Problems on Terminology and Theoretical Description of Language Derivation Levels

Abstract

The paper focuses on the system of terms used in Russian linguistics to denote the processes of language derivation. The existence of significant contradictions in their using is explained by the improper assignment of the generic term "derivation" to a separate language level – word formation. It is argued that a single-word non-attributive term should serve the purpose of nominating a concept that applies to all levels of the language. The terms denoting different varieties of derivation should include attributive characteristics, as it is in the case of terminology combination "semantic derivation". The features of the cognitive mechanisms underlying each of the types of derivation are determined, and the degree of their relevance to the development criterion as a core meaning of the lexeme "derivation" is established. A general typology of derivational processes is proposed. The term "derivation" within this typology is used for denoting the process of secondary nominative signs formation in hyperonimic sense, which includes the semantic, morphological and graphical derivation levels. The internal classification of each of the above-mentioned levels is developed. The main differences between them are presented with the help of formalized semantic records. The belonging of semantic and morphological derivation to the system language processes is proved, while graphoderivation is described as an aside-system phenomenon based on the game deconstruction of a language sign and violation of the conventions of its homogeneous semiotic representation.

A comprehensive cognitive-perceptual model of analysis for contextually determined components of a conceptualized term

“…Special stress is to be placed on the effect that the interpenetration of mental spaces and integral representations will reveal within the explication of contextual overtones of the meaning. Numerous experts point at tha fact that studying terminologization requires a certain specific model, which would allow analyzing the conceptual structure, and this has to be carried out at various activity levels, related both to communication and reflexion [16] or mental fields [17]. If keeping in mind the expectation belonging to the most appropriate interpretation, however, we cannot exclude the fact that there is a special action scheme that corresponds to the contextual perception type and the content distribution.…”