Types of antonym-terms in french and ukrainian philosophical terminology
Terminology of antonymy, analysis of its types. Antonymous relations in French and Ukrainian philosophical terminology. Antonyms based on logical relations: lexical-semantic and stylistic aspects. Contradictory, conversion, occasional and usual antonyms.
| Рубрика | Иностранные языки и языкознание |
| Вид | статья |
| Язык | английский |
| Дата добавления | 17.02.2022 |
| Размер файла | 37,1 K |
Отправить свою хорошую работу в базу знаний просто. Используйте форму, расположенную ниже
Студенты, аспиранты, молодые ученые, использующие базу знаний в своей учебе и работе, будут вам очень благодарны.
Размещено на http://www.Allbest.Ru/
National pedagogical Dragomanov university
Types of antonym-terms in French and Ukrainian philosophical terminology
L.F. Vdovychenko
Kyiv, Ukraine
Abstract
The paper deals with the study of the antonym relations in French and Ukrainian philosophical terminology. The opposition that underlies antonymy is a multifaceted phenomenon and is studied by various sciences: psychology, logic, philosophy, sociology, ethics, aesthetics and religion. From a semantic point of view, there are three types of antonymy based on logical relations: the contrary antonymy, the contradictory (or complementary) antonymy and the reciprocal (or converse) antonymy. Considering antonymy on both lexical-semantic and stylistic levels, there are two types of oppositions: usual (linguistic) and occasional (characterizing the philosopher specific linguistic manner). Occasional oppositions are represented by contextual and individual-authorial oppositions, which are more expressive oppositions of usual antonyms; their impact on the reader is unexpected and unusual. From a structural point of view, we distinguish grammatical antonymy and lexical antonymy. In grammatical antonymy one of the items of the pair is morphologically marked by a negative prefix or prefixoid and in lexical antonymy the opposition is expressed by another lexeme.
The paper gives the definition of antonymy in terminology and analyses the main types of antonymy. As a result of the study, we defined the basic antonymous types of prefixes in French and Ukrainian philosophical terminology. The most productive antonymous prefixes in French philosophical terminology are in-, im-, ir-, a-, de-, des-, dis-, non-, me-. The prefixoids (contre-, plus-, moins-, poly-, mono-) are the initial elements of complex terms. The most productive Ukrainian negative prefixes are не-, без-, ін-. The absolute majority of philosophical antonymic terms in French and Ukrainian languages are nouns.
Keywords: antonymy, philosophical terminology, usual and occasional opposition, contrary antonymy, contradictory (or complementary) antonymy, reciprocal (or converse) antonymy, antonymic prefixes.
Анотація
Стаття присвячена дослідженню антонімічних відносин у французькій та українській філософській термінології. Протиставлення, що лежить в основі антонімії, є різнобічним явищем і вивчається різними науками: психологією, логікою, філософією, соціологією, етикою, естетикою та релігією. З семантичної точки зору існує три типи антонімії, засновані на логічних відносинах: контрарна антонімія, контрадикторна (або комплементарна) антонімія та взаємна (або конверсійна) антонімія. Розглядаючи антонімію як на лексико-семантичному, так і на стилістичному рівнях, розрізняють два типи опозицій: узуальна (лінгвістична) та оказіональна (що характеризує мовну манеру філософа).
Оказіональні антоніми представлені контекстуальними та індивідуально-авторськими опозиціями, які є більш виразними опозиціями, ніж узуальні антоніми; їх вплив на читача є незвичним та неочікуваним. Зі структурної точки зору розрізняють граматичну та лексичну антонімію. У граматичній антонімії один із елементів опозиційної пари морфологічно виражений заперечний префіксом або префіксоїдом, у лексичній антонімії протиставлення виражається іншою лексемою.
У статті подано визначення антонімії в термінології та проаналізовано основні типи антонімії. У результаті дослідження визначено основні антонімічні типи префіксів у французькій та українській філософській термінології.
Найбільш продуктивними антонімічними префіксами у французькій філософській термінології є in-, im-, ir-, a-, de-, des-, dis-, non-, me-. Префіксоїди (centre-, plus-, moins-, poly-, mono-) є початковими елементами складних термінів. Найпродуктивнішими українськими заперечними префіксами є не-, без-, ін-. Абсолютна більшість філософських антонімічних термінів у французькій та українській мовах - це іменники.
Ключові слова: антонімія, філософська термінологія, узуальна та оказіональна опозиція, контрарна антонімія, контрадикторна (або комплементарна) антонімія, взаємна (або конверсійна) антонімія, антонімічні префікси.
