Structural and semantic features of socio-political terminology in English, German and Russian languages. Structural and semantic features of socio-political terminology in English, German and Russian languages ​​Political vocabulary in English

Since ancient times, the study of language began with its “internal structure”; in the modern world, language is of increasing interest in dynamics, namely in oral speech, in action. Problems of the functioning of language in society come to the fore; scientists are interested in its informational and psychological impact on the listener and reader. Since language is the main means of human communication, it instantly responds to all changes in society. In the political sphere, as in any area of ​​public life, communication plays a vital role. In political discourse, a significant place is occupied by politicians’ speeches and appeals that are aimed at attracting the attention of society, forcing society to support one or another political force. At the same time, it is important that the text of a political speech is effective, hides certain points and inclines society to think in the right direction. That is why political figures resort to the use of lexical units that hide unpleasant social phenomena and decorate reality. These lexical units are called euphemisms. Euphemism (eu + pheme = good speech, in Greek) is a stylistically neutral word, phrase or expression used instead of that synonymous linguistic unit that is indecent, impolite, rude or tactless, offends or frightens the listener; the main purpose of euphemisms is to veil, disguise the essence of a given phenomenon (for example, die, pass away instead of die, tell a lie instead of lying). Euphemism has a certain specificity. It manifests itself both in the linguistic essence of euphemism, and in the topics that are most often subject to euphemism, the areas of use of euphemisms, as well as in the types of linguistic methods and means by which they are created. The essence of euphemism can be revealed in three criteria: 1. The speaker’s assessment of the subject in question, and the designation of which can be recognized as harshness, tactlessness or indecency. 2. The speaker’s selection of certain appropriate designations that will veil the phrase, make it softer and more tactful. 3. Dependence of the use of euphemism on the context and on the conditions of speech: the stricter the social control of the speech situation and the speaker’s self-control of his own speech, the more likely the appearance of euphemisms, and, on the contrary, in poorly controlled speech situations and with high automaticity of speech (communication in the family, with friends, etc.) “direct”, non-euphemistic means of designation may be preferred to euphemisms. So, the main goal of euphemization of speech is the desire to avoid communicative conflicts and not create a feeling of communicative discomfort in the listener. According to the Macmillan Dictionary, “euphemism is a word or expression that people use when they want to talk about something unpleasant or embarrassing without mentioning the thing itself.” unpleasant or tactless without mentioning the word directly) [author's translation]. Political euphemisms in the English language are divided into different groups: by the number of words, by parts of speech, and also by areas (topics) of use. 1. The first group is one word-euphemism. 1) For example, the noun detainee - an illegal immigrant who has been arrested (an illegal immigrant in custody); 2) Adjective: disabled - the politically correct term referring to people with a physical or a mental handicap (person with disabilities - a politically correct term referring to people with physical or mental disabilities), nationalized - private ownership that was confiscated by government ( nationalized - private property that has been confiscated by the state); 2. A euphemism is a phrase consisting of two words. 1) For example, an adjective and a noun: nuclear intention - the policy dealing with nuclear weapons (intention to use nuclear weapons - policy related to nuclear weapons), protective custody - the prison (preventive detention - prison); 2) Two nouns: impact fees - taxes (taxes); 3) Noun and verb: money laundering - a process in which money earned by an illegal activity is converted into a legal system. (money laundering is the sale of money that was earned illegally). 3. A euphemism is a phrase consisting of three or more words: peace-keeping force - armed forces sent to another country to ensure piece in their own country (peacekeeping forces - armed forces sent to another country to ensure order there); department of special investigation - the department which secretly monitors actions of suspicious citizens (department of special investigations - a department that secretly monitors the actions of suspicious citizens). According to the scope of use, political euphemisms in English are divided mainly into several topics: war and nuclear weapons, taxes, illegal activities, political regimes. In the Russian language, the following areas of political euphemisms can be distinguished: 1) authorities and their activities, for example, managed democracy; 2) military actions and their participants, for example, clearing a territory in the sense of physical destruction; 3) economic methods and their followers, for example, price liberalization, free prices in the sense of rising prices; 4) various national and social groups and relations between them, for example, touring performers from the Caucasus region in the meaning of criminal groups from the Caucasus. It is interesting that euphemization, or special terminology, is present not only in the field of professional communication; it gradually moves into everyday use. Speaking about political terms, we can compare Russian and English euphemisms. Russian speakers use the expression go to extreme measures, confrontation (when talking about war), capital punishment (about the death penalty). In English, we can find the following euphemisms: to eliminate - to eliminate (instead of to kill - to kill), a conflict - conflict (instead of a war - war). Summarizing the linguistic analysis of euphemisms in political speech, several conclusions can be drawn. Political euphemisms have gone beyond ordinary lexical means that can hide something unpleasant or secret, and have become one of the most powerful means of influencing the audience in order to completely change the idea of ​​certain events. They help create a positive or negative image of a politician, justify certain actions and decisions, attract the electorate to their side, and much more. Political euphemisms are one of the main tools in the hands of politicians, with the help of which they convey their goals and ideas to the listener. A comparison of the linguistic phenomenon of euphemism in Russian and English shows that both of these languages ​​are rich in euphemisms and actively use them in the field of professional communication in order to veil the essence of the denoted. Euphemisms in political discourse have similar functions in the Russian and English languages, and also coincide in some areas of use.

