SEMANTIC CONNOTATION IN THE LINGUO-SEMIOTIC RESEARCH INTO TERMINOLOGICAL LOANWORDS

DOI: 10.24308/iass-2014-127

University of Warsaw, Poland

olga.lesicka@wp.pl

Abstract

Research on language – as an element of the social and cultural semiosphere – shows, that phenomena emerging in the modern world, considered as semiotic entities, cause specific changes in human’s private and social life and thereby participate in communication and information processes [S. Siatkowski, 2012]. My research on the English terminological loanwords in the contemporary Russian economic texts, has shown, inter alia, that owing to the influence of various non-linguistic factors together with intralingual factors, several processes are taking place in the language – transformation inside the structure, interlingual contacts, especially the impact of foreign languages and tremendous amount of loanwords. My analysis of the borrowed economic terms collected from modern Russian texts (mostly Americanisms and Briticisms) allowed to introduce the multiaspectual (multi-level) classification of the numerous and diversified material, which covers almost 8000 examples. Collecting and organizing such extensive research material as well as its classification enabled achieving the main research goal, i.e. creating the classification scales based on grammatical, structural, lexical-semantic and stylistic attributes as well as the phases of adaptation in the text. The research has also shown, that in the specific field of human activity (such as economy), different types of signals form more complex heterogeneous semiotical structures, which can be internally differentiatedand complement information they contain. In this way different types of signs as well as different systems and subsystems of the semiosphere in our analysis, within the culture in a broad sense, usually interact with each other and complement each other.

The semantic connotation – as an element of the wider semiotic aspect, so connected with syntactic and pragmatic factors – has become one of the criteria for building this classification, because without this type of analysis wouldn’t be possible the empirical comprehensive analysis.

The purpose of my paper is to show the role which in the modern dynamic and global life play the existing and newly emerging spheres of formation of signs as well as opportunities of using old and new signs in one of the areas of human activity, which is economy. Any changes in the language (in this case we speak about such a global change like the process of borrowing on a large scale) have the impact on the lingual image of the world, because the meanings of the words (in this case – terms) reflect the attitude of the given society towards the reality. Semantic connotation is therefore an important element of the lingual image of the world, because it enablesus todraw conclusions based on the analysis of the following phenomena:

· meanings of the borrowed terms and their modification in the host language;

· differences between the borrowed and ethnic terms;

· the way in which the meaning of the borrowed term connects with the reality in which the host language exists;

· mechanisms of adaptation of terms in the host language (inter alia word-formative, grammatical and stylistic);

· meanings of terms in metaphorical and phraseological form.

Devoting attention to the above-mentioned phenomena in terms of a holistic analysis of the collected lingual material clearly indicates that translation a term from the donor language into the host language doesn’t confine to the interlingual relation, but is a phenomenon of a heterogeneous nature.

As it is known, a language which is the instrument of communication among people, is constantly changing. Being a verbal reflection of human thoughts a language transforms simultaneously with them, because a human needs more and more resources of language and speech. In order to understand others and communicate them our thoughts we have to use the language adjusted to the new, evolving communication challenges. Therefore also the language contacts becoming more and more diverse and their intensification is getting the hallmark of today's globalised and dynamic world.

The progress, which we can observe nowadays, brings the large number of new scientific fields. Together with them new terms are appearing and then functioning in certain texts – mostly specialized ones – technical languages. Every sphere of professional activity has developed its specialized language-semiotic code, which improves simultaneously with its development and in principle is aimed at expanding the coverage of its influence. This influence among neighboring countries as well as on a global international scale is performing inter alia through the language contacts, because due to them the exchange of information is possible.

The language contacts are performed inter alia through the process of borrowing of various foreign-language units, from one languages to another. Terminological loanwords are special type of borrowings (loanwords), because they belong to the separate semiotic space, which is a particular field of professional activity. Some technical languages are characterized by greater than the rest dynamics of change, which is caused by intense development of the professional field they support. One of them is the professional Russian language (technical language) of economy which has been changing during the last few decades simultaneously with the processes of transformation in socio-economic spheres in Russia. Changes in the Russian language of economy are reflected in economic texts, in which there is an increasing influx of new foreign-language units. The diversity of the borrowings noticed in the economic texts as well as the rapidity of the processes of their influx and adaptation in this language determined the scope of my research topic. Intensification of the processes of borrowing the terminological units is the result of the necessity to describe new phenomena in the developing world economies and the intensive development of telecommunications lasting for several decades, additionally foster the development of language contacts, which element (and result) are inter alia borrowed foreign lexical, grammatical and other phenomena. Thus the desire to determine the essence of these phenomena as well as to describe and systematize them, to name them and to study the processes of their transfer into host-language was created.

