The article is focused on the analysis of structural-semantic features of buzzwords and relating to them problem of interlingual lacunarity in two kinds of professional discourse – business and political-legal discourse. Buzzwords are understood as a special category of lexical units which emerge die to the need of nominating new culture-specific elements, tendencies and trends, as well as attaching novelty to existing in the language phenomena. The study relevance is stipulated by the common understanding that buzzwords represent the newest layer of modern English vocabulary reflecting the most recent changes currently happening in the English language under the influence of modern socio-political processes. The authors draw attention to a close relation between buzzwords and interlingual lacunarity as buzzwords do not have laconic variants of translation, thus demanding the use of various techniques of direct translation such as borrowing, calque and literal translation. Special emphasis is put on some word formation models, according to which many buzzwords are formed. Such word formation methods include affixation, abbreviation, blending and metaphoric transfer. Having considered the results of the research, the authors come to conclusion that different word formation models prevail in different kinds of discourse, as well as different direct translation techniques can be applied to translate them from English into Russian. For political-legal discourse more widespread word formation models include affixation, abbreviation and metaphoric transfer, whereas in business discourse, alongside with abbreviation, blending is also widely used. The most common translation technique is literal translation, sometimes together with other methods. For instance, while translating buzzwords belonging to political-legal sphere, in particular, those formed by affixation using the suffix -ism and the prefix post-, it is possible to provide borrowing as the translation of the new word. Nevertheless, further such borrowed lexical unit will demand additional explanation which is usually represented by the literal translation of its definition. Lack of equivalents of buzzwords in lexicographic sources in Russian proves the fact that they belong to the category of interlingual lexical gaps.

The article deals with the paremiological units of the English language and their cognitive-discursive functions. The paper presents arguments in favor of the study of paroemias in discourse that are due to the principle of functional self-organization of the language, as a result of which, a new synergistic meaning is formed and the importance of paroemias seems obvious for increasing the pragmacommunicative effectiveness of discourse. In the article, the authors state that the language synchronous state is inherent not only in the system, but also in dynamism, and the evolution in the language is not only dynamic, but also systemic in nature, therefore among these properties is the ability of paroemias not only to have a stable initial visual form, but also to carry out evolutionary transformations which initiate new variants of the structural-semantic character. The work also examines paremiological units as precedent texts acting as a recurrent fragment of any discourse. The work focuses on the following properties of parоemias: they represent precedent concepts; express emotional significance for speakers of a particular linguistic culture; are a unique system of associative relations caused by a precedent in the native speaker’s consciousness; have a clear productive and perceptual marking in functional terms; are precedented cultural signs that indicate the semiotic nature of the subject, its active participation in the process of communication and its relationship with the national complex of cultural knowledge; present a truncated discourse behind a text or a situation; are units of linguistic consciousness actualized in discourse. The main goal of the article is to describe a number of cognitive-discursive functions of paremiological units: the function of the structurally-explicational organization of the discourse; the emotional-semantic emphasis function; the generalization function; the stylistic function; the regulatory function; the euphemization function; the phatic function; the meaning variability function.

No abstract

No abstract

The article deals with the notions business, professional and commercial discourse. Business discourse is a verbal or written communication between people interested in business interaction to promote their interests. It is a universal type of institutional discourse which has cultural and communicative orientation, pragma-semantic load and stylistic regulation, strict regulation and conventionality, stereotype and repeatability of communicative situations, speech etiquette. We believe that professional discourse is a vocational-oriented vocabulary, and institutional discourse is a set of social and communicative practices which brings together representatives from diverse professional communities interacting within a social institution. Commercial discourse is an embodiment of an invariant discourse model in a communicative situation in business created by a specific group of people in business. The author argues that business and professional discourses are largely synonymous while business discourse and commercial discourse are not because they are in hypo-hyperonymic relationship where commercial discourse is incorporated in business discourse.