Structural-derivative analysis of the formation of English terms in the field of copyright

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Uzbekistan State World Languages University

STRUCTURAL-DERIVATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE FORMATION OF ENGLISH TERMS IN THE FIELD OF COPYRIGHT

Ismailov Turgun Salakhiddinovich,

Associated professor (PhD)

Second year Master student of (English) Linguistic faculty

Madaminov Javlonbek Tursunovich

Abstract

This article discusses the structural-derivative features of the formation of English terminology in the sphere of copyright. The analysis of the studied sample of special lexical units of copyright in the English language makes it possible to single out the most productive models for the formation of two-component terminological combinations. Copyright is a unique branch of law that regulates the sphere of human intellectual property, which we encounter every day in all spheres of life. It is this fact that makes it an extremely interesting object of study.

Keywords: structural features, structural-derivative analysis, terminology, term combinations, simple terms, complex terms, phrasal term combinations, copyright, copyright law,

The main text

Terminology as a special field of knowledge attracts more attention of researchers. This is primarily due to the international nature of modern scientific knowledge and the desire to standardize terms as a way to overcome language barriers in various areas of human activity. The existence and development of any modern science is impossible without terms and terminology in general. The terms define the essence of scientific discoveries, reflect the content of developing fields of knowledge, convey concepts that new created and already existing in science and technology, serve as the name of new objects of phenomena [8]. Previously, the issues of application and use of terms concerned only narrow specialties. However, today the number of people who are confronted with the problem of special vocabulary, which is the basis of the most modern languages. This is due to the computerization of more areas of human activity, which has made the problem of studying terminology one of the main tasks of linguistics. Terminology is a relatively young science that emerged at the end of the 20th century. Its theoretical foundations are a set of ideas and assumptions put forward by scientists and often representing opposite concepts. This is the reason for the need for a clear definition of the concept of "term" in the framework of a separate study. The study of any terminological system begins with finding out what is meant by a term [1].

English copyright terminology has been closely linked to the vocabulary of general use throughout its development, so the methods of English word formation are applicable in this terminology, however, preference is given to only those methods of term formation that more accurately fulfill its functions. In carrying out the analysis, we relied on the research of domestic and foreign terminologists. It should be noted that within the framework of the study from the general list, there are all terminological units that are in the original sources, with the exception of their definitions [3]. This is due to the fact that within the framework of the analysis of terminological units, there is not the need to rely on the interpretation of the term itself, since in the study of structural features and the word-formation process, the presence of a definition does not play a role.

To identify the structural features of the English terms in copyright law, we analyzed the composition of this terminology in several aspects. The first step was to identify the functional types of terms. We used the classification proposed by T.V. Sokolova [6] in our study, according our identification there are several types:

1. general scientific terms, for example: Agreed statement;

2. general legal terms, for example: Infringement of rights, Protective rights;

3. highly specialized terms of copyright as part of general legal terms, for example: Art copyright protection.

4. also there are cross-industry terms in English copyright terminology, for example: Payment obligation.

Appealing to the structural parameters of the terminology under consideration involves the identification of existing problems within the framework of the legal sublanguage and allows the researcher to suggest possible solutions to the identified difficulties. When considering the structural features of terminology, we should pay attention to the form, i.e. morphological structure of the terminological unit [6]. Therefore, we can divide the criteria into special lexical units into terms-words, or single-word terms, and terms-word combinations, which also bear the name of terminological combinations. As a result of the analysis, we have identified the following structural types of the studied terms:

1. simple terms: single-component (Right, Protection);

2. complex terms (Copy-related right), two or more terminological phrases (Owner of copyright, performing rights);

3. abbreviations (UCC, WIPO, SCMS).

From the total volume of the sample compiled by a complete review of the WIPO glossaries with 394 terminological units, it seems possible to single out 87 term-words, which is 22% of the total number of special lexical units. Terms-words are heterogeneous in their composition, since the following varieties are referred to as generic terms:

1) root terms - one-word terms, the basis of which coincides with the root;

2) affixal terms - one-word terms, the basis of which contains roots and affixes; copyright law english language

3) complex terms - single-word terms, the basis of which contains several root morphemes [2, 10].

There are 14 special lexical units belong to the root terms-words, which make up 3% of the total sample. The following lexical units can serve as examples of such terms: copy, patent. Complex terms in the selection of copyright terminology in English are not the most productive type of term formation - 17 terminological units (4.3% of the total sample). The conducted analysis shows that the vast majority of complex terms are special lexical units consisting of several root morphemes. The terms webcasting, photocopy, cablecast can serve as examples of these units. The studied terminological base is classified as narrowly focused, however, it can be seen in the examples, terminological units are not narrowly focused. In our sample, only 32% (126 terminological units) are narrowly focused (Authorship, Non-copy-related rights), while 68% (268 units) are cross-sectoral (Licence, Intelligence). The terms webcasting, photocopy and cablecast are one of the main terms in the field of copyright, however, they are also actively used in the fields of not only jurisprudence, but also advertising, television and Internet communications. Free terminological combinations suggest the possibility of a synonymous substitution of one or two constituent elements while maintaining the semantic integrity of the entire combination [7]. Speaking of syntactic relations within terminological combinations, one can single out a special type of combinations - phrasal ones. A feature of such terminological combinations is the similarity of the structure with the phrase, and syntactic relations are expressed by means of conjunctions or prepositions. The total number of phrasal terminological combinations is 54 terminological units (18% of the total sample). In our sample, there were also phrasal terms with a large number of components:

· Collective administration of copyright and related rights;

· Recording of a work or object of related rights;

· Storage of works and objects of related rights in an electronic (computer) memory.