In order to achieve this task it was necessary to determine the causes of increased influx of loanwords into languages in general as well to analyze these phenomena on a broader cultural background. With these assumptions my research on the English terminological loanwords in the contemporary Russian economic texts, has shown, inter alia, that owing to the influence of various non-linguistic factors together with intralingual factors, several processes are taking place in the language – transformation inside the structure, interlingual contacts, especially the impact of foreign languages and tremendous amount of loanwords. My analysis of the borrowed economic terms collected from modern Russian texts (mostly Americanisms and Briticisms) allowed to introduce the multiaspectual (multi-level) classification of the numerous and diversified material, which covers almost 8000 examples. Collecting and organizing such extensive research material as well as its classification enabled achieving the main research goal, i.e. creating the classification scales based on grammatical, structural, lexical-semantic and stylistic attributes as well as the phases of adaptation in the text.

The result of the analysis of such a large material as well as the phenomena accompanied by the influx and adaptation of borrowings in the Russian language of economy becomes the prospect of its further research on a semiotic level. Since the semiotics is the necessary condition of the existence, functioning, analysis and use of information it becomes the basis of also integrating sciences on information, among others, linguistics which analyses information connected with language and speech. We can therefore say, that terminological borrowings as a carriers of specific kind of information (or information vehicles) are involved into process of communication in the specific field of human activity (such as economics) and therefore are the part of the separate semiosphere which contains various types of signs. They form more complex heterogeneous semiotic structures, which can be internally differentiated and complement information they contain.

Using in the demanded research the so called semiotic key enables to look at the processes of semiosis in their full scope – syntactic, semantic and pragmatic. It can be assumed that as a result of applying the semiotic approach to research into verbal signs, which are terminological borrowings, deeper conclusions about the phenomena that have already been in the above mentioned studies noticed and described, can be made. In my paper I would like to draw our attention to some of these phenomena, thinking of it as a contribution to further research into this sign material using the whole set of semiotic methods and techniques.

As it was mentioned above the study of verbal signs, which are terminological borrowings, is a process to a large extent interdisciplinary. We will therefore have an interest in, among other things, phenomena associated with the process of their influx into the semiosphere of Russian language of economy as well as their adaptation in it. The subject is important because it is connected with the functioning of signs in the host-language and therefore the process of their creation (translation), interpretation and transmission. Even though the term itself is a language unit of the specific type, it is subject to translation mechanisms understood as a building the logical links between the verbal sign and its source in the donor-language [Dinda L. Gorlée 2014]. It can be well seen on the examples of multi-word terms (such as ценовое плато – Eng. price plateau, способность функционировать бесперебойно – Eng. a going concern) and phraseological calques (for example nплохие/безнадёжные долги – Eng. bad debts).

Without any doubt the semiosis as regards terminological borrowings runs on all 3 levels: syntactic – because being an element of the sign system, the translated sign participates in definite relations with another signs of the system at different level – phonetic phonological, morphological, word-formative etc.; semantic – there are phenomena of multiaspectual, universal (or quasi universal) semantics, having mainly logical and informational basis; and pragmative – involving all possible relations between the phenomena of two previous levels [Siatkowski 2011]. The pragmatic dimension of semiosis covers however not only the above mentioned relations between the syntactic and semantic phenomena, which are characteristic of the simple signs and much more complex – it covers also much wider semiotic space in which there are signs functioning as elements of the sphere of language and speech. From this results that only semantic signs, which have meaning, may take part in all three the above mentioned types of relations. The meaningless phonemes can be treated as functional signs. However, it is the semiotic dimension of a language which contains the essence of functioning of the definite language. In the matter of language, except the verbal signs, there are also non-verbal signs, which includes logic, psychological, cultural, social and other phenomena which form the whole semiosphere [Siatkowski 2011].

