UDC 81‟373 + 811.111
Ya. S. SNISARENKO
(Cherkasy, Ukraine)
THE INFLUENCE OF LINGUAL AND EXTRALINGUAL FACTORS UPON
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIO-POLITICAL LEXIS AND SOCIOPOLITICAL TERMINOLOGY
The paper deals with analyses of difference between socio-political lexis and socio-political
terminology. The main lingual and extralingual factors that influence upon the development of
socio-political lexis and socio-political terminology are determined.
K e y w o r d s: socio-political lexis, socio-political terminology, lexical unit, lingual factors,
extralingual factors.
The study of socio-political lexis excites a considerable interest for linguistics,
because it reflects one of the most important spheres of life for modern society –
political. Many Ukrainian (A. A. Buriachok, V. V. Zhaivoronok, A. V. Kapush,
T. P. Klimushenko, O. O. Moroz, I. V. Kholiavko) and foreign (V. I. Akimova,
A. S. Bielaya,
M. K. Harbovskyi,
L. O. Zhdanova,
S. G. Kapralova,
T. B. Kriuchkova, I. F. Protchenko, N. G. Yuzefovych, D. Cameron, W. Dikman,
H. Lassvel, G. Klaus) linguists investigated the notion “socio-political lexis”.
In the article, after T. B. Kriuchkova, the socio-political lexis is determined as a
special lexical-semantic subsystem of the language, which includes of the most-used
part of the socio-political terms, names of state, party and other organizations and
institutions, social institutions, names of social realities and phenomena of life in
different countries etc. [2, p. 16].
Despite the fact that in modern linguistic literature the scientific interest towards
the studying of special vocabulary and terminology in various languages, and sociopolitical vocabulary in some languages has increased, there is no generally accepted
classification, common definitions and common criteria for the demarcation and
allocation of socio-political lexis and socio-political terminology. Although the
definitions of socio-political vocabulary and socio-political terminology which are
formulated in the literature have much in common, but still have a fundamental
difference, in addition, linguists have different criteria for defining the socio-political
vocabulary.
The purpose of the article is to define the differences between socio-political
lexis and socio-political terminology, to analyse the influence of lingual and
extralingual factors on the development of socio-political vocabulary and sociopolitical terminology.
Analysis of some studies shows that the concepts of “socio-political lexis” and
“socio-political terminology” are not clearly delineated and even are interpreted in a
different way. Some scientists believe that the socio-political vocabulary includes
terminology of political sciences, others clearly differentiate the concept of “sociopolitical lexis” and “socio-political terminology”, fundamentally opposed to the
involvement of the terms to the socio-political vocabulary, others use these concepts
as synonyms.
In the studies, researchers often focus on two main points that are important to
consider when determining the boundaries of socio-political terminology: 1) political
sciences (politology, the theory of state and law) belong to the social sciences,
accordingly, political terms are public housing terminology; 2) all these terms denote
scientific concepts as well as scientific and technical terms, only the first, unlike the
second, express the concept of social rather than natural and technical sciences.
V. M. Leichyk emphasizes that “... it is necessary to talk about the terms and
terminology of the social sciences, but not about the socio-political terminology”
[3, p. 45].
According to T. S. Kohotkova, linguists, while considering the building of
socio-political units, prefer the definition of socio-political lexis, rather than sociopolitical terminology. This is because most of the socio-political terms are commonly
understood, because of their usage in the language of mass propaganda and agitation,
as well as their presence in a conversational speech [1, p. 115]. In fact, many lexical
items that denote objects, phenomena and processes of society, are commonly
understood or seemed as such. But along with them there operate a large number of
words that are understandable only to a narrow circle of specialists.
In the article there is given preference to the term socio-political lexis because
socio-political terminology is only part of the socio-political vocabulary. “Sociopolitical lexis” is much broader notion, which includes words and concepts that
describe various aspects of social and political life of the society.
The lexical system of a language, as it is known, belongs to the most open
systems, which means that the vocabulary of a language is in a state of a constant
dynamic development, which appears either in the appearance of new words, whether
the output of separate lexical items from the use, whether in changing the meaning of
the words. Considering the fact that the vocabulary of a language is connected with
extralinguistic reality and reacts to the changes that occur in the life of a native
speaker, in the article qualitative and quantitative changes in the vocabulary of the
English and Ukrainian languages are explained by lingual and extralingual factors.
