk materialiv naukovo-praktychnoi konferentsii “Ukrainska naukova terminolohiia. Pryrodnychi nauky”, 4 (pp. 29–39). Kyiv: Naukova dumka (in Ukr.).

Hinzburh, M.D. (2019). Peculiarities of the Ukrainian language in presenting process concepts in professional texts. Language: Codification, Competence. Communication, 3, 7–24 (in Ukr.).

Horetskyi, P., & Shalia, I. (1926). Ukrainian Language. Practical and Theoretical Course. Kyiv: Knyhospilka (in Ukr.).
Horodenska, K. (1998). The problem of word-formation identity in Ukrainian terminology. In Ukrainian terminology and modernity (pp. 10–13). Kyiv (in Ukr.).

Horodenska, K.H. (2017). Grammatical standard of the Ukrainian literary language and modern practice. Grammatical Studies, 3, 17–21. Vinnytsia: DonNU imeni Vasylia Stusa (in Ukr.).

Hrytsenko, P., & Britsyn, V. (2021). An important step in creating a Ukrainian-speaking space. In H. Kryvchenko, & V. Ihnatovych. Dictionary of economic terminology (pp. III–XVI). Kyiv: Vydavnychyi dim Dmytra Burahoa. (Oryhinalna robota opublikovanau 1930) (in Ukr.).

Kochan, I. (2023). Ukrainian terminology of the late 20th and first decades of the 21st century. Studia Ukrainica Posnaniensia, XI/1, 55–70 (in Ukr.).

Kryvchenko, H., & Ihnatovych, V. (2021). Dictionary of Economic Terminology (s. XVI) (P. Hrytsenko & V. Britsyn, Peredmova; NAN Ukrainy, Instytut movoznavstva im. O.O. Potebni, Instytut ukrainskoi movy). Kyiv: Vydavnychyi dim Dmytra Buraho. (Oryhinalna robota opublikovana u 1930 r.) (in Ukr.).

Kurylo, O. (2004). Notes on the Modern Ukrainian Literary Language. Kyiv: Vydavnytstvo Solomii Pavlychko “Osnovy”. (1925). (in Ukr.).

Marvan, I. (1992). The status of Ukrainian verbal substantives and participles. Movoznavstvo, 2, 3–7 (in Ukr.).

Pchelintseva, O. (2019). Functional and grammatical specificity of Ukrainian verbal nouns with the meaning of action against the background of other Slavic languages. Terminolohichnyi visnyk, 5, 33–40 (in Ukr.).

Selivanova, O.O. (2008). Modern Linguistics: Trends and Problems. (p. 11). Poltava: Dovkillia (in Ukr.).

Sydorenko, L.M. (2006). Derivatives with generalising semantics of an objectified action or process in technical terminology. In Humanitarnyi visnyk. Seriia: Inozemnafilolohiia: Vseukrainskyi zbirnyk naukovykh prats, 10, pp. 375–377 (in Ukr.).

Syniavskyi, O. (1992). Advisor of the Ukrainian language. Berlin; New-York: Ukrainoamerykanske vydavnyche tovarystvo “Kosmos” (in Ukr.).

Sukharyna, N.M. (2003). Grammatical and Lexical Semantics of the Ukrainian Verb in the Lexicographic System (Extended abstract of candidate’s thesis, Potebnia Institute of Linguistics of NAS of Ukraine). Kyiv (in Ukr.).

Sherekh, Yu. (1951). An Essay on the Modern Ukrainian Literary Language. (Naukove tovarystvo im. Shevchenka; Biblioteka ukrainoznavstva, Part 3). Munich: Molode zhyttia (in Ukr.).

Pchelintseva, O. (October 2022). Aspectual properties of Ukrainian verbal action nouns. Russian Linguistics, 46 (3), 1–14. 10.1007/s11185-022-09267-4 (in Ukr./Eng.).

Pometkova, J. (2002). Intellektualizacija na ezyka črez nominalizirani kontrukcii. Naučnitrudove na Rusenskija universitet “A. Kǎnčev”, 39/2.2, 26–29