Although each of the three dimensions of semiosis may constitute a relatively self-contained research, it is difficult to analyze each of them in isolation from each other. The phenomenon called semantic connotation – which I would like to focus on in the paper – in spite of being an element of the semantic dimension of semiosis, should, at least partially refer to both other dimensions. Otherwise, introducing this phenomenon in its entirety will not be possible.

The semantic connotation – as an element of the wider semiotic aspect, so connected with syntactic and pragmatic factors – is one of the semantic issue [Tokarski 1991]. This phenomenon is understood here as a broad cultural knowledge about the designatum of a sign. In other words, semantic connotation is a result of human knowledge and beliefs about various designata, and therefore is a component of the lingual image of the world [Tokarski 1991].

Terminological borrowings are – as we stated previously – a special sort of signs, because like all other terms they are created deliberately and denote special concepts in a professional sphere. If a certain term or the nuances of its meaning appeared in the sublanguage, it denotes as a rule the intentional act – so it is justified from the pragmatic point of view. The conscious use of term in accordance with a definite goal provides more or less the same understanding of it by members of the professional discourse [Slozhenikina 2005]. The term has, however, a certain feature, which Slozhenikina calls “situationality” of meaning. If the term goes beyond its conceptual field (which is its exact definite scientific use), its semantics may change, become widespread throughout the language, adapting to the use in the non-professional but more common sphere [Slozhenikina 2005]. We are speaking not only about the determinologization of the terminological borrowings, but also about their influx into the texts of different levels of specialization, as well as into the conversational language and jargons. As an example, инсайдер (Eng. insider) in specialized meaning “a person belonging to a limited circle of persons who understand the actual facts in a situation or share private knowledge” and its connotation “a person who has special knowledge, authority etc, because he or she is within or part of some privileged group and use it as a mean of enriching” are determined by the extralingual reality depending on the context. The same applies to the borrowed term аутсайдер (Eng. outsider) in the meaning “small or a medium-sized enterprise from any branch of industry, which is not a part of the branch monopoly” and its connotation “One who is excluded from or does not belong to a group, association, or set” The semantic shifts in the case of terminological borrowings appear at the stage of their influx from the technical language into standard literary language, so in the process of intralingual translation. This process signals the highest degree of the adaptation of a loanword in the language – it gains then additional connotations in the consciousness of the native speakers. As it was shown in the examples above both loanwords insider and outsider are marked negatively, whereas the terms in their initial meaning are free of this emotional marking.

Relations between the pragmatic and semantic phenomena as regards to the terminological borrowings can be noticed, when we look at their existence not only in different specialized sublanguages, but also in other contexts – in popular science and journalistic texts, in the broadly understood journalistic writing and oral expressions. It creates the opportunity for deeper observation of dynamic qualities of the terminological borrowings’ functioning in a host-language. The words спонсор (Eng. sponsor) and сервис (Eng. service) have gained in colloquial language new figurative meanings, having, among other things. a reference to the male-women's relationship.

The description of the connotative qualities of the various signs (terminological units) requires consideration of the characteristics of the object defined by the name as well as the interpreters of these signs. Due to the fact that the interpreters are usually humans, we will be interested in their attitude towards the world, which involves their system of values [Tokarski 1991], cultural traditions, myths and symbols. Semantic connotation of the words спонсор and сервис in definite context reflects the attitude towards phenomena which in the consciousness of interpreters is considered as morally ambiguous. We are dealing here with giving new euphemistic name to the new phenomenon, which exists in the public space as the financing of the project, receiving in return the non-financial profit. In the consciousness of native speakers, the aim of any investment is some kind of profit and we usually do not expect that something we can get free of charge. Therefore the sponsor expects receiving something in return. In the context, for example, of the advertisement for searching a sponsor, which is published by a woman, its message is clear and explicit, although it hasn’t been used the word, which expresses the goal in more precise way. Thus using the word спонсор gives the statement more business-like character and in this way partly mitigates its ambiguous nature. Some equivocal connotation has the loanword PR (public relations), which in Russian language can be used with the tinge of irony, suggesting usage of false content in order to convince the public opinion. There is a sort of manifestation of the lack of confidence in the public and non-public institutions, caused by the experience or concerns of the native speakers.