Functionally, the language depends on the socio-economic and cultural
conditions of the society. Various social and communicative needs of the linguistic
groups, the conditions of their historical existence and ideological attitudes are major
extralingual factors that influence upon the development of the lexical system of the
language. As pointed by D. M. Shmelev [7, p. 19], the possibility of extralinguistic
reality to affect the lexical-semantic system of the language is explained by the
openness of the last.
In the process of historical development each language is characterized by
periods of relative stability, and significant structural and semantic shifts. Significant
transformation in the Ukrainian language took place in the second half of 80–90s of
the 20th century, when the lexical-semantic system was influenced by the sociopolitical, scientifically-technological and cultural changes in the lives of the
Ukrainian people. The change of the social system, mass consciousness, reassessment
much of the previous history because of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the
formation of new states and the declaration of the independence of Ukraine caused
qualitative and quantitative changes in the vocabulary of modern Ukrainian language.
The development of the language is mostly caused by the influence of politics,
ideology, economics, and social changes. Thus, the words of socio-political sphere
are concentrated around concepts related to trends of modern civilization process –
“globalization”, “european integration” and others, political campaigns, movements,
doctrines – “geopolitics”, “extremism” “panslavism” and others, social stratification
of the society – “bourgeoisie”, “elite”, “lumpen”, “proletariat” and others.
Researchers prefer to analyze the socio-political lexis of those periods which are
associated with turning points in the life of society, when its social structure changes,
the new phenomena are appeared, new political parties and public organizations are
established, and thus new lexical items are created to refer to new concepts. The
nature and degree of intensity of changes of the vocabulary in different periods of
development have significant differences, due to the numerous transformations
caused by the socio-political transformations. The condition of lexical space of each
period is a “point in the chain of its continuous change” [5, p. 20].
It is well known that the analysis of the vocabulary primarily includes studies of
semantic processes and sources of its formation. For the Ukrainian language there are
common such semantic processes that reflect the new political situation in Ukraine at
the boarder of the 20th – 21st centuries (similar processes are observed in the sociopolitical vocabulary of the German, Russian, Belarusian and Polish languages):
1) deactualization of the meanings of words: in the condition of one-party system the
word party mattered “Communist Party”, but now it is necessary to specify what kind
of party it is; 2) deidealization of socio-political vocabulary – the removal of negative
shade of meanings of certain words or appearance ironic tone, for example, in the
words бізнесмен („businessman‟), підприємиць („entrepreneur‟); 3) the politicization
of some lexical-semantic groups: from the sports field to the sphere of policy there
the word раунд („round‟) in the meaning “stage” was moved; from the military
sphere to the sphere of politics the word заручник („hostage‟) was passed; the word
діалог („dialogue‟) in the political context has a meaning “negotiation” (antonymous
“confrontation”), “discussion”, “communication”; 4) depolitization of political terms:
political terms are used in non-political contexts, such as диктатура („dictatorship‟)
– “violent suppression of the will of others”; консенсус („consensus‟) – “consent”
[4, p. 45].
In the middle of the 20th century the structure of the socio-political lexis of the
Ukrainian language mainly consisted of words that denote concepts and phenomena
of the Soviet period, socialist society. At the end of the twentieth century much of the
words have passed away, moved to discharge historisms (eg., п‟ятирічка („fiveyearplan‟), партком („party committee‟), передовик („peredovik‟) etc.). Some words
undergone semantic rethinking. Significant social changes are reflected in the
language, especially in the socio-political dictionary. The resulting gaps are filled
with the resources of the Ukrainian language (the words, recorded in dictionaries and
texts of the 18th–19th enturies, come back to usage), as well as new borrowings from
different languages.
Dynamics of socio-political situation in Ukraine in the last decade of the 20th
century (collapse of the Soviet Union, the change of the political system, the change
of the dominant forms of industrial relations, etc.) led to the emergence of many new
and updating previously irrelevant socio-political realities. To indicate the majority of
them there were borrowed words from other languages.
According to the theory of language contacts and interaction of the language
systems, borrowing is interpreted as one of the ways of enriching the vocabulary
(L. A. Bulakhovskyi, V. V. Zhaivoronok, D. Cristal, F. Katamba).
