Knowledge Structures and Ways of Their Description in Cognitive Terminology Research

4 7Te minologija | 2019 | 26 doi.o g/10.35321/ e m26-03 Knowledge S uc u es and Ways o Thei Desc ip ion in Cogni i e Te minology Resea ch La issa Mane ko Lomonoso Moscow S a e Uni e si y AbSTRACT Cogni i e Te minology appea ed as a con inua ion o p e ious s ages o e mi- nological s udies and is based on he an h opocen ic p inciple, a en ion o cogni ion and communica ion. This in e disciplina y and comp ehensi e ap- p oach b ings o h new objec i es, ounda ions, me hodology and p ocedu es. They p esen a e minological meaning in ela ion o pe sonal hough s e lec - ing social, p agma ic and o he ex a-linguis ic ac o s in knowledge s uc u es acco ding o cogni i e mechanisms and ca ego iza ion in he on-going in e ac- ion in specialized discou se. In discou se o mode n echnology, elecommunica ion, legal cou communica- ion and discou se o clinical psychia y nomina i e e minological uni s domi- na e. They a e shown in he pape on he basis o a ious cogni i e models – p oposi ions as pa o cogni i e-onomasiological modelling, image schemas, concep ual me onymy and me apho , ames ep esen ing e minological sys ems as dynamic models o human cogni ion. The a iabili y o concep s and he speci ici y o common and special knowledge concep ualiza ion in e minological uni s unc ioning in p o essional discou se is biased wi h he answe o in ica e ques ions o he pe cep ual and concep ual sou ces o e m o ma ion in in e ac- ion and e minological sys ems. KEYWORDS: e minological s udies, a e m, Cogni i e Te minology s udy, special discou se, ca ego iza ion, concep ualiza ion, knowledge s uc u es. AnoTACIjA Kogni y inė e minologija, a si adusi kaip anks esnių e minologijos y imų ą- sa, g indžiama an opocen iniu p incipu i y a su elk a į pažinimą bei komuni- kaciją. Toks daugiapusis a pdalykinis požiū is iškelia naujus ikslus, eikia nau- jus pag indus, me odologiją i p ocedū as. Te minologinė eikšmė siejama su mąs ymu, a spindinčiu socialinius, p agma inius i ki us eks aling is inius žinių s uk ū ų eiksnius, kaip ai numa o kogni y iniai mechanizmai i specializuo o disku so są eikos ka ego iza imas. 4 8 La issa Mane ko Knowledge S uc u es and Ways o Thei Desc ip ion in Cogni i e Te minology Resea ch Šiuolaikinių echnologijų disku se y auja elekomunikacijų, eisinės eismams būdingos komunikacijos i klinikinės psichia ijos disku so nomina y iniai e - minologiniai iene ai. S aipsnyje jie a skleidžiami emian is ski ingais kogni- y iniais modeliais – eiginiais kaip kogni y inio-onomasiologinio modelia imo dalimi, aizdinių schemomis, koncep ualiosiomis me a o omis i me onimijo- mis, e minų sis emas kaip dinaminius žmogiško pažinimo modelius pe ei- kiančiais eimais. Su są okų į ai o e, bend ųjų i specialiųjų žinių koncep ua- liza imo eikian e minologinius p o esinio disku so iene us ypa umais susijęs a sakymas į keblius klausimus dėl su okimo i koncep ualizacijos ku ian e - minus i e minų sis emas šal inių. ESMINIAI ŽODŽIAI: e minologijos y imai, e minas, kogni y inės e minologijos y imai, specialusis disku sas, ka ego iza imas, koncep ualiza imas, žinių s uk ū os. InTRoDUCTIon Te minology shaped i s objec o s udy in a ious ways, being he ocal poin o a conside able numbe o con ibu ions ha ha e depa ed om a a ie y o disciplines, including philosophy, logics, heo e ical and ap- plied linguis ics, in o ma ion science, compu a ional linguis ics, sociology and p agma ics. Each o hese disciplines widened and deepened he scope o e minology s udies e lec ing he p e alen ideas on e m and i s se- man ics. They con ibu ed he heo e ical ounda ions, esea ch pu pose, a se o exploi ed no ions and me hods. Each new s age con ibu ing o Te minology de elopmen s ill allowed o e ain much o he p e ious s ages. Mode n Te minology as a mo e complex domain o in es iga ion is based on he esul s o p e ious app oaches and new pe spec i es in unde s anding o cogni ion and communica ion. nowadays, i is a mega in e disciplina y app oach incompa ible o p e ious goals, which ies o ep esen e m seman ics and e minological sys ems mo e p ecisely in he cogni i e and unc ional pe spec i e. I undamen ally akes in o ac- coun di e en sphe es o human knowledge in dynamic men al p o- cesses accompanying special communica ion. He e we p o ide an o e iew on di e en sphe es o e minology s ud- ies and pa icula ly hose b ough by he shi o cogni i e and unc- ional pe spec i e o linguis ic and nonlinguis ic knowledge shaping e - minology wo k. This pe spec i e has changed he e minology esea ch, because i e eals human knowledge h ough cogni i e p ocesses in in- e locu o s’ mind in unde s anding he eali y and unc ional mechanisms in language use. I is aimed a e ealing socio-cul u al condi ioning o special discou se and human hinking in communica ion. 4 9Te minologija | 2019 | 26 The pape does no in end o gi e an exhaus i e o e iew o e minol- ogy de elopmen wi h ega d o all wo ks published; he majo ocus is o e iew how he no el de elopmen s in linguis ics in luenced e minol- ogy s udies in Russia and ice e sa – how some ad ances in e minol- ogy in luenced he linguis ic en e p ise in gene al. A he beginning o his a icle I ou line he majo s ages o i s e olu ion and pos ula e he objec i e o e minology esea ch ollowing esea ch p inciples and me h- odology o Cogni i e Te minology. 