Introduction
Antonymy (lexical opposition) is traditionally classified as paradigmatic relations between words. Opposition is one of the basic cognitive mechanisms involved in the nomination process. Its essence is to distinguish opposite concepts within a single terminological field. At semantic level, opposition is expressed by the existence of antonyms.
The opposition that underlies antonymy is a multifaceted phenomenon and is studied by various sciences: psychology, logic, philosophy, sociology, ethics, aesthetics and religion.
As a subsystem and an integral part of the lexical-semantic system of general literary language, terminology is organized on the principle of systematization and hierarchical structure. An essential place in this strict and clear system of semantic and conceptual relations is occupied by terminological antonymy, which plays an important role in determining the place of concepts in the system of a certain scientific or technical field of knowledge.
Antonymous relations are characteristic of almost all terminological systems. In terminology, as in general literary language, antonyms are used to name opposite concepts. The philosophical basis of antonymy is the relationship of opposites within one entity. According to D.N. Shmelev, the logical basis for the emergence of antonymous relations in terminology are the opposite species concepts that represent the limit manifestations of any quality (property), which is determined by the corresponding generic concept (Шмелев, 1973, p. 58). Antonymous relations, or relations of opposites, are a sign of the systemic organization of terminology. The antonymy phenomenon exists in the specialized language: “Relations between two terms represent opposite concepts in a given language” (ISO, 2000, p. 9).
V.P. Danylenko emphasizes that antonymy is inherent in the terminological vocabulary even more than in general literature (Даниленко, 1977, p. 79), due to the logical organization of terminology.
The phenomenon of antonymy was analyzed in Antiquity by Aristotle who considered that the antonymy is based on two principles: the law of contradiction (LC) and principle of the excluded third (PET) (Horn, 1989, p. 18).
The earliest known formulation is in Aristotle's discussion of the principle of noncontradiction, first proposed in On Interpretation, where he says that of two contradictory propositions (i.e., where one proposition is the negation of the other) one must be true, and the other false. He also states it as a principle in the Metaphysics, saying that it is necessary in every case to affirm or deny, and that it is impossible that there should be anything between the two parts of a contradiction (Aristotle, 2019). Aristotle wrote that ambiguity can arise from the use of ambiguous names, but cannot exist in the facts themselves.
The disciple of F. de Saussure, Ch. Bally, - faithful follower of the ideas of his teacher, develops the study on the problem of the relationships between words with opposite meaning in stylistics by noting one of the most important semantic features: “the contrary to an abstract word is a part of the meaning of that word” (Bally, 1966, p. 42). Ch. Bally does not use the term “antonyms” in his research, opting for the expression “logical opposites”, he succeeds in classifying words with opposite meanings and distinguishes two categories of logical oppositions:
a) logical opposites;
b) opposites in the broad sense of the word (Bally, 1966, p. 114-115).
The issue of antonymy in terminology was researched by T.M. Dyachuk (2003), Z.B. Kudelko (2004), G.K. Barvitska (2014), I.M. Fetsko (2014), L.S. Anistratenko (2017), O.V. Galyan (2018). In the French language antonymy was studied by Ch. Bally (1953), L. Guilbert (1964), A. Rey (1969), G. Mounin (1974), P. Amsili (2004), M.-C. L'Homme (2004), T. Giermak-Zielinska (2008), and others.
Aim and Objectives
The aim of the paper is to identify among the terminological units of philosophical terminology the types of antonym-terms in French and Ukrainian languages and to establish the ways of their creation.
To achieve this common goal, it is necessary to fulfill the following objectives:
- to consider the concept “antonymy”;
- to review existing classifications of antonyms;
- to define the types of antonymous relations between philosophical terms in French and Ukrainian languages;
- to create the classification of the ways of antonymy creation in French and Ukrainian philosophical terminology.
Concept “antonymy”
Etymologically, the term “antonym” has its origin in the Greek language: antonym comes from anti which means “against” and onuma “name”: ad litteram the term means “opposite name”. Two lexicographical sources that we consulted Le Petit Larousse (2004) and Le Nouveau Petit Robert (2008) explain this term as follows: in the first source it is defined as “the word which has an opposite meaning to that of another; contrary”, and “the word, syntagma, which, by its meaning, is directly opposed to another” - in the second source.
In linguistics, the antonymy is the type of semantic relations of lexical units based on opposites in the meaning of words. The words that belong to the same part of the language and have opposite meanings are called antonyms (Kronhauz, 2005, p. 146).
British linguist J. Lyons (1977) defines “antonyms” as the words which are opposite in meaning and “antonymy” as the oppositeness between words. For example, “buy” and “sell” is a pair of antonyms and the relation between these two words is termed as antonymy.