Political discourse is a type of speech activity that serves political processes and is characterized by a special vocabulary and typical contexts of word use. The purpose of political discourse is to evoke certain intentions and attitudes among recipients; not to describe, but to convince, motivate, determine reactions, in particular actions.

The main feature of political discourse is the existence of political vocabulary. High percentage of use of argotisms (Argo-speech of socially or professionally closed groups).

The use is explained by the fact that one of the most significant characteristics of political language is its persuasive power, its focus on convincing or dissuading those to whom it is addressed from the previous views. The language of politics can also act as a means of intimidation and suppression. A characteristic feature of terms, words and phrases in the language of politics is their value-laden nature: they not only state certain phenomena (for example, events or facts), but also evaluate them.

Another characteristic of political language is that it is multidimensional, i.e. addressed simultaneously to different groups and is capable of causing different reactions in them. However, the multidimensionality of political language in itself does not provide it with public support in the flow of mass communication. Political language must, moreover, have a clearly defined partisanship (based on the opposition between “friends” and “enemies.” Only in this way does language fulfill its identification function.

To characterize political communication, A.P. Chudinov identifies the following antinomies:

1) ritual and information content;

2) institutional and personal character;

3) esotericism and general accessibility;

4) reductionism and multidimensionality of information in a political text;

6) intertextuality and autonomy of the political text;

7) aggressiveness and tolerance in political communication (Chudinov, 2003: 56).

The main problem of politics is the presence or absence of power. Consequently, political discourse reflects the struggle of various forces for the possession of power. This determines the features of communicative actions within the framework of political discourse. It follows that the basis of communicative acts of political discourse is the desire to influence the interlocutor.

Features of political discourse:

· The “political vocabulary” of discourse is terminological, and ordinary, not purely “political” linguistic signs are not always used in the same way as in ordinary language;

· specific structure of discourse – the result of sometimes very peculiar speech techniques;

· the implementation of the discourse is also specific – its sound or written form”

Political discourse is not just communication, but it is communication main goal which is the struggle for power, and main method which is the manipulation or influence on the mental world of another person.

It must be emphasized that the transmission of messages comes from political institutions and is aimed at society. This form of information transfer is characterized by dialogue. Accordingly, a politician’s public speech to the people is a way of transmitting information through dialogue. Consequently, we conclude that discourse has a dialogical nature, i.e. represents a dialogue between government structures and the population.

