Nominative Potential of Artifact Metaphor in Terms of Animal Anatomy
https://doi.org/10.18384/2949-5075-2025-2-6-15
Abstract
Aim. To identify onomasiological models of anatomical nominations in veterinary and animal husbandry, motivated by artifact metaphorical transfer.
Methodology. The onomasiological structure of professional nominations, including the basis, feature and predicate is analyzed. The linguistic implementation of onomasiological models in veterinary and zootechnical terms, motivated by the conceptual sphere of artifacts, is studied.
Results. Three groups of anatomical names are distinguished based on the features of the interaction of the onomasiological basis, feature and predicate: explicit and implicit comparison of the shape of a particular body part with a thing; metaphorical representation of the animal’s body as a result of the master’s work; identification of a part of the animal’s body with an artifact. The linguistic means of implementing the components of onomasiological models in each of the distinguished groups is characterized. A conclusion is made about the reflection in the studied nominations, on the one hand, of the traditional for medicine in general transfers “organism – mechanism, instrument, container”, and on the other hand – of the specific for animal anatomy ideas: anthropomorphism, likening the animal’s body to an object of manual labor.
Research implications. The results of the study can be used in compiling terminological glossaries for various sections of professional veterinary and zootechnical disciplines.
About the Author
E. A. Abrosimova
Omsk State Agrarian University named after P. A. Stolypin
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ekaterina A. Abrosimova – Сand. Sci. (Philology), Assoc. Prof., Department of Foreign Languages
Omsk
References
1. Varga, E. K. (2018). Tendencies of nomination and semantic development in Russian anatomical terms. In: Studia Russica, XXVI, 391–397 (in Russ.).
2. Ozingin, M. V. (2010). The role of metaphor in structuring and functioning of Russian medical terminology [dissertation]. Saratov (in Russ.).
3. Mishankina, N. A., Panasenko, E. A., Rakhimova, A. R. & Rozhneva, Zh. A. (2018). Russian terminology systems in terms of semantic selectivity (based on metaphorical fragments of natural, technical and humanitarian terminology systems). Moscow: Flinta publ. (in Russ.)
4. Neumann, P. E., Gest, T. R. & Tubbs, R. S. (2020). The principles of anatomical nomenclature revision: They’re more like guidelines anyway. In: Clinical Anatomy, 33 (3), 327–331. DOI: 10.1002/ca.23494.
5. Novikova, O. N. (2023). Veterinary discourse: linguistic and linguodidactic aspects. Ufa: Bashkir State Agrarian University publ. (in Russ.).
6. Kubryakova, E. S. (2004). Language and knowledge: On the way to gaining knowledge about language: parts of speech from a cognitive point of view. The role of language in understanding the world. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoy kultury publ. (in Russ.).
7. Abrosimova, E. A. (2023). Conceptualization of the plant world in veterinary clinical terminology. In: Key Issues of Contemporary Linguistics, 4, 6–16. DOI: 10.18384/2949-5075-2023-4-6-16 (in Russ.).
8. Khakimova, G. A. & Zaharova, S. A. (2024). Metaphorical terms as a source of enrichment of the veterinary terminology system in German. In: Philology: scientific researches, 6, 1–17. DOI: 10.7256/2454-0749.2024.6.70929 (in Russ.).
9. Grinev-Grinevitch, S. V. & Sorokina, E. A. (2021). Some features of development of terminology science at the beginning of the XXI century. In: Linguistics & Education, 1 (1), 49–70. DOI: 10.17021/2021.1.1.49.70 (in Russ.).
10. Chernyshova, L. A. (2011). General and specific in professional language world view. In: Bulletin of the Moscow Region State University. Series: Linguistics, 6-2, 98–102 (in Russ.).
11. Novodranova, V. F. (2009). Formation of the linguistic picture of medicine (cognitive aspect). In: Modern trends in lexicology, terminology and theory of LSP. Moscow: MRSU Ed. Office, pp. 269–274 (in Russ.).
12. Felde, O. V. & Mezit, A. E. (2023). Professional language picture of the world as an object of research in terminology science and LSP linguistics. In: Tomsk State University Journal, 488, 120–126. DOI: 10.17223/15617793/488/12 (in Russ.).
13. Lakoff G. & Johnson M. (2004). Metaphors We Live By. Moscow: Editorial URSS publ. (in Russ).
14. Plotnikova, L. I. (2003). A New Word in the Cognitive-Onomasiological Aspect. In: Philological Studies: International Collection of Scientific Papers. Iss. 2. Belgorod, Zaporizhzhya: Belgorod State University publ., pp. 195–212 (in Russ.).
15. Kubryakova, E. S. (2008). Nominative aspect of speech activity. Moscow: URSS publ., LKI publ. (in Russ.).
16. Balakin, S. V. (2019). Derivational and nominative potential of the lexical system of language (based on the Russian, French and Portuguese languages). Ekaterinburg: Ural State University of Railway Transport publ. (in Russ.).
17. Sakai, T. (2007). Historical evolution of anatomical terminology from ancient to modern. In: Anatomical science international, 82 (2), 65–81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1447-073X.2007.00180.x.
Supplementary files
Review
Views:
65
Email this article 