1. THE DEVELoPMEnT oF TERMInoLoGICAL STUDIES The ollowing pa ag aph p oposes in synopsis he e minology de elop- men in he mos gene al scope s a ing wi h he adi ional app oaches and p oceeding wi h he ecen ad ances in linguis ics. In he ea ly days o e minology s udies a e m was desc ibed as a uni cha ac e ized by a s ic de ini ion, one- o-one co espondence be ween he e m and i s e e ence, a oiding polysemy and ambigui y o a e m, imi a ing he pe inen endencies in o mal sciences – logics, ma hema - ics, and ela i ely “ ue knowledge” in philosophy. Mo eo e , he language o science wi h he e ms embedded was ap ly de ined as “a o malized and codi ied a ie y o language” (Pich , D askau 1985: 9). Wi hin his con ex e minology science was e lec ing ce ain p inciples and me hods, which we e connec ed wi h “s anda dizing and op imizing specialized communica ion” (Schube 2011: 27) codi ied in p inciples and me hods o TC 37, which claimed jus i ica ion o e minology s anda disa ion. This esea ch s a egy s essed he concep in he adi ional sense as a key elemen o hough and a s a ing poin o e minological analysis. The logico-philosophical app oach in e minology came o he o eg ound a bi la e h ough in o ma ion s udies o ex analysis and compu e en- ginee ing app oach, whe e a ious models linked wi h social knowledge became ele an o many applica ions in special ocabula y, pa icula ly in “quali a i e easoning” and “knowledge-le el” o AI in e p e a ions as a “sequence o beha io s” o expe s in socio- echnical sys ems (See Clancey 1993: 39). The nex is he s uc u al o sys ema ic s age o e minology de elopmen . I b ough new heo e ical p inciples as well as no el me hods o esea ch. These s udies we e aimed o explain he ela ionships be ween he o m and meaning, equalizing a e minological uni o wo d cha ac e is ics. The 5 0 La issa Mane ko Knowledge S uc u es and Ways o Thei Desc ip ion in Cogni i e Te minology Resea ch unde s anding o a e m as “a wo d in i s speci ic unc ion” (Vinoku 1939) deepened he unde s anding o a e m. besides ha i was in e p e ed as a sign ealised in language. The cha ac e is ics o e minological ocabula y we e analysed on he basis o a compa a i e, ypological, semasiological and onomasiological me hods. Each o hem seemed o be use ul o e m and i s concep unde s anding, bu hese me hods ad oca ed he simpli i- ca ion o he da a analysis, because hey we e pe o med as o mal p oce- du es ep esen ing e minology in s a ics (Mane ko 2016). Iden i ying e minological concep s and ela ions be ween hem became he objec o e minological wo k in he middle o he 20 h cen u y, which had “ o add ess communica ion hinde s among he domain expe s and o mee hei e minology needs” (nuopponen 2018: 10). Ano he la ge e minology use g oup a e ansla o s, whose claim is he “’non-li e a y’ ansla ion on he basis o e minology” (Roge s 2015: 4). The 70s o he 20 h cen u y en iched e minology s udies wi h he new a i udes owa ds ocabula y o special communica ion, whe e he in en- o y o ce ain no ions was applied o he undamen al basis employed in linguis ic esea ch. These changes a e no nume ous, bu hey a e gaining ela i e s eng h in connec ion o e ms and hei con ex in special com- munica ion. 1) one o hese essen ial changes da es back o 1972, when he dis- cipline s a ed o be called Te minology science (“ e mino edeniye”) (Lei - chik 1983) in Russian e minological school. I was shaped by a mo e ca e ul obse a ion o heo e ical ounda ions o he discipline, me hod- ological appa a us, and esea ch p ocedu es in pa icula sphe es o human ac i i y called e minologies. In Eu opean e minology his dis inc ion is e lec ed in di e en spelling be ween Te minology (“ he uppe case”) indica ing he discipline and e minology (“ he lowe case”) esul ing om he ocabula y o special language (see Temme mann 2000: xiii). besides his dis inc ion “al e na i e designa ions” conce ning he heo e ical basis o he e minological ield a e added, including e minology wo k, e - minology managemen and e minology enginee ing (nuopponen 2018). 2) The second achie emen o Te minology science was he widening o he esea ch objec , which was associa ed wi h languages o special pu poses de ined as “ he linguis ic means in communica i e se ings wi h- in a speciali y” (Ho mann 1976: 170; ci ed om Schube 2011: 28). The de elopmen o LSP as “a uni o a me alanguage” o Te minology s eng h- ened he a en ion no only o he wo ld o echnical and scien i ic concep s, 5 1Te minologija | 2019 | 26 o which specialised e ms e e , bu also o ways e minological sys ems a e exp essed in w i en ex s. Special e ms comp ising lexical and mo - phological means a e he “key o success ul LSP communica ion” (Roge s 2015: 3). They a e used in o al and w i en in e ac ion. E.g., LSP ex s o na u al disciplines p esen “ he independence om he con ex , neu al use o language means, less deg ee o i em mo i a ion” (G ishiani 1986 (2008): 22), while in ex s on his o y, philosophy and linguis ics e m seman ics is in luenced by he “sign o semio ic si ua ion” o p agma ic ac o s. Special concep s a e in cons an e olu ion, in ex s hey “can’ be o n ou o he con ex ” and should be explained on he basis o “ he semio ics o in e linguis ically based ex s” (naza o a 1994: 160–161). The unc ional pe spec i e desc ibes “pe manen ly dynamic” special concep s e e ing o e ms (Cab é 1995: 3), pe o ming he communica i e and semiological unc ions acco ding o he pu po o he ex w i e . 