The vocabulary of periodicals is distinguished by its thematic diversity and stylistic richness. Common, neutral vocabulary and phraseology, as well as book and colloquial vocabulary, are widely represented here. The choice of verbal material is determined by the topic. Among the constantly covered topics, first of all, one should name politics, information about the activities of the government and parliament, elections, party events, and statements by political leaders. Texts on this topic regularly contain such words and phrases as: management, business, democracy, capitalism, pension, wages, basket of goods, unemployment, birth rate, faction, government coalition, bill, opposition, electioneering, Lower chamber, etc. .P. In a figurative sense, they are widely used in political topics. scientific terms: atmosphere - (friendly atmosphere - friendly atmosphere); duet (duet of liberals and conservatives - duet of liberals and conservatives); behind-the-scenes - behind-the-scenes negotiations - behind-the-scenes negotiations, etc. A characteristic feature of journalistically colored words is considered to be their emotional, evaluative, expressive nature, and this assessment is not individual, but social. On the one hand, in the journalistic style there are words with a positive assessment, connotation (mercy, wealth, charity, prosperity), on the other hand, words and expressions with a negative connotation (philistine, sabotage, racism, apartheid, etc.). In political Articles of speech traditionally contain such rows of synonyms as:

situation - condition; commentator - observer - expert; specialist - professional.

In recent periodicals, new synonymous series have emerged:

oligarch - magnate;comment - declare;consultations - negotiations;support - financing;beggary - low-income population.

New vocabulary units also form new antonymic pairs:

democracy - dictatorship, fascism; legal - criminal; brand - false, imitation; people - authority.

Stylistic lexical means in journalism are determined by the communicative situation. They are closely related and complement each other, thus creating a complex model.

The most popular metaphor in political discourse. Metaphorization is the use of words in figurative meanings in order to create a vivid image, express evaluation, and emotional attitude to the subject of speech; it is intended to influence the addressee of the speech. Today, such metaphors used in a political context as ideological diversion, find one's niche, wall of distrust, economical paralysis, etc. have become erased.

The set of metaphors used in political communication is figuratively called a metaphorical mosaic [Chudinov, 2008:123].

When it comes to the Russian presidential campaign in the American media, the following metaphors are often used to nominate the main candidates for the post of head of the Russian state: a new Russian tsar (new Russian tsar), an inheritor (heir), the Russian strongman (Russian ruler), President of all Russia (President of All Rus') [Chudinov, 2008:222].

By decorating speech in form, metaphors often make it difficult to perceive the content, covering up demagoguery and putting pressure on the audience. When discussing political topics, an excess of metaphors leads to the fact that logical reasoning is replaced by emotional argument; the addressee is affected not by the strength of the arguments, but by the brightness, freshness, and catchiness of words. Excessive use of metaphors confuses the reader, and sometimes the author himself.

Political vocabulary of the English language

The English language of politics, just like the Russian language, includes both political terminology and commonly used vocabulary. The actual political terms include such lexical units as constitution, president, by-election, amendment, executive branch.

Commonly used vocabulary in the political context includes words such as public, progressive, nation-wide, unity, crisis, representative. However, due to the fact that many political terms are widely used in the media, they are well known to a large number of native speakers and have also become commonly used.

As noted earlier, the texts of political speeches are characterized by the use of terms belonging to other areas of science and human activity, since in their speeches politicians often touch on certain socially significant topics. Thus, US President Barack Obama, answering a question about genetic research in the US, used special medical terminology:

Disease treatment and identification is likewise being transformed by modern genetics. Recombinant DNA (rDNA) technology has produced a number of products such as human growth hormone or insulin or other complicated proteins that are known to be involved in bone metabolism, immune response, and tissue repair (B.Obama).

The speech of politicians in the USA and Great Britain is highly ideological. The widespread use of ideologemes allows a politician to express his affiliation with a particular party or ideology.

For example, freedom is the main value of modern democratic societies. The adjective “free” and the noun “freedom” acquire an ideological meaning for the leaders and citizens of these countries. By using these words, politicians show their commitment to the principles of a democratic state:

We are fighting for the inalienable right of humankind – black or white, Christian or not, left, right or a million different – ​​to be free, free to raise a family in love and hope, free to earn a living and be rewarded by your efforts, free not to bend your knee to any man in fear, free to be you so long as being you do not impair the freedom of others (T. Blair).

