XII Международная студенческая научная конференция Студенческий научный форум - 2020

The layer of military vocabulary that is one of the most dynamically developing areas of society has been open to foreign language borrowings at all stages of historical development, since the very situation of an armed conflict or war promotes close contact between people and the languages they speak. The external history of the English language is the history of military conflicts and wars, because Great Britain has stood three conquests and one cultural revolution. Extralinguistic factors opened the English language to the penetration of foreign-language military borrowings more than 400 years ago.

The appearance of the English language in the British Isles was made possible as a result of the German conquest in the ancient period. Further, the language was enriched by borrowings from Latin and Greek as a result of the Christianization of the country. Later, the Anglo-Saxons defended their borders from the raids of the Scandinavians. And in the middle period they did not resist the onslaught of the Norman troops of William the Conqueror, which led to a significant transformation of the English language under the influence of French. The early English period was marked by military conflicts with Spain and the beginning of world English expansion.

Vocabulary related to military activities is found in the English language from the oldest written monuments, but does not form a military terminology as a system, since terminology is "not just a list of terms, but a semiologic system, for example the expression of a certain system of concepts, which in turn reflects a certain scientific worldview" [1]. The literature of the middle and early English periods allows us to talk about a fairly large number of military terms, a significant part of which is borrowed. It should also be noted that the borrowed military vocabulary has replaced many native English terms and has firmly taken its place in the vocabulary of the modern English language.

This study examines the development and assimilation of military vocabulary borrowed from French and Italian in the XIV–XVII centuries, for example from the medium of the middle to the beginning of the early new England period of English language development. The most interesting is the depth of assimilation of borrowed vocabulary and the processes of its determinologization in the modern language.

The research data includes 50 military terms borrowed from the French and Italian languages during the specified period, selected from the etymological dictionary [2, 3]. The analyzed vocabulary refers to the following thematic areas: war and military operations, military technology, military ranks, military formations, military personnel, attributes of military life. It should also be noted that military vocabulary is so deeply embedded in the common language that it is often difficult to draw clear boundaries.

At the initial stage of determinologization of borrowed military terms, the process of their transition to common vocabulary was largely facilitated by conversion as a new way of word formation, in which a word belonging to a certain part of speech, without changing its original form, acquires the meaning of another part of speech, being included in a new paradigm. This method of word formation was possible as a result of the transition of the English language to the category of analytical languages. Conversion became more and more common in English military terminology and was one of the main ways of forming verbs from nouns. For example, alarm – to alarm, brigade – to brigade, ambuscade – to ambuscade, regiment – to regiment, soldier – to soldier, etc. A verb formed by conversion in all cases denotes an action related to the meaning of the original word.

The second direction of development and assimilation of the borrowed military vocabulary in the English language is the consolidation of the word in the military term system and the preservation of its original meaning. The analysis of the actual material showed that only three military terms were not subjected to the processes of despecialization and determinologization, preserving the structural conceptuality and unambiguity:

- colonel (fr., the 15^th century) ‘an army rank’;

- navy (fr., the early 14^th century) ‘fleet of ships, especially for purposes of war’;

- sentry (ital., the 16^th century) ‘military guard posted around a camp’.

Another way of developing borrowed military terms in the English language is to leave active use and switch to a passive stock in the form of archaisms and historicisms. The obsolescence of military vocabulary in the framework of the analyzed material concerns both the word as a whole and one of its meanings.

Archaic words: courser – ‘a large powerful horse’; ulan – ‘type of cavalry man’.

Meanings-archaisms: cannon ball – ‘a missile, usually round and made of iron or steel, designed to be fired from a cannon’; regulation – ‘government, rule’; chivalrousact – ‘gallant deed’; battle – ‘a battalion’; captain – ‘military leader’; to company – ‘to accompany’; magazine – ‘place for storing goods’; battalion – ‘battle squadron’.

Historicisms are words that denote the realities and concepts of previous eras, being present in the vocabulary of the language in its passive part, are used for nomination in scientific and artistic literature, poetry.

Historicisms: marshal – ‘officer in charge of a household, groom’; bachelor – ‘youthful knight, novice in arms’; squire – ‘a young man who attends a knight’; chivalry – ‘knight dignity, knighthood in the feudal social system’; siege – ‘throne’; canteen – ‘canteen Keeper in a military camp’; recruit – ‘a levy of troops’; cavalier – ‘knight, mounted soldier, gentleman serving as a lady's escort’. The fourth way to develop borrowed military vocabulary in English is to switch to other terminological systems. Military terminology is very flexible. Currently, this process is a productive way for supplement term systems of different languages. The range of new term systems for the borrowed military terms described in the article is wide. Among them are the following systems: 1) zoology (cannon bone; bachelor – a young male in the herd; courser – stilt; corporate – related to the body); 2) sports terminology (cannon ball 'made from a curled-up position' – the position of the athlete in the group; bivouac – bivouac, sports fabric; cannon – gun in figure skating); 3) Economics (company – society, company, partnership); 4) technical terminology (siege – a workbench under a glassburning stove); 5) musical terminology (major – major fret); 6) legal terminology (Sergeant – police Sergeant; to revolt-raise a mutiny); 7) medical terminology (obsession – obsessive state).

The presence of a sufficiently large number of analyzed military terms in various industry term systems of the modern English language confirms the capacity, flexibility, and mobility of their semantic structure, which can create homonymous nominative units in various industry lexical layers of the English language. It should be noted that homonymy within a single term system is practically absent.

Thus, the study allows us to draw the following conclusions. The vast majority of borrowed French and Italian military terms of the XIV–XVII centuries passed several stages in their development in the English language system: they were fixed in the military terminology system, migrated to the common vocabulary through the processes of despecialization and determinologization, and became part of stable word combinations.

Borrowed military terms have received additional semantic development in the English language, showing a high ability to self-semantic implementation. In all probability, the depth of their determinologization is associated with early entry into the English language, as well as with a long period of assimilation in the host system. Determinologization borrowed from the military vocabulary is called semantic bias of the structure of the terms in which they have become polysem lexical units, greatly adding to the common usage not only by the number of new units, but also as creating a new special token with determinologization value.

In General, it can be assumed that the borrowed special vocabulary of any sphere of the middle and early English periods has a similar ‘destiny’ in the English language system. There are 4 possible ways of development: consolidation in the original term system, withdrawal from active use, migration to common vocabulary, and transterminologization.

We also assume that the development of other term systems in these areas may be less intensive due to the peculiarities of the use of certain terms. The identified ways of development confirm the thesis about the mobility of the lexical composition of the language, its openness to various processes and the relationship of all lexical layers.

References:

1. Wilson A. Military Terminology and the English Language. 2008. URL: http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~cpercy/courses/6362-WilsonAdele.htm (дата обращения: 25.10.2019).

2. Military Dictionary. 2016. URL: http://www.military-dictionary.org (датаобращения: 15.12.2019);

3. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English Online. 2016. URL: http://www.ldoceonline.com (дата обращения: 15.12.2019).

Код для цитирования: Скопировать