French linguist M.-F. Mortureux defined the antonymy as “relations between two words (antonyms) of opposite meanings; contrary to synonymy” (Mortureux, 2008, p. 203).
Canadian terminologist M.-C. L'Homme gives her own definition of antonymy in terminology: “Antonymy is a relation of opposition between terms. This relation is the one that exists between two terms that we perceive to be “contrary”. Two antonyms have common semantic components and the opposition is often based on a single component” (L'Homme, 2005, p. 96-97).
P. Amsili found another definition of this notion: “On the one hand, the notion considered to be central has so many different names that it seems necessary to try to put order: contrary, negation, opposition, inversion. On the other hand, the antonymy shares several features with the synonymy: (1) it implies common points (semes) between antonyms, and (2) it exists overwhelmingly in the form called partial: polysemic terms can enter, depending on their meaning, in several pairs antonymic” (Amsili, 2006)
The term “antonyms” was used in the work of O.M. Peshkovsky How to conduct classes on syntax and style in adult schools (1928), where the author notes that nothing helps to identify differences between synonyms, as the selection of antonyms, words from opposite meaning (Дишлева, 2016, p. 64).
Unlike for other paradigmatic relations (synonymy, polysemy), antonymic relations are lexical as well as semantic (Murphy, 2003). The pairing of words is not based solely on meaning but also on the association of those particular word forms, indicating that the pairings are identified through exposure to them and stored as lexical knowledge.
Antonymous names characterize homogeneous phenomena, being at the extreme positions of the corresponding lexical-semantic paradigm. Antonyms help to define in more detail the place of terms, their interdependence and interaction within the term system (Куделько, 2004, p. 106).
Taking into account different points of view on the initial concepts of “antonymy” and “antonyms”, we rely on the opinion of L.A. Novikov: the linguistic essence of antonymy is “the expression of the function of the opposition and the polarization of words in identical positions” (Новиков, 1982, p. 261).
Types of antonyms
Defining the principle of classification as basic position, A. Gutu constructs the taxonomy of antonyms according to three basic principles:
a) lexico-semantic;
b) grammatical;
c) stylistic (Gutu, 2005, p. 32).
Considering antonymy on both lexico-semantic and stylistic levels, H.A. Khadzhimuradova distinguishes two types of oppositions: usual (linguistic) and occasional (characterizing the linguistic manner of the philosopher). Occasional oppositions are represented by contextual and individual-authorial oppositions, which are more expressive oppositions of usual antonyms; their impact on the reader is unexpected and unusual (Хаджимурадова, 2003).
(Fr.) “La principale force de notre raison consiste, au contraire, a subordonner assez le subjectif a l'objectif, pour que nos operations interieures puissent representer le monde exterieur, autant que I'exigent nos relations, actives et passives, avec son immuable preponderance” (Comte: 181).
(Ukr.) “Емоційне в дусі: відчування, переважання, любов, ненависть, воління - також володіє від початку апріорним змістом, який він не запозичує у мислення і який визначається етикою абсолютно незалежно від логіки. Є апріорне ordre du foeur, або logique du сагиі: як влучно зауважив Блез Паскаль ” (Шелер: 1994).
According to the semantic principle, there are currently three types of antonymy based on logical relations: the contrary antonymy, the contradictory antonymy and the reciprocal antonymy. The first two types are based on the relation of negation which, in logic, is manifested by the “law of contradiction” and the “principle of the excluded third party”. We then use the contrary and contradictory terms. The third type is special, since it is not related to the notion of negation (Peshkov, 2012, p. 347).
Ukrainian linguist M.P. Kochergan identifies groups that differ in opposition character:
1) antonyms that express the opposition;
2) antonyms that express complementary relations;
3) antonyms that express the contradictory opposition;
4) antonyms with vector opposition (Кочерган, 2006, p. 268).
A. Lehrer (1974) and D. Cruse (1986; mostly following J. Lyons 1977) divide opposites into four main types:
- complementaries comprise pairs that in their default interpretations exhaustively bisect a domain into two sub-domains, as for: alive-dead, closed-open, false-true;
- contraries denote degrees of some property, e.g. fast-slow, long-short, thick-thin. Structuralists typically reserve the term antonym for members of this subcategory;
- reversives denote change in opposite directions between two states, as in dressundress, fall-rise;
- converses denote two opposed perspectives on a relationship or transfer - for example, buy-sell, child-parent.
ukrainian french terminology antonyms
Antonymy in philosophical terminology
From a semantic point of view, we find in philosophical terminology in French as in Ukrainian three types of antonyms:
1) contrary antonyms;
2) contradictory antonyms;
3) reciprocal antonyms.