In addition to terms borrowed from other spheres, the composition of political vocabulary is actively replenished with neologisms. On the pages of English-language media on political topics, you can find such words and expressions as a teach-in (a form of political competition in the form of heated political debates), white backlash (a violent reaction of American racists to the phenomenon of the struggle of African Americans for civil rights), stop-go policies ( half-hearted and ineffective policies).

Another characteristic phenomenon in Western ideology in general and English-language ideology in particular is a powerful cultural, behavioral and linguistic tendency called “political correctness” (PC). This tendency largely determines the lexical choice of politicians. “Political speech, because of its scope and for pragmatic reasons, is one of the most euphemism-rich styles of speech.”

The creation of politically correct lexical units can be traced in two illustrative examples: “Negro → Black → Afro-American” (American Negro) or “lame → crippled → handicapped → disabled → differently abled” (disabled).

The main semantic feature of OPL is the presence of the semantic component “political, social”. This approach is typical of the Western lexicographical tradition with a large set of political glossaries and dictionaries. Foreign linguists interpret political terminology as the language used by politicians both officially and behind the scenes in the process of communicating about politics. Determining the composition of OPL is a very difficult task, because “The definition of the very concepts of “political, social” is complex and multifaceted. It is in this regard that linguists begin their analysis of OPL by determining the meanings of the components of a given term. So, L.A. Muradova characterizes the composition of the OPL quite extensively, including lexical units from various spheres of public life, for example, from economics, diplomacy, culture, which characterize state policy in a particular area. “State policy is applicable to a large number of spheres of social life of society, because it affects all areas of human activity.” Muradova L.A. Semantic-functional characteristics of the socio-political vocabulary of the modern French language. - M.: Education, 1986. - P. 61.

However, at the same time, politics is a field of activity that is associated with relations between classes, nations, and social groups. Its core is the problem of conquest, retention and use of state power, participation in state affairs. It can be noted that the core of the OPL is a very complex phenomenon, and the boundaries of the OPL are arbitrary, because language is living, moving matter. It is the OPL that quickly responds to changes occurring in the world. When translating it, not only traditional grammar is used, but also a large number of clichés.

The OPL consists of 4 zones: Zhdanova L.A. Socio-political vocabulary: Structure and dynamics: dissertation of a candidate of philological sciences: 10.02.01. - Moscow, 1996. - 224 p.

• 1 zone - OPL itself (OPL in the narrow sense). Actually, OPL is political vocabulary. This group includes direct nominations of persons, places, phenomena, structures that shape the political life of society.
• 2 zone - ideological vocabulary. The expression of a power relationship is associated with an evaluative meaning and a pragmatic component of meaning, designated as “engagement,” reflecting the attachment of the word to a specific historical era. Ideological vocabulary is a marker of the speaker’s political position and the ideological orientation of the text.
• 3 zone - thematic vocabulary. First of all, this vocabulary denotes the spheres and forms of manifestation of public life (army, economy, administrative sphere, foreign policy, etc.)
• 4 zone - non-specific OPL (so-called “peripheral” OPL). Such vocabulary describes power relations in general, regardless of the sphere of implementation, or a specific (but not state-political) sphere of implementation of power relations. Traditionally, this vocabulary is not included in the OPL. But semantics and the systematic correlation of non-literate OPL with socio-political life, including metaphorical transfers, branched relationships between all words denoting a power relationship, are the basis for considering this vocabulary within the framework of OPL.

It should be noted that the term “socio-political vocabulary” (SPL) is used by domestic linguistics to designate a set of lexical units that name the concepts and realities of socio-political life and are widely used in the media. Foreign science, in turn, operates with a different terminological apparatus:

“social life, political life, political discourse, political discourse analysis, political dictionary, language of politics, political language, political cognition, political communication, political opinion classification, political economy words, political quotations, political slang, dictionary of social sciences, political terms, social issues dictionary, social science terminology" .

but never socio-political life or socio-political words/lexis. In the West, there is a tendency to distinguish between the political and social spheres, so options are possible social and political life/language/vocabulary/lexis(cf. public life - understood in English in a different context). According to the definition in many English-language dictionaries, socio-political is understood as “relating to, associated with, or implying a combination of both social and political factors” URL: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/sociopolitical (access date: 04/28/2013) .