The relevance of the process of borrowing of foreign language vocabulary into
the Ukrainian language in the last decade of the 20th century – at the beginning of the
21st century drew attention of many modern linguists to the problem. In particular, the
development of foreign borrowings in scientific terminological systems are explored
by
L. A. Lysychenko,
O. A. Pavlushenko,
N. O. Popova,
O. A. Styshov,
A. V. Yankov, while scientists consider borrowed words as an effective way to enrich
the vocabulary of the language at this stage of its development.
There are the most relevant causes of foreign borrowings and the emergence of
new words in the sphere of socio-political vocabulary of modern Ukrainian language:
1) lack of words to name the new realities, a subject, a concept that emerged in public
life (брифінг („briefing‟), імпічмент („impeachment‟); 2) the need in naming
phenomena that still exist in society, but they didn‟t have appropriate designation
because their existence was suppressed (мафія („mafia‟), рекет („racketeering‟); 3)
the tendency to replace the word-combination by one-word name for convenience
(рейтинг („rating‟) – “a political figure”, імідж („image‟) – “image of “self”, which
a political activist creates”).
A powerful source of lexical borrowings in the socio-political lexis of the
Ukrainian language of the late 20th century was English – the most widespread
language of international communication. In the Ukrainian language of the analyzed
period the quantity of anglicisms is about 70–80 % of all borrowings. This can be
explained by the large role of English-speaking countries (especially the U.S.) in the
modern global social and political life, active cultural expansion of the United States
and the introduction of democracy, parliamentarism, liberalism and market economy
in Ukraine, that is the realities, in which English-speaking countries are the most
experienced, so that‟s why English is the source of special terminology. Borrowingsanglicisms within the socio-political vocabulary of the Ukrainian language are
characterized by heterogeneity and varying frequency, stylistic and genre using
[6, p. 17].
The Ukrainian language borrowed some terms of socio-political English
vocabulary; they are divided into several types: 1) borrowings which are rather old
and adapted to the language in such a way that their foreign origin is not felt, they are
often widely used, they have a large number of derivatives (лідер („leader‟); 2) proper
English words that are often used in speech; these words go out of the professional
scope of use and gradually become common units (піар („PR‟); 3) barbarisms are
rarely used foreign words that can be easily replaced by common lexicon and are
used in professional communication; it is impossible to hear them in everyday
language.
Because of the replacement of fictitious Soviet elections on real electoral
system, with the establishment of democracy in Ukraine the words балотуватися
(„run‟), рейтинг („rating‟), популізм („populism‟), and so on intensified and acquired
new shades of meanings. The current political struggle of the Ukrainian politicians
and their dependence on the voters made it possible to combine the word рейтинг
(„rating‟) with the names of Ukrainian politicians, to activate the word популізм
(„populism‟) and to give the word балотуватися („run‟ – to stand for election) real
content. Also the following words in the Ukrainian language as спікер („speaker‟),
парламент
(„parliament‟),
лобіст
(„lobbyist‟),
лобі
(„lobby‟),
імпічмент
(„impeachment‟), інаугурація („inauguration‟), екстрадиція („extradition‟) and more
are borrowed from the English language into the sphere of politics.
The word спікер („speaker‟) was borrowed long ago, but it acquired the
significant proliferation in socio-political lexis in recent years. The Head of the
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine is called Спікер („Speaker‟).
The word парламент („parliament‟) is common in the media and everyday
speech, it is used to refer to the legislative authority of Ukraine.
The words лобіст („lobbyist‟), лобі („lobby‟) (eng. Lobby - Couloir) also
operate in the Ukrainian language long ago, but beforehand these words were not
specific to the Ukrainian reality and were used only in scientific papers and several
articles about western parliamentarism. Today лобі („lobby‟) is as much a part of the
Ukrainian reality, as the parliament, and therefore words лобі („lobby‟) and лобісти
(„lobbyists‟) became an active part of the socio-political vocabulary of the Ukrainian
language. Take to consideration that the meaning of this word is somewhat far from
the first-hand – “agents of large banks and industrial monopolies, which influenced
the sidelines of parliament”. In modern conditions лобі („lobby‟) is a “direct
parliamentary deputies of a legislature, who secretly or openly represent the interests
of a financial, industrial or national group” (НСІМ, p. 427).