The contrary antonymy is considered as antonymy in the strict sense. It's the most frequent relationship that is established between items of the same syntactic category with an opposite meaning. In logic, two opposite items cannot be true at the same time, but they can be false at the same time. L. A. Novikov (1982) accentuates that the contrary antonymy exists between two notions of species “X” and “Y” between which is assumed a median notion “Z”. We also explain these relations as the relations of the items placed at opposite positions on the same axis that carries a gradation:
(Fr.) amour - (indifference) - haine,
decadence - (stagnation) - epanouissement,
loi - (coutume) - doctrine,
(Ukr.) любов/кохання - (байдужість) - ненависть,
занепад/декаданс - (стагнація) - розквіт,
закон - (звичай) - вчення.
Two contrary terms, by definition, cannot be true at the same time; that is why we suggest using the term of incompatibility to designate the relations shared by the cohyponyms. Incompatible terms enter into exclusionary relations which can be paraphrased in the following manner:
It's an X, so it's not a Y.
X and Y are incompatible. Terms belonging to the same hyperonym are cohyponyms. For example, (fr.) cabriolet, berline, familiale, limousine are co-hyponyms whose hyperonym is car (L'Homme, 2004).
The relation of contradictory antonymy is binary and reversible; the negation of the first term implies the assertion of the second and vice versa. Contradictory terms divide their domain into two sets complementary, in the sense that if it's not X, then it's necessarily Y. The contradictory antonyms are also qualified as “complementary”. P. Amsili from Universitd Paris-Diderot also calls them “polar antonyms”. The terms with a negative prefix are also included in this category. The most often contradictory antonymy is created by negative prefixes, among which the most active are non-judgmental prefixes (in-, im-, ir-, a-, de-, des-, non-, me-):
(Fr.) justice / injustice, politesse / impolitesse, realite / irrealite, sociabilite / asociabilite, gout / degout, espoir / desespoir, reconnaissance / meconnaissance, existence / inexistence, vie /mort.
(Ukr.) справедливість / несправедливість, ввічливість / грубість, реальність / нереальність, комунікабельність / некомунікабельність, смак / огида, надія / відчай, визнання / невизнання, існування / неіснування, життя / смерть.
The complementary or contradictory terms have exclusionary relations between them by dividing the universe of discourse into two complementary subsets. Between alive and dead, present and absent, male and female, etc., there are no intermediate degrees. We can only be alive or dead, present or absent, male or female. The contradictory antonymy is noted by the fact that there is no intermediate element between species concepts that are opposed.
(Fr.) La veritable philosophie est au-dela du monisme comme du pluralisme, parce que les categories de l'un et du plusieurs dans l'ordre de l'esprit perdent l'une et l'autre toute signification (Marcel, 1914).
(Ukr.) Саме відчуття суму допомагає пересвідчитися у тонкому сприйнятті дійсності. Сум є необхідною ланкою у ланцюгові єдності краси й потворності, він знаходиться на межі між буденністю і святом прекрасного, миттєвого, але того, що залишає слід у пам'яті; це мур, який здолати може тільки той, хто здатен зрозуміти красу (Dorosh, 2012).
The reciprocal anonymy is also called by some scholar's converse antonymy. This type of antonymy, which is not necessarily linked to the negation, is not recognized by all linguists. It is proposed, for example, by L.A. Novikov (1973), R. Kocourek (1991), J. Picoche (1992), D. Rozental' (2002) and M.-C. L'Homme (2004). The inversion of the actants of a term with a predicative meaning sometimes gives rise to a relation of reciprocal or converse antonymy. If the permutation of the actants of two terms (considered as antonyms) gives equivalent sentences, then the two terms in question are antonyms.
For example, to bequeath and to inherit are reciprocal antonyms, because if X bequeaths Y to Z, Z inherits from X. Both sentences are equivalent, but the actants of the verbs have changed place (L'Homme, 2004).
The reciprocal antonymy is not based on negation, but on the converse character of actants of the relations. P. Amsili mentions that “the reciprocal or converse antonyms are much more present in terminology than in general language, at least in areas where the processes are described in great details” (Amsili, 2003), for example:
(Fr.) amateur / professionnel, expert, anarchisme / etatisme, apparition / disparition, artiste / spectateur, auditeur, citoyen / cosmopolite, copie / original, devoir / droit, relatif / absolu.
(Ukr.) аматор / професіонал, експерт, анархізм / етатизм, поява / зникнення, митець / глядач, слухач, громадянин / космополіт, копія / оригінал, oбов'язок / право, відносне / абсолютне.
