Ukrainian Tax Terms: Principles of System Approach

Olena Chorna

Information about the author:

Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor, University of State Fiscal Service of Ukraine (Irpin, Ukraine)

e-mail: chaika_75_ch@ukr.net.

Title: Ukrainian Tax Terms: Principles of System Approach

Rubric: Branch Terminology

Abstract: The article deals with modern term as a special language sign and its characteristics from the linguists’ point of view. Every language as a means of communication has a strict structure. Different language mechanisms are depend of each other and function as one organization. We know, that system approach to language was made in XIX cent., it became the main only in XX cent. V. V. Wynogradov discovered its basis. Different scientific works on theory of semantic fields (G. Ipsen, J. Trir) were done before contemporary system researches. In our opinion, terminology is the amount of all scientific and professional concepts which belong to certain branch with its inner relations and connections with special knowledge sphere, for which they were invented and used. Every term system is under the influence of general literary lexicon and scientific concepts. Due to different approaches to term definition, we can say, that it belongs to subjectively-valued concepts. System organization of terminology is based on term as a special language sign and on its classification according to their semantic and structure. Linguistic classification base – differentiation of terms according to structure and semantic – gives the opportunity to define subgroups, term categories in terminological system of Modern Ukrainian: subject concepts, names of processes, conditions, etc. we have to notice, that terms can define general concepts or generic and specific. Correlation of terms denoting generic and specific concepts meets yet another criterion system – hierarchy, as subordination more general items to less common in the system. System analysis of terms needs to find connections between elements of term system and to describe its structure (amount of connections and relations between language elements).
The principles of system approach to the study of tax terminology are characterized in this article. Correlation of term system ‘tax’ with other terminology can be divided into several connections: 1) with terms of specific sections: podatky zemelni, podatky transportni etc.; 2) with a term used only in the tax area, but no specific correlation with the terminology of a section: zbir, vnesok, aktsyz, poshlyna; 3) with terms that serve not only the tax sector but the financial sector in general and even the economy as a whole: vidomist, deklaratsiia, obsiah zastavy, zvitna dokumentatsiia and so on.
Lexical-semantic relations express different kinds of semantic relations between the components of compound terms. Here it is necessary to provide logical and semantic relations that can be derived from the correlation of each component of terminological phrase with a certain logical concepts (object, feature, process, etc.), with the consideration of the interaction of these concepts in the term, and the syntactic and semantic relationships, such as coordination and attributive connections in the phrase aktsyznyi zbir, objective connection in term стягнення податку, coordination in term pokaznyk prybutkovosti etc.
Subject-and-logical connections in term system make it possible to identify the relationship between scientific concepts of a certain branch. Genus-species relationship between terms is the most common type of connections (zbir – aktsyznyi zbir, plata – plata orendna neperedbachena, renta – zemelna renta), the whole and partial (prybutkovyi podatok – prybutkovyi podatok z hromadskykh orhanizatsii, prybutkovyi podatok z pidpryiemstv).
System approach in terminology is useful because it is difficult to compare term systems of different languages in general because of some their peculiarities. Subsystems and microsystems make comparative research easier and deeper. System approach usage helps to define all types of relations between terms and their constituents, so give deep and full analysis of terms.

Keywords: term, terminology, system, classification of terms, system approach.

References:

1. Vinokur, G.O. (1929). Problema kul’tury rechi. Russkij yazyk v nacional’noj shkole, 1929, № 5, 85–87 (in Rus.).
2. Vyuster, E. (1935). Mezhdunarodnaya standartizaciya yazyka v tekhnike. Moscow – Leningrad (in Rus.).
3. Gerd, A.S. (1968). Problemy formirovaniya nauchnoj terminologii (na materiale russkih nauchnyh nazvanij ryb) [Docoral thesis]. Leningrad (in Rus.).
4. Golovin, B.N. (1973). O nekotoryh dokazatel’stvah terminirovannosti slovosochetanij. Leksika, terminologiya, stili, Vyp. 2, 61–65 (in Rus.).
5. Hrydzhuk, O.Ye. (2001). Terminolohichna leksyka khudozhnoi rizby po derevu [PhD thesis]. Ivano-Frankivsk (in Ukr.).
6. Hrozovska, N.A. (1998). Terminolohiia vesilnoho obriadu serednonaddniprianskoho rehionu [PhD thesis]. Zaporizhzhia (in Ukr.).
7. Danyliuk, O.K. (2000). Heohrafichna terminolohiia Volyni [PhD thesis]. Kyiv: Instytut movoznavstva im. O. O. Potebni NAN Ukrainy (in Ukr.).
8. Dmytruk, M.V. Formuvannia ukrainskoi veterynarnoi leksyky [PhD thesis]. Simferopol: Tavriiskyi nats. un-t im. V. I. Vernadskoho (in Ukr.).
9. Diakov, A.S., Kyiak, T R. & Kudelko, Z. B. (2000). Osnovy terminotvorennia: Semantychni ta sotsiolinhvistychni aspekty. Kyiv: Vyd. dim “KM Akademiia” (in Ukr.).
10. Diachuk, T.M. (2003). Ukrainska sotsialno-ekonomichna terminolohiia: stanovlennia i kodyfikatsiia [PhD thesis]. Kyiv: Kyivskyi nats. un-t im. Tarasa Shevchenka (in Ukr.).
11. Ivanova, F.P. & Buldenko, K.A. (1970). Nablyudeniya nad semanticheskoj i slovoobrazovatel’noj strukturoj dialektnyh terminov. Uchebnye zapiski Habarovskogo ped. in-ta. Seriya russkogo yazyka, Vol. 29, 183–191 (in Rus.).
12. Kandelaki, T.L. (1986). Opyt razrabotki principov uporyadocheniya terminologii (konstruirovanie slovarej sistemnogo tipa). In Sovremennye problemy russkoj terminologii (1986). (pp. 124–140). Moscow (in Rus.).
13. Kapanadze, L.A. (1965). O ponyatiyah “termin” i “terminologiya” (na materiale nauchno-tekhnicheskoj terminologii). In Razvitie leksiki sovremennogo russkogo yazyka (1965). (pp. 75–85). Moscow: Nauka (in Rus.).
14. Kochan, I.M. (2004). Dynamika i kodyfikatsiia terminiv z mizhnarodnymy komponentamy u suchasnii ukrainskii movi. Lviv: Vyd. tsentr LNU im. I. Franka (in Ukr.).
15. Kryzhanivska, A.V. (1984). Problemy uporiadkuvannia terminoleksyky na suchasnomu etapi. Movoznavstvo,1984, №1, 12–19 (in Ukr.).
16. Kryzhanovskaya, A.V. (1985). Sopostavitel’noe issledovanie terminologii sovremennogo russkogo i ukrainskogo yazykov: Problemy unifikacii i integracii. Kyiv: Nauk. dumka (in Rus.).
17. Kuznecov, A.M. (1970). Sopostavitel’nyj tipologicheskij analiz terminov rodstva v anglijskom, datkom, francuzskom i ispanskom yazykah. Filologicheskie nauki, 1970, № 1, 203–216 (in Rus.).
18. Lytvyn, O.H. (2000). Stanovlennia ukrainskoi mashynobudivnoi terminolohii [PhD thesis]. Lviv: Instytut ukrainoznavstva im. I. Krypiakevycha NAN Ukrainy (in Ukr.).
19. Lotte, D.S. (1961). Osnovy postroeniya nauchno-tekhnicheskoj terminologii. Moscow: Izd-vo AN SSSR (in Rus.).
