Persoalan Keunggulan Univositi: Perbezaan antara Terminologi Sosiokognitif dengan Terminologi Tradisional

Rita Temmerman

Abstrak

Dalam makalah ini, penulis mempersoalkan keunggulan univositi Terminologi tradisional. Penulis akan memperlihatkan bagaimana Terminologi tradisional yang selari dengan pendekatan strukturalisme Saussurian tidak mengambil kira bahagian-bahagian saling mem­pengaruhi antara unsur dalam segi tiga semantik. Semantik kognitif dan linguistik fungsional telah memberikan alternatif kepada pendekatan strukturalis Saussurian.  Dalam Bahasa untuk Tujuan Khusus (BTK) bidang sains hayat. struktur konsep mencerminkan fungsi epistemologi. Hal ini akan memberikan kesan terhadap penghuraian kaedah terminologi. Beberapa konsep seperti intron jelas difahami dan boleh diterapkan prinsip univositi tetapi konsep-konsep lain seperti pemblotan dan biotek­nologi mempunyai struktur prototaip. Bagi yang berstruktur prototaip ini. univositi bukanlah tujuan utamanya kerana polisemi, sinonim dan bahasa figuratif merupakan sebahagian daripada sejarah penamaan.

Abstract

In this article we are questioning the univocity ideal of traditional Terminology. We show how traditional Terminology in line with the Saussurian structuralism ignores part of the interplay between the elements of the semantic triangle. Cognitive semantics and functional linguistics have offered an alternative for the Saussurian structuralist approach. Several of their findings can be used for the development of socio-cognitive Terminology. In the Language for Special Purposes (LSP) of the life sciences, the structure of concept reflects their epistemological function. This could have consequences for the principles and methods of terminological description. While some concepts (like intron) are clear cut and therefore be submitted to the principle of univocity, others (like blotting and biotechnology) have prototype structure. For prototypically structured categories univocity cannot be the aim as polysemy, synonymy and figurative language are part of their naming history.

RUJUKAN

Bains,W.,1993. Biotechnology from A to Z. Oxford University Press.

Berg, P. Singer, M., 1992. The Language of Heredity. California: Blackwell Scientific  Publications.

Cooper, N. , 1994. The Human Genome Project. California. University Science Books.

Crick, F., 1979. Split Genes and RNA Splicing. dlm. Science, 204.264-271. Dictionary of Microbiology and Molecular Biology. 1987. New York: J.Woley & Sons.

Doolittle,W., 1978. Genes in Pieces: were they ever together? dlm. Science. 272, 581­ 582.

Drlica, K., 1984. Understanding DNA and Gene Cloning. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Felber, R ., 1984. Terminology Manual. Vienna, Inforterm.

Geeraerts, D., 1989a. Wat er in een woord zit. Leuvens: Peeters.

Geeraerts, D., Prospects and Problems of Prototype Theory. dlm. Linguistics, 27­4(302),587-661. (l989b.)

Geeraerts, D., 1993. Cognitive Semantics and the History of Philosophical Episte­mology. dlm. Geiger, R / Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (eds.) Conceptualization and Mental Processing in Language. Berlin-New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Gilbert, P., 1978. Why Genes in Pieces? Dlm. Nature, 271, 501. Gilbert, P., 1991.

Genome, Human. dlm. Encyclopedia of Human Biology, Vol.3, 869­ 897.

Grinsted, J. / Bennet, P., 1988. Analysis of Plasmid DNA with Restriction Endonu­cleases. dlm. Grinsted, 1. / Bennet, P. (eds.) Methods in Microbiology, Vo1.21.

Halliday, M.A.K., 1985. An Intoduction to Function Grammar London: Edward Arnold. Hawkes, N., 1991. Genetic Engineering. London: Franklin Watts.

Hodson, A., 1992. Essentials Genetics. London: Bloomsbury. Johnson, M., 1987. The Body in Mind Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.

Kleiber, G., 1987. La semantique du prototype. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.