Ways of antonymy creation in French and Ukrainian philosophical terminology
We analyzed the papers of philosophical terminological dictionaries of French and Ukrainian languages and identified 223 antonymous pairs (446 units) in each of the terminological systems.
Comparative analysis of linguistic material revealed that nouns play an important role in the formation of philosophical antonyms. The richest groups of antonyms are made up of nouns and adjectives. We consider adjectives with a philosophical sense as terms. These are adjectives that enter as components in several terms by communicating to them philosophical characteristics well defined in the terminology system. These terms relate to the instruments of philosophical thought and have their own conceptual meaning:
(Fr.) abstraction / concretisation, analytique / synthetique, ame / corps, beaute / laideur, devoir / droit, esthetique / inesthetique, indifferent / interesse, noms propres / noms communs, objectif / subjectif.
(Ukr.) абстракція / конкретизація, аналітичний / синтетичний, душа / тіло, краса / потворність, обов'язок / право, естетичне / неестетичне, байдужий / зацікавлений, власні назви /загальні назви, об'єктивний / суб'єктивний.
Table 1
Distribution of antonyms across word classes in philosophical terminology
|
Part of speech |
Antonyms given |
% |
|
|
Nouns |
192 |
86 |
|
|
Adjectives |
31 |
14 |
|
|
Total |
223 |
100 |
The majority of the antonymic pairs we found were nouns, and a large portion of these nouns would traditionally be considered co-hyponyms rather than standard antonyms, but they differ from standard co-hyponyms in that they are naturally contrasted.
From a structural point of view, we distinguish:
- grammatical antonymy where one of the items of the pair is morphologically marked by a negative prefix or prefixoide (in-, im-, de-, contre- etc.) or a ppaper (non-) and
- lexical antonymy, where the opposition is expressed by another lexeme (Martin (1976), Kocourek (1991)):
(Fr.) admiration / mepris, chaos / ordre, chatiment / recompense, cynisme / idealisme, essence/forme, fait / idee, maitre / esclave, mal / bien, melancolie / joie, paix / guerre,
(Ukr.) захоплення / зневага, хаос / порядок, покарання / винагорода, цинізм / ідеалізм, сутність / форма, факт / ідея, господар / раб, зло / добро, меланхолія / радість, мир / війна.
Lexical antonyms are characterized by a number of features: socially conscious systemic relations, stable affiliation to a certain lexical and grammatical paradigm, regularity of reproduction in the same (or similar) syntactic conditions fixed in the vocabulary, relative stability and stylistic essence.
The prefixation remains the most productive in the formation of new philosophical antonymic terms. The prefixes are the regular means of antonyms expression in the terminology. Each prefix expresses the nuance of opposition due the semantics of the term.
The French philosophical antonymic terms are formed by prefixes (in-, im-, ir-, a-, de-, des-, dis-, non-, me-) and prefixoids (contre-, plus-, moins-, poly-, mono-) that notify the opposite or negative meaning in French.
The antonymic prefix in- is a Latin negative prefix that can be used to form opposites. It can take many forms to negative value like: il-, before an “l”; ir-, before an “r”, or im- to form antonymic pairs. This range of correlative prefixes helps to form oppositional pairs of contradiction:
(Fr.) satisfaction / insatisfaction,
pertinence / impertinence,
responsabilite / irresponsabilite.
The prefix de- (or des-) which includes special nuances of expression of the contrary notion and which acquires the philosophical meaning by semantic attraction, helps to form antonymic constrictions:
(Fr.) interet / desinteret,
espoir / desespoir,
interessement / desinteressement,
obeissance / desobeissance.
The negative ppaper non- is intended as a modifier of the lexical meaning and is used to express a contrary idea:
(Fr.) etre / non-etre,
valeur / non-valeur,
violence / non-violence.
The prefixoids are the initial elements of complex words such as: anti-, contre-, super-, plus-, moins-, poly-, mono-, ex- etc. The words with quantitative and evaluative values are most often used in a function of prefixoids:
(Fr.) revolution / contre-revolution,
polysemie / monosemie,
plus-value / moins-value.