3) The hi d impo an s ep u he in e minology science is ha a e m is de ined as “a language uni ul illing he nomina i e unc ion and possessing he gene al no ion in he sys em o co esponding no ions” (Lei chik 1987: 141). Gee ae s conside s he p ocess o naming o be e y impo an in unde s anding dynamic p ocesses o human hinking, while he onomasiological analysis is use ul in ep esen ing he way “ he i em in ques ion en e ains wi h o he i ems in he same lexical ield” (2006: 413). C ucial o he unde s anding o his analysis is how he phenomena in eali y a e acqui ed by human mind and he mo i a ion o he c ea ed uni is associa ed wi h pe sons’ abili y o p oduce new i ems ac- co ding o he needs o communica i e se ings in he u e ance. nomina- i e uni s exp essed by di e en o ms o de i a i e wo ds can be in es- iga ed on he basis o a “wo d- o ma ion meaning”, which co esponds o “ he linking pa e n be ween wo ca ego ical meanings, i is a kind o ela ions be ween hings, p ocesses and ea u es in eali y and he no ions co esponding o hem” (Koub iako a 1978: 57). This kind o analysis may be also applied o subs an i e cons uc ions. The impo ance o he onomasiological app oach is undeniable, because i e ealed “ he gnoseo- logical basis o he nomina i e ac i i y, i s link wi h he cogni i e p o- cesses, cha ac e izing semio ic aspec s o nomina ion and e c.” (Koub ia- ko a 2004: 323). As we can see onomasiological s udies bo h in linguis ic and pa icula ly e minological sphe e o human ac i i y became he ea ly and ex emely ui ul expe ience o human cogni ion unde s and- ing, an icipa ing ideas o he u u e cogni i e science. 5 2 La issa Mane ko Knowledge S uc u es and Ways o Thei Desc ip ion in Cogni i e Te minology Resea ch 4) The las ou come o linguis ic and e minological esea ch is “ he de ining o he way a human being in luences language” (The ole o hu- man ac o in language 1988: 9). I appea ed no as a decla a i e s a emen as i was in p e ious pe iods, when schola s spoke abou he concep e en no eaching i by he o mal kinds o analysis, hough hey ied o do i in a p ope way acco ding o he exis ing esea ch p inciples and me hods. bu i is becoming one o he mos undamen al p inciples o cogni i e explo a ion o language coming o he o eg ound a he end o he 20 h cen u y. This p inciple is called an an h opocen ic p inciple. The encou ag- ing hing is ha his p inciple is he basis o unde s anding human hink- ing and discu si e ac i i y, associa ed wi h he in luence o cogni i e e- sea ch ha “holds ha language is a pa o a cogni i e sys em” o an indi idual, whose men al abili ies “in e ac wi h language and a e in luenced by language” (Di en, Vespoo 1998: xi). Cogni i e linguis ics akes in o accoun agen s’ men al and communica i e ac i i ies inco po a ing social, psychological, p agma ic and o he sides o human in e ac ion (Mane ko 2016: 129). This pe spec i e shows a u n om s uc u ally o ien ed e- sea ch in language as an au onomous sys em o he pa adigma ic shi mi o ed in cogni i e and unc ional pe spec i e o linguis ic knowledge desc ip ion and a new shape o he Te minology science also conce ned wi h cogni ion, cogni i e p ocessing and communica ion p ocesses. Cogni i e (Cogni i e-communica i e) Te minology has become one o he main b anches o cogni i e linguis ic s udy. I ep esen s he esea ch, which is cogni i ely g ounded, speake o ien ed, in e wo en wi h in e locu o s’ unde s anding o he wo ld and unc ionally ul illing concep ual and dis- cu si e mechanisms in language use. Te minological s udies a e becoming close o human ealiza ion o cogni ion and goals o communica ion. The objec i e o esea ch in Cogni i e Te minology s udies is o e eal he seman ic peculia i ies o e minological uni s on he basis o amilia , new and ans e ed concep ual elemen s ep esen ing he gene al (usual) and special cha ac e o human expe ience in knowledge s uc u es shown h ough a spec um o a ious simple and complex men al cons uc s depending on sense poly unc ionali y ans e ed in specialised commu- nica ion. In his pape I ollow his objec i e in e ealing he esul s o e minological esea ch. In he nex pa o he pape Cogni i e Te minology is discussed al o- ge he wi h he me hodologically impo an e ms o he discipline analysis. 