Lakoff, G., 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago: University of Chi­cago Press.

Lakoff, G. / Johnson, M., 1980. Metaphors We Live By Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lauren, C. / Picht, H., 1993. (Hrsg.) Ausgewwdhlte Texte zur Terminologie. Wi en : Termnet. IITF Infotem. Lee,T., 1993. Gene Future: The Promise and Perils of New Biology. New York: Plenum Press.

Lewin, B., 1983. Genes. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Liebert, W.A. “Reflecting Your Own Cognitive Models: The Lexicons Of Metaphor-Models Of A Science Team Of AIDS-Research”. Paper presented at the Third International Cognitive Linguistics Conference in Leuven. 18 to 23 Julai 1993.

Meyer, I. “Knowledge Management for Terminology-Intensive Applications: Needs and Tools”. dlm.: Pustejovsky, J. / Bergler, S. (eds.) Lexical semantics and Knowledge representation. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 21-37 1992.

Nicholl, D., 1994. An Introduction to Genetic Engineering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rieger, R / Michaelis, A. / Green, M., 1991. Glossary of Genetics: Classical and Molecular. New Delhi: Narosa Publishing House.

Shapiro, R, 1991. The Human Blueprint: The Race to Unlock the Secrets of our Genetics Script. New York. St. Martin’s Press. Southern, E. Detection of Specific Sequences among DNA Fragments Separated by Gel Electrophoresis. dlm. Journal of Molecular Biology, 98, 503-517, 1975.

Southern, E.,. Gel Electrophsresis. dlm. Methods in Enzymology, 68, 152-176, 1979.

Starr, C., 1991. Biotechnology: Concepts and Applications. Belmont CA: Woodsworth inc.

Taylor, J., 1989. Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Clareelon Press.

Temmerman, R. Meaning Relationships and how to detect them: The case of Bio­technology. dlm. Proceedings Maastricht Conference on Translation and Meaning. 1995.

Temmerman, R. The Process of Revitalization of Old Words; “Splicing”, a case study in the extension of reference” dlm. Terminology 2: 1, 107-128.

Temmerman, R. (1996a). The Process of (neo )-Lexicalisation: the Case of Life Sci­ences. dlm. Proceedings Third International Terminology Meeting 19-20 April 1996. Centre de Terminologie de Bruxelles.

Temmerman, R., (l996b). “Retrospect Lexicalisation: A Recurrent Phenomenon in the Lexicalisation Process ofthe Life Sciences”. dlm. Eurex 96 Proceedings, 825-835.

Temmerman, R. Why some terms are more fit for standardization than others. From standardization to Optimisation of Understanding. dlm. Steurs, F. (eel.) Termi­nology and Terminography in Relation to Translation. Amsterdam: Rodopi 1996c.

Temmerman, R., 1996d. Terminology: the Structuralist Tradition and The socio­Cognitivist Future. dlm. Terminology 3 (2).

Temmerman, R. / Simonis, F. / Luyten, L., 1990. Terminologie: een methode. Leuven:  Acco.

The Barnhart Dictionary of Etymology, 1988.  W. Wilson.  

The Oxford Dictionary of New Words. A Popular Guide to Words in the News, 1991 Oxford/New York : Oxford University Press.  

Tournier, J., 1985. Introduction descriptive ala lexicogenetique de l’anglais con­ temporain. Paris-Geneve: Champion-Slatkine.

Watson, J., e.a. 1992. Recombinant DNA. 2nd. Ed., New York. W.H. Freeman & Co.

Wuster, E., 1991. Einfuhrung in die allgemeine Terminogielehre und terminologische Lexikographie. 3. Aufl. Bonn. Romanistischer Verlag.

Zawada, B. / Swanepoel, P. On the Empirical Adequacy of Terminological Concept Theories. The case for Prototype Theory. dlm. Terminology (2) 253-275, 1994.

(Teks Penuh)

Hantar Maklum Balas Anda