Special kind of signs are multi-word terminological loanwords which are semantic borrowings. These are units already existing in the lexical system of the host-language that adopt new meanings from the donor-language which has an impact on the nature of the relationship between the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic phenomena. Semantic connotation of the adjectives теневой (Eng. shadow) and чёрный (Eng. black) in the European culture, as a contrast with light, symbolizes the negative values, therefore combining with other, semantically neutral signs they give them the pejorative meaning. Words like экономика (Eng. economy), капитал (Eng. capital), бюджет (Eng. budget), рынок (Eng. market), вторник (Eng. Tuesday), деньги (Eng. money) are semantically neutral, but in combination like теневая экономика (Eng. shadow economy), теневой капитал (Eng. shadow capital), теневой бюджет (Eng. shadow budget), чёрный рынок (Eng. black market), чёрный вторник (Eng. Black Tuesday), чёрные деньги (Eng. black money) they are given names of the other phenomena with clearly negative connotations. Functioning of this type of terminological borrowings is therefore conditioned by the relationship between the syntactic and semantic phenomena, because the two-component structure of these units directly affects the semantic features of the object. In that way we can say that signs like теневая экономика, теневой капитал, теневой бюджет, чёрный рынок, чёрный вторник, чёрные деньги have denotata, whereas the designata have the signs like экономика, капитал, бюджет, рынок, вторник, деньги. In the pragmatic dimension we have the clear attitude of the interpreter towards the object which is the result of the relationship of the above mentioned phenomena. The semantic connotation of these signs may though change according to the interpreters. Adaptation of the semantic borrowings in a host-language consists of transferring on its basis not the form, but the meaning, and therefore this process is creative, directing towards seeking the appropriate means in the native language with the retain of the original semantics together with the semantic connotation. Black color – as it was stated above – has negative connotation mainly in the tradition of the European culture. In Eastern cultures this color is the color of happiness (China) and life (India), while the white is the color of mourning (China). Differences in the semantic connotations are therefore the main obstacles for the influx of this kind of terminological borrowings into the language.

As it was indicated in my research quite significant group of the terminological borrowings are calques, mainly phraseological. These are linguistic signs – simple and complex – which being an element of a foreign language system reflect all dimensions of their semiosis through the same or similar relations between its phenomena in the system of the host-language. Calking is not therefore automatic, step by step copying a certain sign. This is by all means the creative process, reflecting in its final effect, to a lesser or greater extent, the relevant qualities of the native as well as foreign languages. As a result of this phenomenon the language enriches by adopting new word-formative models, new motivations, and to a large extent new structural-semantic units as a definite completeness, provided that in addition to the structural phenomena also new meanings have been taken over in this process. This is a special kind of the verbal signs which due to their metaphorical and visual nature are keenly adapted by native speakers of the host-language. Because however of their semantics and figurative meaning, which is not always clear for the users, they often exist in the host-language in two or even three variants, which certain forms may not exactly reflect their sense. It leads to obliteration of semantic boundaries of a term, and this in turn may cause the wrong use in the text. In scientific texts they can play the role of the kind of decoration, may have the ironic tone and much more frequently occur in popular science texts. All these attributes make them rather an element of the professional slang than the unit of the scientific discourse in the serious scientific literature.

Mutual influence between the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic phenomena is apparent with regard to the borrowed single-word calques like телохранитель (Eng. bodyguard) and небоскрёб (Eng. skyscraper). This kind of loanwords, called also structural, are lexical calques, defined in English language as translation loan-words, when the term is approximate or precise translation of the original preserving its, for example, metaphorical semantic mechanism (model, structure), due to which it becomes a calque, otherwise it would be an ordinary translation. All attributes of the host-language, such as grammatical, lexical-semantic, word-formative, stylistic etc, are implemented in this kind of borrowings. Semantic connotation of the terminological calques is also the effect of multi-faced relations in the semiosis that can be seen when comparing them to their equivalents which are not calques – высотное здание (Eng. tower block, high-rise) and охранник (Eng. security guard, gorilla).