• Pryanikova Alina Alexandrovna, student
• Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University, Institute of International Relations, History and Oriental Studies

• TERM FORMATION
• TERMINOLOGY
• CONCEPT
• TERM
• TRANSLATION METHODS

The article examines the methods of term formation and structural and semantic features of socio-political terminology. The study shows productive ways of forming political terms and describes their translation options from English and German into Russian.

• “It’s as if he built a house in chaos according to all the laws of statics and life...”: on the grammatical structure of participial phrases characterizing buildings in the poetry of I. Brodsky
• Historical and local history topics as a means of updating the ethnic community (travel journalism and ethnotourism in the Republic of Mordovia)
• Sonnet and wreath of sonnets in Mordovian poetry: formation and history of development
• Syntagmatics of pressure verbs: object valency

The 21st century is the era of globalization, the emergence and development of the information society, where every person is to some extent involved in world events, receiving a huge amount of information every day. Language, being primarily a means of communication, performs many other functions; it allows you to look into the past, comprehend the present and open the curtain to the future. Words that express special knowledge, the concept of certain areas of activity are usually called terms. Despite the fact that terminology as a science emerged only in the 20th century, during the scientific and technological process, when new inventions and the development of human thought required the systematization of existing concepts and their precise interpretations for each field of knowledge and each language separately, many domestic and Foreign linguists date the origin of terminology to the early stage of human development. As you know, the Sumerian civilization gave the world many inventions - the wheel, writing, irrigation system, potter's wheel - hence the designations of these realities, which from written sources indicate the level of development of society in ancient times. V.V. Vinogradov wrote that “the history of terminology is a story about the patterns of development of knowledge about nature and society.”

Terminology acts as a repository of scientific and professional knowledge and a mediator in specialized communication, and also has many tools for creating new terms. Terminology can be classified as an anthropocentric science, since it reveals the human impact on language, recording the cultural, historical and social experience of ancestors. In the last century, the boom in the development of terminologies was associated with the emergence of new areas of knowledge, scientific achievements and the development of the information space; currently, most of it falls on the information space. Modern man strives to be informed, to keep abreast of world events, which allows the media to create neologisms, thereby replenishing the layer of socio-political terms.

It should be noted that political vocabulary is replenished from political science terminology, which contains knowledge aimed at specialists in this field and incomprehensible to most citizens. However, the information flow presents world events, uses narrow terms and, thereby, takes them out of the field of political science knowledge to a wide audience. In the era of globalization, the importance of information reaches enormous proportions, wars and attacks are waged to gain access to closed sources, and it is also necessary to name political actions in the international arena, which have adequate equivalents in target languages.

The desire to expand international scientific relations leads to the internationalization of terms and a large number of borrowings, which leads to problems in their functioning along with the national language and difficulties associated with synonymy, homonymy and polysemy. In this regard, it should be noted that many terms in Russian, English, German and other European languages ​​are international, as they were borrowed from Latin or Greek. Precisely determining the source of any term is difficult and requires etymological analysis and the study of extralinguistic factors.

The relevance of the study of socio-political terminology is determined not only by the need to systematize existing lexical units and their foreign language equivalents indicating the divergence of meanings, but also by the fact that at the present stage terminology is formed both at the level of national media and under the influence of the English-language press, which is reflected in the substitution original units of language, distortion of national languages ​​and difficulties in perceiving information. Languages ​​are annually replenished with thousands of new words, changes at the level of vocabulary on socio-political topics reflect the processes of social development. This terminology cannot be studied in isolation from society and the changes occurring in it, since it names ideological concepts of reality.

The purpose of this study is to analyze the structural-semantic and word-formation models of socio-political terms to identify the most productive and widespread forms of the emergence of new lexical units, as well as to describe the specifics of translating terminological units of this area into English, German and Russian.