Table 2
The most productive antonymic prefixes in French philosophical terminology
|
Prefix / prefixoid |
Term |
Antonym |
|
|
in- |
application commensurable complexe connaissance deductif deduction determination determinisme enthousiasme esthetique exact existence experience formel interessant justice observation sociabilite temperance tolerance utilite |
inapplication incommensurable incomplexe inconnaissance inductif induction indetermination indeterminisme indifference inesthetique inexact inexistence inexperience informel ininteressant injustice inobservation insociabilite intemperance intolerance inutilite |
|
|
im- |
forces productives materialisme materiel morale politesse politique possibilite pouvoir probabilite probable propriete prudence puissance |
forces improductives immaterialisme immateriel immoralite impolitesse impolitique impossibilite impouvoir improbabilite improbable impropriete imprudence impuissance |
|
|
ir- |
realite respect responsabilite |
irrealite irrespect irresponsabilite |
|
|
a- |
dynamique |
adynamique |
|
|
sociabilite theisme |
asociabilite atheisme |
||
|
de- |
gout plaisir raison |
degout deplaisir deraison |
|
|
des- |
agreable interet espoir interessement, obeissance |
desagreable desinteret desespoir desinteressement desobeissance |
|
|
dis- |
grace |
disgrace |
|
|
non- |
etre valeur violence |
non-etre non-valeur non-violence |
|
|
me- |
reconnaissance |
meconnaissance |
|
|
anti- |
communisme amitie |
anticommunisme antipathie |
|
|
contre- |
revolution performance |
contre-revolution contre-performance |
|
|
plus-/ moins- |
plus-value |
moins-value |
|
|
poly- / mono- |
polysemie polytheisme |
monosemie monotheisme |
The Ukrainian negative prefix не- is the most productive in antonymic oppositions: (Ukr.) буття / небуття, існування / неіснування, справедливість / несправедливість, обережність / необачність, матеріальне / нематеріальне, можливість / неможливість.
The negative prefix без- forms antonyms in Ukrainian: (Ukr.) влада / безвладдя, робота / безробіття, відповідальність / безвідповідальність.
In Ukrainian philosophical terminology there are also antonymic terms, that are formed by an international prefix (ін-, а-): (Ukr.) детермінізм / індетермінізм, дедукція / індукція, дедуктивний / індуктивний, теїзм / атеїзм, соціальний / асоціальний.
The prefixoid мало- expresses the quantitative characteristics of objects and actions: (Ukr.) ймовірний / малоймовірний.
The greatest word-forming activity is shown by the Greek prefixoids полі- (from Greek: лоХп-, poly-, “many”) and моно- (from Greek povog, monos “alone”), which in complex words correspond to the concepts of “many”, “numerous” and “one”, “single”:
(Ukr.) полісемія / моносемія, політеїзм / монотеїзм.
Table 3
|
Prefix/ prefixoid |
Term |
Antonym |
|
|
не- |
буття визнання досвідченість естетичне знання інтерес існування ймовірність матеріалізм матеріальте можливість насильство обережність офіційний повага покора приємний продуктивні сили смак співмірний справедливість точний цікавий |
небуття невизнання недосвідченість неестетичне незнання незацікавленість неіснування неймовірність нематеріалізм нематеріальж неможливість ненасильство необачність неформальний неповага непокора неприємний непродуктивні сили несмак незмірний несправедливість неточний нецікавий |
|
|
без- |
відповідальність влада робота |
безвідповідальність безвладдя безробіття |
|
|
a- |
динамічний теїзм соціальний |
адинамічний атеїзм асоціальний |
|
|
ін- |
детермінізм дедуктивний |
індетермінізм індуктивний |
|
|
анти- |
комунізм дружба |
антикомунізм антипатія |
|
|
псевдо- |
політика |
псевдополітика |
|
|
полі- / моно- |
полісемія політеїзм |
моносемія монотеїзм |
|
|
мало- |
ймовірний |
малоймовірний |
|
|
контр- |
революція |
контрреволюція |
The most common antonymic prefixes in Ukrainian philosophical terminology
Conclusions
Antonymy is a fundamental relation in philosophical discourse because of its categorical character. For us, antonymy is a complex phenomenon that includes all types of philosophical terminological oppositions. After comparative analysis of linguistic material of philosophical terminology in French as in Ukrainian we distinguished three types of antonyms: contrary, contradictory and reciprocal antonyms. The antonymic pair is a complex lexical construction consisting of two lexical items ready for insertion into constructions that require two items of the same part of speech. The majority of found antonymic pairs were nouns representing 84% of all material under consideration. Antonymic relations help to systematize concepts of philosophy, to clarify and distinguish the meaning of polysemic terms of philosophical terminology, to explain scientific concepts through the opposition of other concepts. For further investigation it would be interesting to compare synonymic relations in French and Ukrainian philosophical terminology.