Because the semantic connotation covers all the attributes which enable speakers in their entirety to connect the name with the designatum, they also include those which are fixed in metaphors and phrasemes [Grzegorczykowa 1999]. It is well illustrated by a big group of borrowings which are multi-word phraseological calques. Borrowings like плохие or безнадёжные долги (Eng. bad debts), горячие деньги (Eng. hot money), налоговые каникулы (Eng. tax holiday), синдром рассказа сказок (Eng. story telling), белый воротничок (Eng. white-collar worker), синий воротничок (Eng. blue-collar worker), невидимая рука рынка (Eng. the invisible hand of the market), шоковая терапия (Eng. shock therapy), падшие ангелы (Eng. fallen angels), фонды-стервятники (Eng. vulture funds), объятия плюшевого медведя (Eng. teddy bear hug), золотой парашют (Eng. golden parachute), белый рыцарь, чёрный рыцарь (Eng. white knight, black knight), спящая красавица (Eng. sleeping beauty) have appeared in Russian language together with the political-economic transformation in Russia and in most cases were the names of the new phenomena or new names of the phenomena, which have already existed but need the new names. The appearance of such a large number of borrowings in the language as well as renaming the old names to the new ones, should be considered in the category of a sign, which is a tangible indicator of information about the need for wide-ranging changes in many spheres of life – politics, economy, social relations, ethics, mental attitude towards these changes, language etc. The phenomena that we observe in these spheres are semiotic by their nature, because they affect the mind, worldview, aesthetics, human behavior and emotions, participating this way in the information and communication processes [Siatkowski 2011]. The occurrence of borrowings in the language which are on the one hand the professional terms, thus the signs of the certain system of semiosphere (in this case – the Russian language of economy), on the other hand – possessing the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic attributes of signs that belong to another sign systems (for example standard literary language), indicates the mutual influence between signs and their systems. Hence different kinds of signs in various systems and subsystems of semiosphere remain with each other in relations of mutual supplementing and complementing. The above listed terms are signs which have particular designata – it means that they are carriers (vehicles) of definite specialized information, but their semantics is figurative, visual, which enables somewhat adequate reception of new and sophisticated content by the interpreter. New developments during the process of the systemic transformation demanded the acceptance and understanding by the society, hence the influx of many terms from the sphere of the economic theory into the standard literary language, which made them an element of the wider discourse. We are dealing here with the problem of interaction between the two sign systems – the sublanguage of economy, with precisely defined concepts and phenomena, and the standard literary language with its rich semantics, word-formation, phraseology etc. The connotative feature of the mentioned examples is personification (невидимая рука рынка – the invisible hand of the market), emotional tinge (безнадёжные долги – bad debts, шоковая терапия – shock therapy), figurative expression (горячие деньги – hot money, налоговые каникулы – tax holiday, синдром рассказа сказок – story telling), the elements of non-linguistic knowledge, e.g. social and moral issues (белый воротничок – white-collar worker, синий воротничок – blue-collar worker), reference to biblical connotation (падшие ангелы – fallen angels), characteristic features of animals (фонды-стервятники – vulture funds, объятия плюшевого медведя – teddy bear hug), symbols of colors (золотой парашют – golden parachute, белый рыцарь, чёрный рыцарь – white knight, black knight), characters from fairy tales (спящая красавица – sleeping beauty). Therefore, using the terminology of Roman Jakobson we are dealing here with both intralingual translation – because the foreign term is borrowed through its semantics, as well as interlingual – because within the language system (in Russian language in this case) there is interaction between two subsystems – specialized language (orientation to the designatum, functional affiliation of a term) and the standard literary language (syntax, semantics and its connotations). The terms existing so far in the confined sphere of the professional discourse extend the coverage of their using in the standard literary language, participating thereby in the process of its intellectualization. The influx of the elements (in this case – terminological borrowings) of the system of specialized language into the system of the standard literary language is also the sign by its nature – it betokens the changes of civilization, which are reflected, among others, in the language. Due to terms the speech becomes more definite and precise, able to express all the complexity of thoughts as well as interconnections between them. Scientific and technological changes complicate the very concept of the homogenous language, because a huge number of new words, developing in different spheres of science and technology, steadily pass into the standard literary language; old words obtain new meanings; word combinations (collocations) and syntactic structures of a special type are being constructed, evolve the relations between the styles of language. This way the scientific and technological development as well as communication foster the mutual influence between the standard literary language and the systems which are professional language variants, with territorial and social dialects and other languages. It should be once again emphasized that relations between these systems and subsystems are reciprocal – changes of our civilization generate signs, which provide certain semiotic mechanism enabling communication. Conversely, changes in the system of language, which is emerging new syntactic structures, new relations of signs towards their designata and new interpretations of the signs themselves affect the way of perceiving the world [Siatkowski 2011]. That clearly means that the process of intralingual borrowing takes place both with the system of specialized language to the system of the standard literary language, strengthening its intellectual aspect due to signs which are terms, and vice versa – the system of specialized language is being enriched due to new syntactic structures and semantics of the new terminological borrowings.