For this purpose, a glossary of 200 terms was developed, containing the basic concepts of the political science sphere, as well as reflecting modern world processes used in international media materials. When compiling it, the following semantic subgroups were identified:

• Diplomacy (doyen, exequatur, der Auswanderer);
• Form of government and government (teledemocracy, anarchy, der kalter Krieg);
• Political economy (embargo, securities issuer);
• Military-political vocabulary (die Annexion, disarmament);
• Civil terms (das Recht, nation, state);
• World political realities (political socialization, Benelux, die Kubakrise);
• Social statuses and positions (ombudsman, MP, die UN-Blauhelme);
• International documents and organizations (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Worldwatch Institute, GUS (die Gemeinschaft unabhängiger Staaten).

This work is the result of an analysis of the semantic and structural features and method of translation of socio-political terms. Based on the morphological characteristics of each individual language, different methods of word formation are inherent in each individual language. Thus, in the Russian language, the majority of terms were phrases (41.5%) – articulation of interests, credentials, and then the suffixal method of word formation prevailed (26.5%) - citizenship, apartheid, legitimacy. The Russian language is characterized by a fairly large number of root words (16%) - right note, slogan, which is due to the high degree of Greco-Latin borrowings - vote, deputy.

We see a similar picture in the English language, where the largest share falls on phrases (42%) - delegation of authorities, public administration, followed by the suffixal method of word formation (34.5%) - establishment, Legitimacy, observer. In both languages, the most common international suffixes are -ism, -id, -tion, -tion, -ism, -ment. Root words in English are less common, but compound words and adjuncts are more common (4.5%) – newsbreak, battle- cry .

For the German language as a whole, the leading method is compounding; this trend can also be seen in socio-political terminology. It accounts for 45.5% of terms – der Staatsangestellte, die Zweisprachigkeit. When translating phrases from Russian or English, they are often transformed into complex words in German (delegation of authorities-die Kompetenzdelegation, constitutional system - die Verfassungsordnen). The second most productive method is the suffix method (26.6%), where there are both international suffixes and typical German suffixes –keit, -ei, -ung – die Globalisierung, die Politikasterei.

In this study, an analysis was carried out of the most frequently used methods of translation from foreign languages ​​into Russian. It should be noted that the glossary contains three terms that have no correspondence in the German language, that is, they are gaps ( demopolitics, manual government, soft rating). From both German and English, the predominant method for translating socio-political vocabulary is translation using an equivalent (61% in English, 68.5% in German) – vote- das Votum, innuendo- die Unterstellung. This is followed by tracing (16% each) - repeat election- die Wiederwahlrepeat elections; further specification (7.5% each) – military takeover-putsch,die Abgrenzung-demarcation. Generalization, compression, transliteration, metaphorical and descriptive translation were also used. It should be noted that when translating from English into Russian, transcription was used, but in German there were no such matches.

Thus, this study showed that socio-political terminology is characterized by expressiveness and emotional coloring of vocabulary, which is an unacceptable indicator for other terminologies. Secondly, in the three languages ​​under study, borrowed Greek-Latin vocabulary predominates from the time of the formation of citizenship in the world, which has become international and has equivalents in each of the languages ​​or has remained in an unassimilated form ( status Quo, persona non grata). However, this situation is not always typical for the German language, where speakers prefer to use the equivalent from the original vocabulary, often expressed by a compound word ( Bipatrid –bipatride – der Doppelstaatler).

Bibliography

1. Vinogradov V.V. Introductory remarks // Questions of terminology. Materials of the All-Union Terminology Meeting. M., 1961
2. Grinev-Grinevich S.V. Terminology textbook for students. higher textbook establishments / S.V. Grinev-Grinevich. – M. Publishing center “Academy”, 2008. 304 p.
3. Leichik V.M. Terminology: subject, methods, structure. Ed. 3rd. – M.: LKI Publishing House, 2007. – 256 p.
4. Komarova Z.I. Semantic structure of special words and its lexicographic description - Sverdlovsk, 1991.
5. Kryuchkova T.B. Features of the formation and development of socio-political vocabulary and terminology. – M.: Nauka, 1991-153 p.
6. Towards New Ways of Terminology Description: The sociocognitive approach. (Google eBook)