Dynamic processes in Ukrainian terminology of management

Nataliya Krasnopolskа

Information about the author:

Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor of Ukrainian Language and Literature Department, Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman (Kyiv, Ukraine)

e-mail: zhebrov@gmail.com

Title: Dynamic processes in Ukrainian terminology of management

Rubric: Branch Terminology

Abstract: The researches of innovative processes that occur in various terminology systems of Ukrainian language remains debatable. These issues continue to remain relevant and require further study, and that necessitates our intelligence.
The purpose of the article is to characterize the dynamic processes in modern terminology of management, as well as to determine the main language and extra-linguistic factors that influence the development of the aforementioned terminology.
One of the key processes that affect the building vocabulary of management considers borrowed words of Anglicisms. You can select the most relevant causes of borrowing the Anglicism terms, they are: 1) the need for the distinction between scientific field of management or of their specialization; 2) the need for naming new concepts, phenomena recorded in foreign scientific literature of management, but those that do not have equivalents in the Ukrainian scientific language; 3) the trend of “linguistic economy” (O. Jespersen), which is reflected in replacing the bulky narrative construction with one-word borrowing.
Along with the advent of neologism borrowed words one can observe the expansion of using foreign language special terminology of economics, finance, commercial activities and some other industries. Neosemantisms constitute a significant layer of loanwords in terminology of management.
Changes in the political system of Ukraine and its output to the international arena as an independent state became the most important factors for updates in the vocabulary of the Ukrainian language, led to the rehabilitation of “forbidden” words in the studied area. These lexemes functioned in the Ukrainian language as exotisms which called the realities that were officially considered not inherent to the Soviet reality.
The priority feature of the modern terminology of management is the process of passivization caused by the distance to the periphery of the vocabulary of words due to the loss of nominative urgency caused by the partial or complete disappearance of realities and concepts that they marked. The terms which were relevant during the Soviet period, are transferred to the category of archaic.
The distinguishing feature of the present stage of terminology of management is determinologization. Appearing on the pages of periodicals or fiction, term stops functioning only in a very specific context, that is changing its purpose to call a special concept.
For modern Ukrainian terminology of management at the turn of the twenty-first century the following semantic processes are characterized: neologization that is the appearance of the borrowed Anglicism words under influence of external and internal factors; neosemantization that is the appearance of the new meanings in the already known words (neosemantisms); activation of functioning of the lexems that were previously used only to describe the phenomena of the capitalist world; archaization and determinologization.

Keywords: term, terminology, dynamic processes, new borowings, archaism, determinologization.

References:

1. Bielousova, V. (1998). Problema kodyfikatsii anhlo-amerykanskykh zapozychen na -ing (na materiali viddiieslivnykh imennykiv). In Ukrainska terminolohiia i suchasnist [zb. nauk. prats] (pp. 116–119). Kyiv (in Ukr.).
2. Boiarova, L.H. Ukrainska naukova terminolohiia v konteksti hlobalizatsiinykh protsesiv. Ukrainska naukova terminolohiia. Pryrodnychi nauky: zb. mater. nauk.-prakt. konf. (Kyiv, 2012) (pp. 20–28). Kyiv: Nauk. dumka, 2012 (in Ukr.).
3. Golovanevskij, A.L. (1986). Obshchestvenno-politicheskaya leksika v slovaryah 1900−1917 gg. (K probleme ideologo-semanticheskoj tipologii slovarej dorevolyucionnogo perioda). Filologicheskie nauki, 1986, №3, 25−31 (in Rus.).
4. Daki, O. (2015). Dynamichni protsesy u suchasnii ukrainskii morskii terminolohii. Naukovi zapysky, Vyp. 137: Seriia: Filolohichni nauky (movoznavstvo), 184−188 (in Ukr.).
5. Zelencova, M.G. Osobennosti otrazheniya inoyazychnoj terminologii v yazykah recipientah (na materiale terminologii menedzhmenta russkogo i ukrainskogo yazykov) [PhD thesis]. Simferopol’ (in Rus.).
6. Karpilovska, Ye.A. (2007). Tendentsii zasvoiennia anhlitsyzmiv u suchasnii ukrainskii movi. Visnyk Kyivskoho natsionalnoho linhvistychnoho universytetu. Seriia Filolohiia, 2007, Vol. 10, 78−84 (in Ukr.).
7. Krysin, L.P. (1996). Inoyazychnoe slovo v kontekste sovremennoj obshchestvennoj zhizni. In Russkij yazyk konca XX stoletiya (1985−1995) (pp. 142−161). Moscow: Yazyki russkoj kul’tury (in Rus.).
8. Kushch, E.O. (2010). Semantychni aspekty mihratsii ta sposoby perekladu anhliiskoi terminolohichnoi leksyky. Visnyk Zaporizkoho natsionolnoho universytetu, 2010, №1, 215−221 (in Ukr.).
9. Medved, M.M. (2012). Dynamichni protsesy u vydavnycho-polihrafichnii terminolohii kintsia XX –pochatku XXI st. Naukovi pratsi Natsionalnoi biblioteky Ukrainy im. V. I. Vernadskoho, Vyp. 34, 144−149 (in Ukr.).
10. Mykhalevych, O.M. (2011). Struktura ta funktsii ekonomichnoi leksyky druhoi polovyny XX – pochatku XXI [Synopsis of PhD thesis]. Lutsk (in Ukr.).
11. Minchak, H.B. (2003). Konotatyvna semantyka suchasnykh ideolohichno zabarvlenykh nominatyvnykh odynyts (na materiali ukrainskoi presy 90-kh rokiv XX stolittia) [PhD thesis]. (in Ukr.).
12. Ohar, E. (2002). Kompiuteryzatsiia vydavnychoi haluzi ta rozvytok suchasnoi vydavnychoi terminolohii. Visnyk : Problemy ukrainskoi terminolohii, 2002, № 453, 237–241 (in Ukr.).
13. Oliinyk, A.D. (2002). Rol zapozychen-anhlitsyzmiv u rozvytku suchasnoi mikroekonomichnoi terminolohii [PhD thesis]. Kyiv (in Ukr.).
14. Popova, N.O. (2007). Struktura ta semantyka leksychnykh zapozychen z anhliiskoi v ukrainsku movu novitnoho period [Monohrafiia]. Kharkiv : KhNADU (in Ukr.).
15. Skoreiko-Svirska, I.P. (2009). Osvoiennia anhlomovnykh zapozychen v ukrainskii naukovo-tekhnichnii terminolohii [Synopsis of PhD thesis]. Ternopil (in Ukr.).
16. Snisarenko, Ya.S. (2015). Innovatsiini protsesy u skladi suspilno-politychnoi leksyky ukrainskoi movy. In Naukovi zapysky. Vyp. 137. Seriia: Filolohichni nauky (movoznavstvo) (pp. 92–95). Kirovohrad: RVV KDPU im. V. Vynnychenka (in Ukr.).
17. Khalinovska, L.A. (2010). Innovatsiini protsesy u suchasnii ukrainskii aviatsiinii terminolohii. Ukrainska naukova terminolohiia: zb. mater. naukovo-prakt. konf (Kyiv, 2010). (pp. 118−126). Kyiv: Nauk. dumka (in Ukr.).
18. Turovska, L.V. (2005). Innovatsiini protsesy v ukrainskii naukovii terminolohii. Ukrainska mova, 2005, №2, 56−63 (in Ukr.).
19. Shapran, D.P. (2004). Suchasna ukrainska terminolohiia marketynhu: semantyka ta prahmatyka [Synopsis of PhD thesis]. Dnipropetrovsk (in Ukr.).

Legends:

Malchenko, I., Samokysh, M. & Kovtun, O. (1993). Azbuka menedzhmentu : Slovnyk (in Ukr.).
Bashnianyna, H.I., Iftemichuka, V.S. (Eds.) (2004). Heneza rynkovoi ekonomiky. Lviv: Mahnoliia plius (in Ukr.).
Danylenko, V. (2010).  Kapeliukh Sikorskoho [Novel]. Lviv: Piramida (in Ukr.).
Mochernyi, S.V. et al. (2000). Ekonomichna entsyklopediia (Vol. 1–3). Kyiv: Vyd. tsentr “Akademiia” (in Ukr.).
Bahriia, P.I., Dorohuntsova, S.I. (1973). Ekonomichnyi slovnyk. Kyiv: URE AN URSR (in Ukr.).
Kostenko, L. (2011). Zapysky ukrainskoho samashedshoho. Kyiv: A-BA-BA-HA-LA-MA-HA (in Ukr.).
Kolesnikov,  H.O. (2010). Slovnyk iz menedzhmentu ta marketynhu: dovid. vyd.; navch. posib. Lutsk: VIEM (in Ukr.).
Turovska, L.V., Vasylkova, L.M. (2008). Novi slova ta znachennia: slovnyk / In-t ukr. movy NAN Ukrainy; ukl. Kyiv: Dovira (in Ukr.).
Shevchenko, L.I., Nika, O.I., Khomiak, O.I., & Demianiuk, A.A. (2008). Novyi slovnyk inshomovnykh sliv. Kyiv: ARII (in Ukr.).
Pustovit, L.O. et al. (2000). Slovnyk inshomovnykh sliv. Kyiv: Dovira (in Ukr.).