5 3Te minologija | 2019 | 26 2. THE ATTEnTIon To CoGnITIon AnD CoMMUnICATIon In CoGnITIVE TERMInoLoGY STUDIES Cogni i e o Cogni i e-communica i e Te minology is a new s age in Te minology de elopmen , which s a ed o de elop a he end o he 90s o he 20 h cen u y. I depa ed om he p e ious s ages o he de elop- men o e minological discipline, hough is cha ac e ized by new objec- i es, ounda ions, me hodology, and esea ch p ocedu es. I is mi o ed in p esen ing he cogni i e and communica i e unc ions. The cen al conce n o e minological in es iga ions is o desc ibe he cogni i e unc- ion o language ul ima ely leading o he e m o ma ion. The le el and dep h o i s desc ip ion is di e en om hose ideas, which co e only “ easoning abili ies” o a human being and concep ions o “speci ici y domains” as “dis ibu ed de ices” (Hi sch eld, Gelman 1994: 4, 22). The hing is ha he cogni i e unc ion is unde s ood as a wide phenomenon han i was conside ed be o e he cogni i e linguis ic heo y. The in es- iga ion doesn’ ega d he linguis ic sys em and i s s uc u es as an au- onomous whole, bu a he akes in o accoun he language means ex- plo ed on he basis o senso y, physical, social, his o ical, cul u al pecu- lia i ies e ealed on he basis o linguis ic ea u es. I seeks o unde s and how knowledge is cons uc ed by a human being wi h he help o language means used o pu poses o communica ion. As Temme mann poin s ou , he concep obse a ion is undamen ally suppo ed by expe ien ial epis- emology “…embedded in ich cogni i e models” (2000: 29). The cogni i e unc ion is linked wi h human pe cep ion o objec s in he ou e wo ld and a eal si ua ion in some sphe e o human ac i i y. The e ms exp essed by single wo ds a e a he a e in p o essional com- munica ion. E en in a dic iona y a icle, we can ind lexemes linked wi h he o he ones in ep esen ing di e en , bu in e ela ed phenomena, e.g.: an ai plane – a powe ed hea ie - han-ai ai c a wi h ixed wings om which i de i es mos o i s li (h ps://www.me iam-webs e .com/dic- iona y/ai plane); a de ec o is a de ice used o inding pa icula sub- s ances o hings, o measu ing hei le el: a lie de ec o , a smoke de ec o , a me al de ec o ˮ (Camb idge 1995: 375). Thus, he i s le el ha should be aken in o accoun is he hie a chical s uc u e o concep ual domains wi hin he body o knowledge. The e m-c ea ion always depends on he s age o discipline de elopmen a some ce ain pe iod. S a ing he analysis wi h he e m de ini ion and 5 4 La issa Mane ko Knowledge S uc u es and Ways o Thei Desc ip ion in Cogni i e Te minology Resea ch in some cases i s e ymology is a common hing, bu e en his in o ma ion ells us abou he LSP as “a sys em o linguis ic means o he na ional lan- guage” and an impo an me alanguage uni o mode n e minological s udies (Zyablo a 2005: 17). Le us look a one o he examples belonging o he sphe e o clinical psychia y on he basis o he e m schizoph enia. The dic iona y p o ides he in o ma ion abou he wo d schizoph enia and i s o igin. I appea ed om wo G eek oo s skhizein “ o spli ˮ and ph ēn (geni i e ph enos) “mind, hea ” (h ps://www.e ymonline.com/wo d/ schizoph enia). This e minological uni was coined in 1910 by Swiss psy- chia is Eugen bleule (1857–1939), who wan ed o explica e he s a e o people’s mind cha ac e ized by he dys unc ion o associa ions, childish sil- liness, hys e ics and hallucina ions as he non-adequa e a ec o eali y, and o he symp oms o his disease. This was he pe iod o he de elopmen in he medical domain specializa ion wi h he ca e ul obse a ion o diag- nosis, p e en ion and ea men o men al diso de s. The nomina i e uni o schizoph enia is de ined as “a men al diso de cha ac e ised by abno mal beha io and misin e p e a ion o eali y” (h ps://www.e ymonline.com/ wo d/schizoph enia), whe e he hype onym “a men al diso de ” co e- sponds o a ce ain class o diseases in he medical sphe e. bu p e iously, a he ea ly s age o his scien i ic ield in he 80s o he 19 h cen u y, he e exis ed he o he e m – demen ia p aecox “p ema u e demen ia”. Exp essed in La in i poin ed a he age disc epancy o he pe son wi h his synd ome, besides ha he La in exp ession was a he ague in i s deno a ion s ill poin ing a one o he mos ypical ea u es o he disease. So he e m and i s immedia e con ex poin a many o he laye s o human expe ience, including he pe cep ual, physical, social and o he sphe es. Some schola s hink ha cogni i e p ocesses may be e ealed by on o- logical knowledge based on en i ies, ac i i ies, cha ac e is ics, and ela ions (Sage 1990: 27) esembling he pa o speech meaning. o he schola s widen his lis o “concep ual en i ies” including Thing, E en , S a e, Place, Pa h, Ac ion, P ope y, and Amoun , hough qui e ob iously hey a e “all qui e di e en in he kind o e e ence” (jackendo 1996: 9, 34). These en i ies a e hough o ep esen men al ope a ions o ca ego iza ion and concep ualiza ion, ep esen ing he wo ld unde s anding in a concep as “an ope a i e uni o consciousness” co esponding o a pa icula sign in he on-going p ocess o in e ac ion in human ac i i y. Langacke desc ibes he meaning as “concep ualiza ion”, which “ esides in cogni i e p ocessing” and is able o “cha ac e ize he ypes o cogni i e 5 5Te minologija | 2019 | 26 e en s whose occu ence cons i u es a