In this study, the main classification is general scientific. The terminology are divided into general scientific, sectoral, intersectoral and highly specialized. The division of terms into classifications seems important in the further study of word formation methods. When studying the word-formation processes of the terminology under consideration, it is possible to determine the classification of the studied terms. The analysis of the studied sample showed that such word formation methods as reversion, conversion and word fusion are not the most productive ways of word formation. Only 12% of terminological units from the total sample were formed by these methods. According to the results of the analysis, the most productive non-linear models of word formation are word addition, affixation and abbreviations - their total amount was 88% of terminological units from the total sample. Many terminological units are formed by prefixation and suffixation methods, in which term-forming affixes are added at the beginning or end of the root word. With the help of affixes, new terms and words can be formed. Suffixes and prefixes used in the system of English term formation are mainly borrowed from the general word-forming means of the English language. Suffixes have a broader meaning and indicate the category to which the concept belongs. When analyzing the terminology under study, it is that to single out the most productive suffixes involved in the formation of terms. The results of the analysis are presented below in Table 1.

Table 1

Productive suffixes in the term formation of English in copyright terminology

As the analysis shows, among the terminological units formed with the help of suffixes, the suffix -ion is the most productive, with the help of which 126 units were formed, which is 31% of the units from the total sample. The suffix -ion means an action, a process, or the result of this process (Translation, renumiration). Next in terms of productivity is the suffix -ing, with the help of which 54 terminological units are formed, which is 13% of the terms. From this it can be concluded that many terms formed in a suffixal way express a certain process or reflect its result. As can be seen from the table, many suffixes are rare or all are absent in the process of term formation in the copyright language. Non-productive suffixes in our selection include suffixes such as -ness, -ess, -or, -ist, -ency, -ian. These suffixes are more typical for the process of word formation of general scientific terms. With the help of these suffixes, abstract nouns are formed that express a certain property, quality, person or mechanism that produces a certain action [5]. Based on the analysis of the productivity of suffixes, it can be concluded that copyright terms cannot be classified as general scientific, because in the structural-word-formation process of terms in the sublanguage of jurisprudence under study, the suffixes characteristic of these classifications are not productive. In our work, the studied terminological base was classified as narrowly focused, however, as the study showed, most of the terms refer to interdisciplinary [11].

In conclusion, based on the results of the analysis, it was possible to establish that English terms in the field of copyright obey the general rules of word formation of legal terms. The analysis of the practical material showed that the most productive way of word formation in the field of English copyright is affixation. In this way, 371 lexical units were formed, which is 94% of the total sample. The second most productive is the terminological phrase - complex terms accounted for 83% of the entire sample. The prevalence of this method can be explained by the high motivation of compound words, that is, their ability to eliminate unwanted ambiguity. When analyzing the terminology under study, it seemed possible to single out the most productive affixes involved in the formation of terms. Among the terminological units formed with the help of suffixes, the most productive is the suffix -ion, 31% of the units of the studied terminological base were formed. Among the prefixes, the suffix re- is the most productive, 11 units were formed, which is 2% of the units from the total sample. Based on the results obtained, it was possible to establish that prefixation is the least productive way of term formation for English terms in the field of copyright.

References

1. Arnold I.V. Lexicology of modern English: Proc. forin-towifak. foreign lang. M.: Higher school, 1986. 295 p.

2. Akhmanova O.S. Dictionary of linguistic terms. 2nd ed. M.: Sov. Encyclopedia, 1969. 608 p.

3. Benveniste E. General Linguistics. M.: URSS, 2002. 448 p.

4. Bushev A.B. Term formation in legal discourse and ways of translating terms // Jurislinguistics. 2010. 452 p.

5. Gorelikova S.N. The nature of the term and some features of term formation in English // Bulletin of OSU. 2002. N 6.

6. Latyshev L. K., SemenovA. L. Translation: theory, practice and teaching methods. M.: Academy, 2003. 192 p.

7. Leichik V.M. Culture of the term [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.library.krasu.ru/ft/ft/_articles/0113944.pdf.

8. Pearson J. Strategies for identifying terms in specialized texts // The Irish Yearbook of Applied Linguistics, No.16.1996. P. 33-42.

9. Teresa Cabre M., Terminology. Theory, Methods and Application. Barcelona, 1992. 17 P.

10. Verbukh K.Ya. Terminological Variance: Terminological and Applied Aspects // Questions of Linguistics. 1986. 364 p.

11. Vasilenko V.A. The language status of a legal term: specificity of translation. M.: Vest. Samar.2013. 224 p.

Размещено на Allbest.ru