In the explanatory dictionary of the Ukrainian language (НТСУМ) the word
імпічмент („impeachment‟) means “special, supported by legislation, rules, liability,
recall from office senior officials of the state” (НТСУМ, I, p. 281). In English, this
word is a multilingual and is interpreted as: імпічмент („impeachment‟ – “a charge
of a serving government official with serious misconduct while in office”; “removal
of somebody such as a president or a judge from public office because of having
committed serious crimes and misdemeanors or because of other gross misconduct”
(OALD, p. 777) (“the accusal of government employee of a serious offense in the
performance of official duties”, “removal of a person, such as president or judge from
office by committing a serious crime or act or through any other serious violation”).
This can be explained by the etymology of the word, because it has an English origin.
In the Ukrainian language the word імпічмент („impeachment‟) was stuck with
changing the initial meaning according to the sphere of its usage.
Thus, lexico-semantic development of socio-political lexis of the Ukrainian
language occurs by updating the vocabulary and by changes in the semantic load of
the words. Obvious and easily fixed were and still remain facts of lexical upgrade, so
researchers-lexicologists seek to identify trends and then setting the patterns at certain
stages of a continuous process of updating and enriching the vocabulary of both
languages. All new borrowings in the socio-political lexis of the Ukrainian language
in recent years come from languages that are relevant for Ukrainian society in
connection with the active contacts of both languages with appropriate language
cultures.
Prospects for further research is a comparative analysis of the impact of lingual
and extralingual factors in the socio-political lexis and socio-political terminology on
the basis of the English and Ukrainian languages.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Коготкова Т. С. Из истории формирования общественно-политической терминологии
(по материалам последних десятилетий XIX в.) // Исследования по русской
терминологии. – М. : Наука, 1971. – С. 204 – 215.
Крючкова Т. Б. Особенности формирования и развития общественно-политической
лексики и терминологии. – М. : Наука, 1988. – 151 с.
Лейчик В. М. Люди и слова. – М. : Наука, 1982. – 177 с.
Мороз О. О. Сучасна чеська суспільно-політична лексика: семантика, структура,
динаміка: Дис. … канд. філол. наук: 10.02.03. / – К., 2005. – 160 с.
Сорокин Ю. С. Развитие словарного состава русского литературного языка в 30–90-е гг.
ХIX в. – М.; Л. : Наука, 1965. – 568 с.
Стишов О. А. Особливості розвитку лексичного складу української мови кінця ХХ ст. //
Мовознавство. – 1999. – № 1. – С. 7 – 21.
Шмелев Д. Н. Проблемы семантического анализа лексики. – М.: Наука, 1973. – 216 с.
ABBREVIATION LIST OF LEXICOGRAPHIC RESOURCES
НСІМ – Новий словник іншомовних слів. 20 000 слів / [укл. і передмова О.М. Сліпушко]. –
К. : Аконіт, 2007. – 848 с.
НТСУМ – Новий тлумачний словник української мови : в 3 т. / [укл. В. Яременко, О.
Сліпушко]. – 2-ге вид. – К. : Аконіт, 2008. – Т. 1 : А – К. – 926 с.
OALM – Oxford Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary. – Oxford : University press, 2008. – 1780 p.
Я. С. Снісаренко
ВПЛИВ ЛІНГВАЛЬНИХ ТА ЕКСТРАЛІНГВАЛЬНИХ ЧИННИКІВ НА РОЗВИТОК
СУСПІЛЬНО-ПОЛІТИЧНОЇ ЛЕКСИКИ ТА СУСПІЛЬНО-ПОЛІТИЧНОЇ ТЕРМІНОЛОГІЇ
Проаналізовано відмінність між суспільно-політичною лексикою та суспільнополітичною термінологією. Визначено основні лінгвальні й екстралінгвальні чинники, що
впливають на розвиток суспільно-політичної лексики та суспільно-політичної термінології.
К л ю ч о в і с л о в а:
суспільно-політична
лексика,
суспільно-політична
термінологія, лексична одиниця, лінгвальні чинники, екстралінгвальні чинники.