20. Mis’kevich, G.I. (1971). Nekotorye nablyudeniya nad novymi terminami. In Issledovaniya po russkoj terminologii (1971). (pp. 166–182). Moscow: Nauka (in Rus.).
21. Moldataev, E.A. (1969). K problematike sportivnoj terminologii. Aktual’nye problemy leksikologii, Vyp. 2, Ch. 2, 121 (in Rus.).
22. Nakonechna, H.V. (1993). Sotsialno-psykholohichni aspekty terminotvorennia (na materiali ukrainskoi khimichnoi terminolohii). Problemy ukrainskoi naukovo-tekhnichnoi terminolohii: Tezy dop. II Mizhnar. nauk. konf. (Lviv, 1993). (pp. 113–115). Lviv: Vyd-vo Derzh. un-tu “Lvivska politekhnika” (in Ukr.).
23. Panochko, M.N. Ukrainska sportyvna leksyka [Synopsis of PhD thesis]. Kyiv: Kyivskyi derzh. un-t (in Ukr.).
24. Pokrovska, O.A. (1996). Ukrainska terminolohiia rynkovykh vidnosyn [Synopsis of PhD thesis]. Kharkiv: Kharkivskyi derzh. un-t (in Ukr.).
25. Popova, N.E. (1967). O nekotoryh terminah rybnogo promysla (na materiale delovyh dokumentov Krasnoyarskogo ostroga 17–18 vv.). In Materialy i issledovaniya po russkoj dialektologii (1967). (pp. 4–14). Krasnoyarsk (in Rus.).
26. Radchenko, O.I. (2000). Movna norma i variantnist v ukrainskii naukovii terminolohii [PhD thesis]. Kharkiv: Kharkivskyi nats. un-t im. V. N. Karazina (in Ukr.).
27. Razumeiko, M.S. (1995). Pedahohichna leksyka ukrainskoi movy [Synopsis of PhD thesis]. Kyiv: Instytut ukrainskoi movy NAN Ukrainy (in Ukr.).
28. Reformatskij, A.A. (1968). Termin kak chlen leksicheskoj sistemy yazyka. In Problemy strukturnoj lingvistiki (1968) (pp.103–123). Moscow: Nauka (in Rus.).
29. Sergevnina, V.M. (1978). Principy sistemnogo analiza terminov. Termin i slovo: Mezhvuz. sb. Gor’kovskogo GU, Vyp. 1 (7), 65–74 (in Rus.).
30. Symonenko, L.O. (2006). Biolohichna terminolohiia: Formuvannia ta funktsionuvannia. Uman: Sofiia (in Ukr.).
31. Symonenko, L.O. (2007). Linhvistychni problemy unormuvannia naukovoi terminolohii. In Ukrainska terminolohiia i suchasnist [zb. nauk. prats] (2007). (pp. 21–25). Kyiv (in Ukr.).
32. Siryk, S.V. (1998). Nazvy dorih v ukrainskii movi [PhD thesis]. Zaporizhzhia: Zaporizkyi derzh. un-t (in Ukr.).
33. Tolikina, E.N. (1964). O sistemnom sootnoshenii terminologicheskogo sochetaniya i frazeologicheskoj edinicy. In Problemy frazeologii (p. 165). Moscow–Leningrad: Nauka (in Rus.).
34. Trubachev, O.N. (1965). Remeslennaya terminologiya v slavyanskih yazykah (Etimologiya i opyt gruppovoj rekonstrukcii) [Synopsis of Dr thesis]. Moscow (in Rus.).
35. Hayutin, A.D. (1963). O nekotoryh edinicah terminologicheskoj leksiki (otnosyashchejsya k strukture i osushchestvleniyu vlasti v gosudarstve) v “Puteshestvii iz Peterburga v Moskvu” Radishcheva. Trudy SamGU, 1963, T.130, 105–110 (in Rus.).
36. Cheremisina, M.I. (1971). O sistemnosti terminov i ponyatij sintaksisa. Semioticheskie problemy yazykov nauki, terminologii i informatiki, Ch. 2, 371–376 (in Rus.).
37. Shkatova, L.A. (1967). Yavlyayutsya li terminami naimenovaniya lic po professii? Voprosy sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo yazyka, Vyp. 2, 37–51 (in Rus.).