References
1. Amsili, P. (2003). L 'antonymie en terminologie: quelques remarques [Anonymy in terminology: some remarks].
2. Amsili, P. (2006). Antonymie. Semanticlopedie: dictionnaire de semantique.
3. Bally, Ch. (1966). Traite de stylistique frangaise [French stylistic Treaty]. Berne - Paris. [in French].
4. Cruse, D.A. (1986). Lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Gutu, A. (2005). Aspects systemique et fonctionnel des antonymes [Systemic and functional aspects of antonyms]. ULIM. Chisinau. [in French].
6. Horn, L.R. (1989). A Natural History of Negation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 18.
7. Organisation internationale de normalisation (2000). ISO 1087-1:2000 Travaux terminologiques. Vocabulaire. Partie 1: Theorie et application. 9. [in French].
8. Lehrer, A. (1974). Semantic fields and lexical structure. Amsterdam: North Holland.
9. L'Homme, M.-C. (2004). La terminologie: principes et techniques [Terminology: principles and techniques]. Les Presses de l'Universite de Montreal. [in French].
10. L'Homme M.-C. (2005). Sur la notion de “terme” [About the notion “term”]. Meta, 50 (4). 1112-1132. [in French].
11. Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Mortureux, M.-Fr. (2008). La lexicologie. Entre langue et discours [Lexicology. Between language and speech]. Paris. Armand Collin. 203. [in French].
13. Murphy, M. L. (2003). Semantic relations and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Peshkov, K. (2012). Le discours juridique en russe et en francais: une approche typologique [Legal discourse in Russian and French: a typological approach]. Linguistique. Aix-Marseille Universite. 347. [in French].
15. Аністратенко, Л.С. (2016). Явище антонімії у японській літературознавчій термінології [The phenomenon of antonymy in Japanese literary terminology]. Матеріали Міжнародної науково-практичної конференції: “Сучасні наукові дослідження представників філологічних наук та їхній вплив на розвиток мови та літератури". Львів. 80-82. [in Ukrainian].
16. Барвицкая, Г.К. (2014). Антонимические отношения в украинской терминосистеме учета и аудита [Antonymous relations in the Ukrainian terminology of accounting and auditing]. Научный потенциал. Чебоксары: НИИ педагогики и психологии. 1. 16-20. [in Russian].
17. Галян, О.В. (2018). Формування та функціонування фізичних термінів у французькій мові [Formation and functioning of physical terms in French]. (Дис. канд. філол. наук). Київський національний університет імені Тараса Шевченка. Київ. 228. [in Ukrainian].
18. Головин, Б.Н., Кобрин, Р.Ю. (1987). Лингвистические основы учения о терминах [Linguistic foundations of the doctrine of terms]. М.: Высшая школа. 105. [in Russian].
19. Даниленко, В.П. (1977). Русская терминология: опыт лингвистического описания [Russian terminology: Experience of linguistic description]. М.: Наука. 246. [in Russian].
20. Дишлева, С.М. (2016). Антонімія в англійському поетичному мовленні ХХ століття [Antonymy in English poetic speech of the twentieth century]. Науковий часопис Національного педагогічного університету імені М.П. Драгоманова. Серія 9: Сучасні тенденції розвитку мов: зб. наук. праць. Київ: Вид-во НПУ імені М.П. Драгоманова. Вип. 14. 64. [in Ukrainian].
21. Дячук, Т.М. (1998). Специфіка антонімії в сучасній соціально-економічній лексиці. [Specifics of antonyms in modern socio-economic vocabulary]. Матеріали наукової конференції “ Українська мова: з минулого в майбутнє” на відзначення 200-річчя виходу в світ “Енеїди” І. Котляревського. Київ. 129-132. [in Ukrainian].
22. Кочерган, М.П. (2006). Загальне мовознавство [General Linguistics]. Київ: Академія. 464. [in Ukrainian].
23. Кронгауз, М.А. (2005). Семантика: Учебник для студ. линг. фак. висш. учеб. заведений [Semantics: Textbook for students]. М.: Академия. 352. [in Russian].
24. Куделько, З. (2004). Антонімія в терміносистемі ринкових взаємин [Antonymy in the terminology of market relations]. Проблеми української термінології: зб. наук. праць. 106-108. [in Ukrainian].
25. Новиков, Л.А. (1982). Семантика русского языка [Semantics of the Russian language]. М: Высшая школа. 261. [in Russian].
26. Тараненко, О.О. (2004). Антоніми. Українська мова: Енциклопедія [Antonyms. Ukrainian language: Encyclopedia]. Київ: Вид-во “Укр. енцикл.” ім. М. П. Бажана. 824. [in Ukrainian].
27. Фецко, І. (2014). Антонімні відношення в українській терміносистемі музейництва [Antonyms in the Ukrainian terminology of museology]. Spheres of Culture. Lublin: Maria Curie Sklodovska University in Lublin. Vol. 7. 351-358. [in Ukrainian].
