Yarmashevich Marina Arkadjevna, Doctor of philological sciences, professor, sub-department of foreign languages and speech culture, Saratov State Agrarian University named after N. I. Vavilov (1 Teatralnaya square, Saratov, Russia), email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Background. The work was carried out within the framework of the modern theories of nomination, semiotics, discourse and communication and dedicated to the development of a new integrated approach to the study of abbreviated signs of different structural and semantic models, widely represented in different types of discourse of modern European languages with inflected systems. The article presents the characteristics of the telescopic abbreviated way of word formation in the languages with different grammar systems. The aim of the research is to identify the structural-semantic peculiarities and especially the possibilities of discursive realization of the telescopic units in the modern European languages with diverse grammar structures.
Materials and methods. The main research method was the descriptive one, based on such research techniques as observation, comparison, generalization and classification. The quantitative methods and techniques of component and contextual analysis were applied to the obtained data. The abbreviations of different structural-semantic types (more than 35 thousand units) became the material of the research. Main sources of material were the Russian and English texts of 1983–2004, belonging to different types of discourse, as well as lexicographic materials. The author used materials of German and French languages, which helped to strengthen the reliability of the study results and the proposed provisions. Total analyzed sources in 4 languages amounted to more than 900 conventional signatures.
Results. The factors contributing to formation and functioning of complicated word reductions in modern European languages have been outlined; the character of the influence of the morphological type of language onto formation features of structural models of abbreviations and the specificity of motivation, derivation, paradigms and semantics of telescopic formations have been identified; the communicative and discursive nature of telescoping has been revealed; the types of discourse using telescopic units have been singled out.
Conclusions. The integrated approach to the study of abbreviations and telescoping will not only allow to consolidate the linguistic and semiotic view of the world and to summarize the processes and phenomena having a formal-semantic compression as a general communicative basis, but also to understand the specific character of each of them better. Peculiarities of all structural-semantic and discursive components of telescoping and creation of telescopic unit typology in different types of multilingual discourse require further study and evaluation. It will allow to make scientifically valid conclusions on the independent and unique character of the phenomenon under consideration.
abbreviation, abbreviations, word-formation, nominative processes, linguistic sign, telescoping, telescopic unit, telescope formation, complicated word reduction, discourse, discourse types.
1. Timoshenko T. R. Teleskopiya v slovoobrazovatel'noy sisteme angliyskogo yazyka: avtoref. dis. kand. filol. nauk [Telescopy in word forming system of English language: author’s abstract of dissertation to apply for the degree of the candidate of philological sciences]. Kiev, 1975, 26 p.
2. Zemskaya E. A. Slovoobrazovanie kak deyatel'nost' [Word formation as an activity]. Moscow: Nauka, 1992, 220 p.
3. Batyreva L. P. Slozhnosokrashchennye slova v sovremennoy slovoobrazovatel'noy sisteme frantsuzskogo yazyka: avtoref. dis. kand. filol. nauk [Abbreviated words in modern word forming system of French language: author’s abstract of dissertation to apply for the degree of the candidate of philological sciences].Moscow, 1995, 22 p.
4. Kemmer S. Words in English: Structure, History and Use. 1999.
5. Ulukhanov I. S. Voprosy yazykoznaniya [Problems of linguistics]. 1984, no. 4, pp. 44–54.
6. Ratsiburskaya L. V. Chelovek. Yazyk. Iskusstvo [People. Language. Art]. Moscow: Izd-vo Mosk. ped. un-ta, 2002, pp. 250–252.
7. Dubois J. Etude sur la dérivation suffixale en Français moderne et contemporain [Study of suffixal derivation in modern French language]. Paris: Larousse, 1962, 307 p.
8. Dauzat A. Tableau de la langue française: Origines, évolution, structure actuelle [Revie of French language: Origin, evolution, modern structure]. Paris: Payot, 1939, 342 p.
9. Ulukhanov I. S. Edinitsy slovoobrazovatel'noy sistemy russkogo yazyka i ikh leksicheskaya realizatsiya [Units of the Russian language derivative system and lexical realization thereof]. Moscow: Izd-vo in-ta rus. yaz. RAN, 1996, 221 p.
10. Karasik V. I. Yazykovoy krug: lichnost', kontsepty, diskurs [Language group: personality, concepts, discourse]. Volgograd: Peremena, 2002, 374 p.
11. Kedaytene E. I. Kategoriya odushevlennosti v russkom yazyke [Category of animation in Russian language]. Moscow: Prosveshchenie, 1982, 181 p.