gi en men al expe ience” (Lan- gacke 1991: 2). Showing how he cogni i e p ocessing wo ks, he au ho discusses he no ion o hypo enuse, which posi s a hie a chy e e ing o “ he p io concep ion o a igh iangle” and his iangle “ unc ions as he cogni i e domain o hypo enuse” (Langacke 1991: 3). He also men- ions a kind o implica ion appea ing in human consciousness, when a pe son compa es hese wo no ions – a hypo enuse and a igh iangle. In eal meaning ul desc ip ions, including usual and o cou se special no ions, hese implica ions may be o a ious kinds co esponding o senso y, kines he ic, spa ial, emo ional, and a ional. Langacke s a es ha people usually emembe “basic domains”, which a e “i educible ep e- sen a ional spaces o ields o concep ual po en ial” (Langacke 1991: 4). The de ini ion helps o ind ou he highe le el iden i ie o a wo d o he same le el in concep ual o ganiza ion o ce ain classes o wo ds in he explana o y dic iona y, e.g. in he example wi h an ai plane ou mind swi ches o he cogni i e domain o a powe ed hea ie - han-ai ai c a (h ps://www.me iam-webs e .com/dic iona y/ai plane) and in a de ec o he p ominen cha ac e is ic is a de ice. The e m becomes an in eg al pa o ce ain domains o human knowledge, as in ou examples co e- sponding o means o anspo o de ices. Linguis ic uni s included in o he anspo domain a e qui e di e en in hei mo phological s uc u e, bu hey a e o ganized in o one subjec a ea acco ding o a esul o human cogni ion and ca ego isa ion. As any o he concep ual ca ego y i is cha ac e ized by he hie a chical s uc u e o i s membe s e ealing he ela ionship be ween he language i ems. The hema ic concep o TRAnSPoRT o ganises human knowledge abou he en i e ca ego y o objec s in eg a ing a numbe o di e en means o anspo a ion. I is included in o he wide concep ARTIFACT ep e- sen ed by he highes le el o ca ego iza ion, which is he mos abs ac phenomenon in his axonymic sys em. A he same ime i ’s easy o ace he hie a chical pa h h ough his sphe e o knowledge, because TRAnS- PoRT bea s a ela ionship o schema ici y o such no ions as AIRCRAFT, VESSEL and VEHICLE ep esen ing hei use acco ding o a ious ways o mo emen in he ai , in wa e and on he land su ace. Simple, de- i a i e, compound wo ds and nomina i e ph ases belong o he supe o- dina e, basic and subca ego ial le els (Mane ko 2000). All hese uni s desc ibe di e en kinds o anspo a ion (see Figu e 1). 6 2 La issa Mane ko Knowledge S uc u es and Ways o Thei Desc ip ion in Cogni i e Te minology Resea ch The analysis in he language o mode n e minology and elecommunica- ion sphe e con i med ha he main aim o e minological esea ch in Cog- ni i e-communica i e Te minology is o ocus on he a iabili y o e m concep ual s uc u es in discou se speci ied u he in LSP and e mino- logical sys ems’ cons ual. This analysis is based on he an h opocen ic coo dina e in unde s anding p o essional discou se and he co esponding e minological sys em. besides he linguis ic analysis i includes he desc ip- ion o knowledge s uc u es. I s a s wi h he ep esen a ion o he ca ego- izing po en ial o all he e minological uni s belonging o ce ain le els in knowledge domains, p oposi ion as a pa o he cogni i e-onomasiological modeling, which is he su icien e e ence o concep ual en i ies in nominal complexes, some imes whe e i is necessa y image schemas, he analysis on he basis o concep ual me apho and me onymy is used. The cons uc ion o he ela ionship be ween ce ain domains in he in es iga ed subjec ields ends wi h he c ea ion o he amewo k, which elabo a es he schema ic subs uc u es o LSP o ganiza ion o human p o essional ac i i y. The me hodological p inciples and p ocedu es became he objec o cogni i e and communica i e esea ch in o he pape s in e minological sphe es o English. 4. CoGnITIVE RESEARCH In LEGAL DISCoURSE AnD PSYCHIATRY one o he mos in e es ing kinds o special discou se is legal discou se. He e we add ess some peculia i ies o e m o ma ion in legal discou se based on special cou oom communica ion in he Sup eme Cou o he USA (2011–2018) (Mane ko 2018; 2019; Vo objo a 2018). ou unde - s anding o legal cou oom discou se is also associa ed wi h he p omi- nence o special and common knowledge occu ing in media ion be ween he in e locu o s, whose p o essional and linguis ic ac i i y is in luenced by pe sonal, socio-cul u al, and p agma ic ac o s as well as con lic in- e es s and cou oles in communica ion. Legal discou se includes lan- guage s uc u es o special law and e e yday ypes o knowledge in p o- essionally o ien ed pic u e o he wo ld. The p o essional speech ep esen s he al eady exis ing s ic e ms and hei seman ics in e minological sys em o law. ou analysis s a ed wi h he language in o ma ion ep esen ed in o al and ebu al a gumen s o cou p oceedings o he Sup eme Cou o 6 3Te minologija | 2019 | 26 he USA. We ge he da a abou he con lic be ween wo g oups o people (w ongdoe s, on he one hand, and ic ims, on he o he ) and he eason o he con lic si ua ion. Analysing he exis ing con lic in eal EVEnT we paid a en ion o he in e es s o hese people and