XIII Международная студенческая научная конференция Студенческий научный форум - 2021

To some extent, the history of mankind is a history of wars. In modern society, when the media can cover various events, including military conflicts, military vocabulary is regularly used by politicians, journalists, diplomats, as well as ordinary people. The scope of use of military terminology is no longer limited to its use only in the course of various military operations and the daily life of the army.

General military terminology is a set of military terms, conceptually and functionally assigned to the professional and corporate field of military affairs, common to the entire sphere of the armed forces and all categories of personnel [1, p. 58]. Thus, the military vocabulary includes words and combinations that denote military concepts, directly related to the armed forces, military affairs, military operations, etc., as well as scientific and technical terms used with military concepts.

This paper deals with the features of the use of military vocabulary in articles of English-language publications related to the clashes. Sources of factual data are selected articles of modern newspapers and news websites of the United States and Great Britain: "New York Times", "The Guardian", "The Daily Mail", "The Washington Times", "BBC News", etc.

In our work, we will take as a basis the classification of A. A. Danilevich, according to which military terms are divided by the sphere of use, by the method of education, by structure and by stylistic characteristics [2, pp. 86-87]. We will consider the classification of military vocabulary by the sphere of use: 1) terms of various branches of the armed forces – terms that are used to describe concepts in the formations of the armed forces: e.g., artillery, infantry, air force; 2) staff terms – terms that are widely used in military personnel management bodies, e.g., headquarters, staff car, personnel; 3) general tactical terms – terms that are used in solving general tactical tasks, conducting combined – arms combat and its preparation, e.g., defense, offensive; 4) organizational terms-terms that are used in various units of military forces, e.g., unit, battalion, division, company; 5) military topographical terms – terms that are used in the study of terrain, orientation, target designation, production of measurements on the ground, e.g., topographical map, cartography, land survey; 6) command-line terms – terms that are used in the drill and command speech of military personnel, e.g., Arms, port! ‘Weapons on your chest!’; Eyes, right!'

To identify the lexical composition of the text, a computer program for filtering the vocabulary of the text was used. One of the results of text filtering is the establishment of a rating of the frequency of use of words in the text. They are arranged in a column in descending order of their frequency rating. This column provides a complete and visual representation of the lexical composition of the text. In this study, the computer program Wordstat v 1.1 was used to perform the frequency analysis. When using this program, the computer presents all the vocabulary used in the text in the form of a column of words arranged according to the frequency of use in the text. Note that the most frequent lexemes in any text in any language will be articles, conjunctions, prepositions, auxiliary verbs, pronouns, and proper names [3]. For example, in our work, the first ten most frequently used words were presented as follows (the frequency of words used in articles is indicated in parentheses): 1. the (491), 2. to (236), 3. of (209), 4. in (191), 5. a (175), 6. and (172), 7. is (95), 8. that (93), 9. for (79).

All the analyzed articles with a total volume of about 7000 words were processed using this program. From the resulting word lists, indicating their numerical frequency of use in the text after separating articles, prepositions, conjunctions, pronouns, copula verbs, proper names, geographical names, etc., the vocabulary related to military terminology was selected by the continuous sampling method. It is worth noting that the resulting vocabulary was divided according to the classification presented earlier. These words, divided into groups, are presented below: 1) terms of various branches of the armed forces: artillery (12);

2) staff terms: commander (5), personnel (1);

3) general tactical terms: shelling (10), frontline (9), pullback (7), battlefield (5), defense (5), armor (3), invasion (2), assault (2), deployment (2), bombardment (2), defend (1), convoy (1), conquer (1), seize (1);

4) organizational terms: troops (16), battalion (7), corps (1), paratroopers (1), gunmen (1);

5) general-military training terms: fighters (13) security (12), soldiers (11), vehicles (9), equipment (8), tanks (8), weapons (7), fight (6), combat (6), trucks (4), officer (3), ammunition (3), rockets (2), operation (2), enemy (2), servicemen (1), missile (1) bomber (1), insignia (1), uniform (1).

However, as seen above, not all of a group of military terms have been filled.

Thus, the terms of various branches of the armed forces, staff terms, general tactical terms, and organizational terms were distinguished. Military topographical terms were not highlighted in the analyzed sources, as they are narrowly focused terms of the military sphere, and the analysis was carried out on the texts of newspaper articles. In addition, we have made a group of general military terms. It turned out to be the most numerous, general military terms are used in the articles 101 times. This group included words used in all spheres of military life, as a result of which they cannot be unambiguously attributed to any of the previously presented groups of terms.

Thus, it is worth noting that, despite the not very large content of military vocabulary in the texts of the analyzed sources (2.8 %), these articles are filled with military terms that are widely used outside the sphere of military life, but also in the modern press.

REFERENCES

1. Korovushkin V.P. Non-standard vocabulary in English and Russian military sublanguages (the conceptual apparatus of sociolexicological description) // Bulletin of OSU. 2003. No. 4. p. 58.

2. Danilevich A.A. Military terminology of the modern English language. elib.bsu.by/bitstream/123456789/96048/1/85-88.pdf

3. Serebryanska N.A. The interpretation of the text. Analysis of discourse / / Voronezh: VSPU, 2010. - 88 p.