28. Хаджимурадова, Х.A. (2003). Лингвистическая организация текста философской публицистики В.С. Соловьева. [The linguistic organization of the text of the philosophical journalism of V.S. Solovyov]. (Дис. канд. філол. наук). Махачкала. 158. [in Russian].
29. Шмелев, Д.Н. (1973). Проблемы семантического анализа лексики (на материале русского языка) [Problems of semantic analysis of vocabulary (based on the Russian language)]. М.: Наука. 279. [in Russian].
Lexicographic Sources
30. Blay, M. (2003). GrandDictionnaire de laphilosophie. Paris: Larousse et CNRS editions. [in French].
31. Le petit Larousse grand format (2004). Paris: Edition Larousse. 1885. [in French].
32. Le Petit Robert Dictionnaire de la langue francaise (2008). Paris: Dictionnaires Le Robert. 2838. [in French].
33. Шинкарук, В.І. (2002). Філософський енциклопедичний словник [Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary]. Київ: Абрис. 798. [in Ukrainian].
Sources of Illustrative Material
34. Aristotle. Metaphysics. classics.mit.edu. The Internet Classics Archive. 2, 996b. 26-30.
35. Aristotle. On Interpretation. 9.
36. Comte, A. (1852). Catechismepositiviste. Paris. 3rd ed. 181. [in French].
37. Marcel, G. (1914). Journal. 94. [in French].
38. Дорош, Г.A. (2012). Развитие художественного восприятия эпического произведения студентами филологического факультета в процессе изучения украинской литературы [Development of artistic perception of an epic work by students of philological faculty in the process of Ukrainian literature studying]. Педагогический дискурс, Вып. 11. 87. [in Russian].
39. Шелер M. (1994). Краткая философская энциклопедия [Brief philosophical encyclopedia]. Прогресс. 574. [in Russian].
Размещено на allbest.ru
Подобные документы
Lexico-semantic features of antonyms in modern English. The concept of polarity of meaning. Morphological and semantic classifications of antonyms. Differences of meaning of antonyms. Using antonyms pair in proverbs and sayings. Lexical meaning of words.
курсовая работа [43,0 K], добавлен 05.10.2011Information access and exchange. Cognitively Salient Relations for Multilingual Lexicography. Work in Cognitive Sciences. Transcription and Normalization. Mapping to Relation Types. Clustering by Property Types. Information about synonyms and antonyms.
реферат [24,6 K], добавлен 28.03.2011The history of the English language. Three main types of difference in any language: geographical, social and temporal. Comprehensive analysis of the current state of the lexical system. Etymological layers of English: Latin, Scandinavian and French.
реферат [18,7 K], добавлен 09.02.2014The structure of words and word-building. The semantic structure of words, synonyms, antonyms, homonyms. Word combinations and phraseology in modern English and Ukrainian languages. The Native Element, Borrowed Words, characteristics of the vocabulary.
курс лекций [95,2 K], добавлен 05.12.2010Development of translation notion in linguistics. Types of translation. Lexical and grammatical peculiarities of scientific-technical texts. The characteristic of the scientific, technical language. Analysis of terminology in scientific-technical style.
курсовая работа [41,5 K], добавлен 26.10.2010Semantic meaning of the lyrics of Metallica. Thematic Diversity and Semantic Layers of Lyrics. The songs about love and feelings. Philosophical texts. Colloquialisms and Slang Words. The analysis of vocabulary layers used in the Metallica’s lyrics.
курсовая работа [33,4 K], добавлен 09.07.2013The history of translation studies in ancient times, and it's development in the Middle Ages. Principles of translation into Greek, the texts of world's religions. Professional associations of translators. The technology and terminology translation.
дипломная работа [640,7 K], добавлен 13.06.2013The structure and purpose of the council of Europe. The structural and semantic features of the texts of the Council of Europe official documents. Lexical and grammatical aspects of the translation of a document from English to ukrainian language.
курсовая работа [39,4 K], добавлен 01.05.2012Modes and types of interpreting and also lexical aspects of interpreting. Handling context-free and context-bound words. Handling equivalent-lacking words and translators false friends. Translation of cultures and political terms. Translation of verbs.
дипломная работа [84,6 K], добавлен 22.03.2012Basic terminology on gymnastics and types of competitions on gymnastics, their program and exercises. Rules of refereeing. The history of gymnastic development. The Belarus champions of Olympic Games on sports both art gymnastics and their achievements.
учебное пособие [599,2 K], добавлен 25.11.2008