he ma - e speci ied by he ex a-linguis ic si ua ion and he ci cums ances o he EVEnT (see Figu e 3). Then, om he ex s o he o al a gumen s we ge o know abou he legal con lic , explain pa icipan s’ social oles and alues some imes un- in en ionally causing ha m o o he subjec s o law. I is concep ually e- ealed as a PRoCESS. In he cou he enhanced salience is gi en o he law b eake s and ic ims, who become legal pe sons o en i ies – ei he pe i ione s o esponden s, while de endan s, solici o s, wi nesses, expe s and di e en anks o judges con ibu e he ci il ac ion s eadily leading o he RESULT e lec ed in he cou decision on each case. Figu e 3. Con lic EVENT in eal li e and in Legal ac ion as a PROCESS ⇧ ⇧ ⇧ SoCIETY and LAW (Sys em o no ms and alues in Ame ican cul u e and law) EVENT (PLACE and TIME + CIRCUMSTAnCES) one g oup o people MATTER The o he g oup o people (Agen ) (Pa ien ) In e es Con lic o in e es s In e es Legal pe son / en i y Legal ac ion Legal pe son / en i y (PRoCESS) Ci il ac ion and decision 6 4 La issa Mane ko Knowledge S uc u es and Ways o Thei Desc ip ion in Cogni i e Te minology Resea ch names o he pa icipan s a e o ganized in o concep ual ca ego ies ex- p essed by de i a i e uni s o na i e o bo owed (F ench) o igin. They become he concep ual sca old o knowledge s uc u es included in mo e complica ed cogni i e mechanisms in legal discou se. The concep ual model o he con lic e en is de e mined by he ela ions be ween he EVEnT and PRoCESS pa icipan s, hei unc ions e ealed in commu- nica i e blocks o he con lic s udy. The unc ion desc ip ion co espond- ing o he pa icipan s in cou discou se is based on he links wi h con- cep ual ca ego ies o SPACE, TIME, MATTER e e ing o he common wo ld iew, and hose speci ied by LAW, kinds o CRIME, HARM and EVIDEnCE. The knowledge cons ual o e ms and ela ions be ween hem becomes ob ious in concep ual modelling o he scien i ic a ea based on human expe ience and dynamic amewo k o each o al a gumen in he Sup eme Cou o he USA. In he special discou se o medicine, pa icula ly in clinical psychia y (Vo on-Ko alskaya 2016) language uni s ep esen he ca ego y o “a hu- man b ain”, which also e e s o he subo dina e le el o ca ego isa ion. The g ea e pa o hese uni s a e exp essed by wo d-combina ions (b ain ci cui , co ical g ay ma e , B oca’s a ea), o he s a e wo ds o La in o igin (amyglada, halamus, e c.). In addi ion o his ca ego y o he sphe es o knowledge also acqui e he ela i e p ominence including domains o human expe ience s a ing om neu ophysiology and gene ics, p o iling unc ions o he neu al sys em and i s s uc u al uni s – neu ons, and o cou se concep s o he social sphe e. In he disse a ion i is shown (Vo- on-Ko alskaya 2016) ha e e y discipline de elops wi h he e olu ion o human knowledge. The mos impo an cons i uen s o he concep ual modelling ep esen s ages o he disease de elopmen , diagnos ics, a i- abili y o symp oms, peculia ea u es o a emission and elapse, and o cou se he ea men o pa ien s. Te ms ep esen ing new domains o knowledge become mo e complica ed and de ailed. Clinical psychia y discou se is a e y an h opocen ic kind o communica ion ep esen ed by e ms cha ac e ised by image y seman ics, cons ued on he basis o concep ual me apho and me onymy. In legal discou se and discou se o clinical psychia y as kinds o special communica ion pe o med by language pe sonali ies ce ain e mino- logical uni s a e o ganized in o cen al concep ual ca ego ies ocusing immedia e a en ion o hem. Rep esen ed by ce ain knowledge s uc u es 6 5Te minologija | 2019 | 26 hey in luence o he ca ego ies in ex s. In legal discou se, which e eals he ela ions be ween he people in socie y, he sys em is cons ued on he basis o names o pa icipan s and he s a e o a ai s a a conc e e momen , closely ela ed o ma e s, in e es s and social oles o indi idu- als in he communi y, designa ing se s o in e connec ed special en i ies co esponding o law and ules o beha iou . In discou se o clinical psychia y he domina ing concep ual ca ego y poin s a a human b ain, he concep ual unde s anding o which is cons ued acco ding o i s cha - ac e is ics and unc ions speci ied by e minological uni s. In gene al, he domina ing ca ego y p o ides he s uc u ing be ween he ca ego ies, b ings o h he symboliza ion o concep ual con en exp essed by nom- ina i e uni s inside ce ain e minological sys ems. ConCLUSIon Cogni i e-communica i e Te minology science as i has been demon- s a ed in his a icle ollows he de elopmen o p e ious s ages o e - minological s udies. bu his s age cons i u es no a depa u e om o mal ypes o analysis, bu a new iewpoin on he objec i es, ounda ions, me hodology, and esea ch p ocedu es in luenced by he in e disciplina y app oach. This app oach is d awn om human knowledge dynamics in i s ep esen a ion o he cogni i e con ex o e minological meaning c ea ion, in which men al p ocesses o communica o s a e pa and pa cel o specialized discou se. The in es iga ion o special discou se, LSP and e minological sys ems om his new pe spec i e is based on cogni i e and communica