FEATURES OF ABBREVIATION AS A WAY OF WORD FORMATION IN MODERN UKRAINIAN MILITARY TERMINOLOGY

  • Olga Yaroslavivna Andriyanova
Keywords: term-abbreviation, extra-linguistic factors, lexical-semantic groups, structural types, military preface

Abstract

The article is devoted to the study of the phenomenon of abbreviation in modern Ukrainian military terminology. To perform the tasks in the study the descriptive (for inventory and taxonomy of acronyms) and structural (presented by the folowing methodologies: oppositional, distributive, transformational analysis) research methods were used. Extralingual factors have been identified as dominant: the military conflict in eastern Ukraine, the European integration process and strategic partnership with NATO. Depending on the content, we distinguish 8 lexical-semantic groups: to indicate the types of structural units, military technical equipment, weapons, ammunition, other equipment, the operations of troops during the actual fight and while performing of combat missions, daily activities of troops, military documentation and the order of its maintenance, each of which is a kind of hierarchical formation of a military term system that functions with different activity. Structural types whose creation occurs according to general principles are investigated. The most productive are the initials (alphabetic and acoustic), while the low-frequency are partial. The product types are described by the number of abbreviated word components. Problems in the creation of the abbreviation of the military subtext have been identified. Among which is the adjective + noun with the meaning of the type concept in relation to the noun term indicating its functional peculiarity; adjective + adjective + noun – which is based on a complex adjective formed with an adjective with an adjective or a noun with an adjective with interfixation and a noun.

Errors and inaccuracies in the creation of acronyms were identified: the use of homonyms, creation of non-acoustic acronyms; the use of acronyms that are consonant with a literary word; use of abbreviations mechanically copied from Russian; the use of variants; the texts burdened with abbreviations, the inconsistency of the abbreviation with other clauses of the sentence,

We suppose that the further study of the problem involves the creation of an appropriate vocabulary and glossary of abbreviations of military terminology that could satisfy the need for linguistic support in this area.

References

1. Борисов В. В. Аббревиация и акронимия. Военные и научно-технические сокращения в иностранных языках. Москва: Воениздат, (1972). 320 с.
2. Горпинич В. О. Українська словотвірна дериватологія : навч посіб. Дніпропетровськ: ДДУ, (1998). 189 с.
3. Клименко Н. Ф. Абревіатура. Українська мова: Енциклопедія; [редкол.: В. М. Русанівський, О. О. Тараненко (співголови), М. П. Зяблюк та ін.]. Київ: Укр. енцикл., (2004). 824 с.
4. Лотте Д. С. Основы построения научно-технической терминологии. Москва: Изд.-во АН СССР, (1961). 158 с.
5. Нелюба А. Перебіг і наслідки одного скорочування. Вісник Львівського університету. Серія філологічна, (2004). Вип. 34 (2). С. 232–238.
6. Онуфрієнко Г. С. Науковий стиль української мови: навч. посібник. Київ: Центр навчальної літератури, (2006). 312 с.
7. Український словотвір у термінах: слов.-довід. / Л. О. Вакарюк, С. Є. Панцьо. – Тернопіль: Джура, (2007). 259 c.
8. Włodzimierz Potasiński, Roman Bohdanowicz, Mariusz Jędrzejko. Słownik terminów skrótów wojskowych : angielskopolski, polsko-angielski Warszawa : Bellona, (2000), 349 p.
Published
2019-12-27
Pages
12-17
Section
SECTION 2 FUNCTIONAL SEMANTICS OF LEXICAL AND GRAMMATICAL UNITS