Semiotics – which is the necessary condition of the existence, functioning, analysis and use of information – is becoming more all-embracing and integrating field of research. It is therefore the basis for integrating sciences of information, among others, linguistics which analyses information connected with language and speech [Siatkowski 2011] Semiotic studies on the ground of linguistics have their tradition based on the active work of some semiotic schools, including mainly the school of structural linguistics, which focused its attention on stricte language problems. Another semiotic school, called the interpretative school is rooted in Peirce's pragmatism and identifies widely understood translation with the endless semiosis that means the continual process of signs creation [Pieczyńska-Sulik 2009]. Roman Jakobson combined both of these approaches, taking over from Charles S. Peirce the interpretative nature of translation and focusing more on language issues. Further development of the Jakobson’s ideas has been transformed in works of another authors into implementation of the Peirce’s concept of translation identical with semiosis and culture [Pieczyńska-Sulik 2009].

Drawing attention to the phenomena accompanying the process of borrowing new terminological units in the system of Russian economic language in the aspect of an overall analysis of the collected verbal material clearly indicates that translation a term from the donor language into the host language doesn’t confine to the interlingual relation, but is a phenomenon of a heterogeneous nature. The transition of a verbal sign from one language to another alone – that means the so-called intralingual translation – is the starting as well as destination point of a borrowing [Petrilli 2003]. However, between these two stages we can observe a variety of phenomena accompanying the process of adaptation of the verbal sign in the new language system. The analysis of these phenomena with the use of the so-called semiotic key will allow to recognize the semiotic nature of the language and see the bigger picture of its functioning in the cultural space.

References

GORLÉE, Dinda L. 2014. From Translation To Semiotranslation. Abstract for 12th World Congress of Semiotics.

GRZEGORCZYKOWA, Renata. 1999. Pojęcie językowego obrazu świata [Concept of the lingual image of the world]. In Jerzy BARTMIŃSKI (ed.). Językowy obraz świata [Lingual image of the world]. Lublin.

JAKOBSON, Roman. 1966. On Linguistic Aspects of Translation. In Reuben A. BROWER (ed.). On Translation. New York: Oxford University Press.

MORRIS, Charles William. 1971. Writings on the General Theory of Signs. Den Haag: Mouton.

PETRILLI, Susan. 2003. The Intersemiotic Character of Translation. In Susan PETRILLI (ed.). Translation translation.

PIECZYŃSKA-SULIK, Anna. 2009. O semiotyce przekładu [About the semiotics of translation]. “Rocznik przekładoznawczy” [Translational annual], No 5.

SIATKOWSKI, Stanislav. 2011. Актуальные проблемы культурно-общественной семиосферы и семиотико-лингвистические исследования [Current problems of cultural social semiosphere and semiotical linguistic research]. In Antoni MIKLEWSKI (ed.). Zagadnienia innowacyjności funkcjonowania system badania + rozwój w nauce [Issues of innovative working of R&D system in science]. Warsaw.

SLOZHENIKINA, Julia. 2005. Термин: семантическое, формальное, функциональное варьирование [Term: semantic, formal, functional variation]. Samara: Samara State University.

TOKARSKI, Ryszard. 1991. Poziomy konotacji semantycznej, Język a kultura [Levels of semantic connotation, Language and culture]. Volume 2. Zagadnienia leksykalne i aksjologiczne [Lexical and axiological issues]. Jadviga Puzynin & Jerzy Bartminski (eds.). Wiedza o Kulturze [Cultural knowledge], Wroclaw.