i e unc- ions e lec ed in he an h opocen ic p inciple o language use desc ip ion. This pe spec i e akes in o accoun human knowledge cons uc ion on he basis o language and cogni i e p ocesses in in e locu o s’ unde s and- ing o he eali y and unc ional mechanisms in language use condi ioned by socio-cul u al and o he ac o s in special media ion. Special discou ses o mode n echnology and elecommunica ion e eal he dominan ole o a i ac ca ego ies co esponding o he concep ual en i y o THInG and p o iding ce ain links o SPACE, PRoCESS, FEATURE, STATE and o he s ca ego ies. In legal cou a gumen a ion and clinical psychia y he e minology depends on social and p agma ic ac o s in luencing communica ion o a pa icula language pe sonali y in w i en o o al in e ac ion. In legal discou se names o pa icipan s in ol ed 6 6 La issa Mane ko Knowledge S uc u es and Ways o Thei Desc ip ion in Cogni i e Te minology Resea ch in conc e e episodes o e en s domina e, while in psychia y academic ex s he main concep ual sphe e co esponds o human b ain cha ac e - is ics, s ages o he disease, diagnos ics and ea men . So, knowledge s uc u es in conc e e special discou se a e able o illumina e he pecu- lia i ies o human a en ion o in some pa icula domains o knowledge. The cons ual o knowledge s uc u es is o ganised a ound he cen al concep ual ca ego ies usually exp essed by nomina i e uni s. Linguis i- cally hey belong o simple, de i ed, complex uni s and nominal combi- na ions, which poin a he deepening o human expe ience in cognizing he ou e wo ld. nomina i e uni s associa ed wi h common, special and p o essional ac i i y mos ly belong o he subca ego ial le el o he ana- lysed ca ego ies. The cons uc i e po en ial o a ious ypes o special discou se and e minological sys ems is ealised by he di e si y o cogni i e me hods. Va ious o ma s o knowledge ui ully employed in Cogni i e Te minol- ogy esea ch e eal he concep o ganisa ion based on ca ego iza ion and concep ualiza ion in he human mind in ol ed in p o essionally o ien ed media ion. These o ma s include cogni i e-onomasiological modelling based on p oposi ions, image schemas, concep ual me onymy and me a- pho . They illumina e he on-going cha ac e o human hinking, men al expe ience and ways o e m c ea ion. besides ha , hese kinds o analy- sis help o desc ibe dynamic p ocesses in e minological naming h ough hei seman ics and ela ions wi h o he i ems in p o essional discou se inhibi ing he in ica e ques ions o he pe cep ual and concep ual sou c- es o e m o ma ion and hei o ganiza ion in e minological sys ems. Simple men al cons uc s a e included in o cogni i e amewo ks o e minological sys em domains in special discou se, which ep esen he link be ween common and special kinds o knowledge s uc u es in luenced by linguis ic and men al p ocessing. The cogni i e-communica i e Te minology ies no only o desc ibe e minological means and hei peculia i ies in special discou se, bu i also ocuses on ex a-linguis ic con ex s ha achie e subs an ial cogni i e salience in in e locu o s’ mu ual “dialogue o consciousnesses” (bakh in 1996: 159) in he concei ed si ua ion. The in es iga ion o he nomina i e sphe e in special communica ion g ea ly depends on he cons ual o e minological seman ics inside e minological sys ems ha b ings o h men al mechanisms e ealed h ough knowledge s uc u es based on ca - 6 7Te minologija | 2019 | 26 ego iza ion and concep ualiza ion. The analysis o he ma e ial demon- s a es some deg ee o p edic abili y in unde s anding o cogni i e p o- cesses in he global con ex o specialised discou se and e minological sys ems in a ce ain domain o knowledge. REFERENCES Bakh in M. 1996: Бахтин М. Проблема речевых жанров. – Собрание сочинений. Т. 5: Работы 1940– 1960 гг, Мocквa: Русские словари, 159–206. Cab é M. T. 1995: on Di e si y and Te minology. – Te minology 2(1), 1–16. Camb idge In e na ional Dic iona y o English 1995: Camb idge: Camb idge Uni . P ess. Clancey W. j. 1993: The Knowledge Le el Rein e p e ed: Modeling Socio-Technical Sys ems. – Knowledge Acquisi ion as Modelling. K. M. Fo d, j. M. b adshaw (eds.), new Yo k: john Wiley & Sons, 33–50. Concep – E ymology-on-line Dic iona y. A ailable a : h ps://www.e ymonline.com/wo d/concep . Di en R., Vespoo M. (eds.) 1998: Cogni i e Explo a ion o Language and Linguis ics, Ams e dam, Phila- delphia: john benjamins. Engbe g j. 2007: Specialised Knowledge as an E ol ing En i y: The Case o Concep s om Consume C e- di Law o he EU. – The XVI h Eu opean Symposium on Language o Special Pu poses (LSP) “Specialised Language in Global Communica ion”. book o Abs ac s, Hambu g, 34–35. Gee ae s D. 2006: Wo ds and O he Wonde s: Pape s on Lexical and Seman ic Topics, be lin, new Yo k: Mou on de G uy e . (Cogni i e linguis ics esea ch; 33). G ishiani N. 1986 (2008): Гвишиани Н. Б. Язык научного общения: вопросы методологии, Москва: УРСС. Hi sch eld L. A., Gelman S. A. 1994: Towa d a Topog aphy o Mind: An In oduc ion o Domain Speci ic- i y. – Mapping he Mind: Domain Speci ici y in Cogni ion and Cul u e. Ed. by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 3–36. Ho mann L. 1976: Kommunika ionsmi el Fachsp ache, be lin: Akademie-Ve lag. jackendo R. 1996: Languages o he Mind: Essays on Men al Rep esen a ion, Camb idge, Massachuse s; London, England: A b ad o d book; he MIT P ess. Koub iako a H. 1978: Кубрякова Е. С. Части речи в ономасиологическом освещении, Москва: Наука. Koub iako a H. 2004: Кубрякова Е. С. Язык и знание. На пути получения знаний о языке. Части речи с когнитивной точки зрения. Роль языка в познании мира, Москва: Языки славянской культуры. Langacke R. W. 1991: Concep , Image, and Symbol: The Cogni i e Basis o G amma , be lin, new Yo k: Mou on de G uy e . Lei chik V. 1983: Лейчик В. М. Особенности терминологии общественных наук и сферы ее использо- вания. – Язык и стиль научного изложения: Лингвометодические исследования, Москва, 70–87. Lei chik V. 1987: Лейчик В. М. Термин и его определение. – Терминоведение и терминография в индо- европейских языках, Владивосток: Изд-во ДВО АР СССР, 135–145. Longman Dic iona y o Con empo a y English. A ailable a : h ps://www.ldoceonline.com/dic iona y/ ai plane. Mane ko L. 2000: Манерко Л. А. Язык современной техники: Ядро и периферия, Рязань: Изд-во Рязан- ского государственного ун-та имени С. А. Есенина. Mane ko L. 2014: Concep Unde s anding in Cogni i e Linguis ics and Cogni i e Te minology Science. – Languages o Special Pu poses in a Mul ilingual, T anscul u al Wo ld. P oceedings o he 19 h Eu opean Symposium on Languages o Special Pu poses, 8–10 July 2013. G. Budin, V. Luŝicky (eds.), Vienna, Aus ia: Uni e si y o Vienna, 471–482. A ailable a : h p://lsp2013.uni ie.ac.a /p oceedings. Mane ko L. 2016: Towa ds Unde s anding o Concep ualisa ion in Cogni i e Te minology. – Lege A is. Language Yes e day, Today, Tomo ow Vol. 1, issue 2, 129–170. A ailable a : h ps://www.deg uy e .com/ iew/j/la .2016.1.issue-2/la -2016-0012/la -2016-0012.xml? o ma =InT. Mane ko L. 2018: Манерко Л. А. Когнитивное терминоведение как отражение антропоцентрического и конструирующего взгляда на терминосистемы и специальный дискурс. – Когнитивные исследо- вания языка. Вып. 34: Cogni io и Communica io в современном глобальном мире. Материалы VIII международного конгресса по когнитивной лингвистике 10–12 октября 2018 года. Отв. ред. вып. Л. А. Манерко, Москва: МГУ имени М. В. Ломоносова; Неолит, 720–725. 6 8 La issa Mane ko Knowledge S uc u es and Ways o Thei Desc ip ion in Cogni i e Te minology Resea ch Mane ko L. 2019: Knowledge Cons ual o Te m Seman ics as he basis o Te minological Sys em and Spe- cial Discou se. – 22nd Con e ence on Languages o Special Pu poses: Media ing Specialised Knowledge: Challenges and Oppo uni ies o LSP Communica ion, T ansla ion and Resea ch. book o abs ac s, Pado a: Pado a Uni e si y, 81–82. Me iam-Webs e Dic iona y. A ailable a : h ps://www.me iam-webs e .com/dic iona y/ai plane. Naza o a T. 1994: Назарова Т. Б. Филология и семиотика: Современный английский язык. Монография, Москва: Высшая школа. no od ano a V. 2000: Новодранова В. Ф. Терминологический взрыв в 90-е годы ХХ века. – Научно- техническая терминология: научно-технический реферативный сборник, Москва: BНИИКИ, 1, 4–9. nuopponen A. 2018: Dimensions o Te minology Wo k. – Te minologija 25, 6–22. O el T. 2005: Орёл Т. И. Структура и номинативно-образовательные характеристики английской терминосистемы телекоммуникации. Дис. …канд. филол. наук, Москва. O el T. 2007: Методика описания терминосистем посредством образных схем (на материале англий- ской терминосистемы телекоммуникации). – Когнитивная лингвистика: новые проблемы познания: сборник научных трудов, Москва: Институт языкознания РАН, Рязань: РГУ имени С. А. Есенина, 141–148. Pich H., D askau j. 1985: Te minology: An In oduc ion, England: Uni e si y o Su ey. Philosophical Encyclopedic Dic iona y 1983: Философский энциклопедический словарь. А. Я. Горский (ред.), Москва : Сов. Энциклопедия. Доступ через интернет: h ps://dic.academic. u/dic.ns /enc_phi- losophy/952/Понятие. Roge s M. 2015: Specialised T ansla ion: Shedding he ‘Non-li e a y’ Tag. Palg a e Macmillan (Palg a e S u- dies in T ansla ing and In e p e ing). The Role o Human Fac o in Language 1988: Роль человеческого фактора в языке: язык и картина мира. Отв. ред. Б. А. Серебренников, Москва: Наука. Schizoph enia – E ymology on-line Dic iona y. A ailable a : h ps://www.e ymonline.com/wo d/schizoph enia. Schube K. 2011: Specialized Communica ion S udies: and Expanding Discipline. – Cu en T ends in LSP Resea ch: Aims and Me hods. M. Pe e sen, j. Engbe g (eds.), be n, be lin: Pe e Lang, 19–58. Temme man R. 2000: Towa ds New Ways o Te minology Desc ip ion: The Sociocogni i e App oach, Ams e - dam/Philadelphia: john benjamins Publishing Company. Vinoku G. O. 1939: Винокур Г. О. О некоторых явлениях словообразования в русской технической терминологии. – Труды Московского института истории, философии и литературы: cборник ста- тей по языковедению, Москва, 3–54. Vo objo a M. 2018: Воробьева М. П. Языковые, концептуальные и функциональные характеристики су- дебных прений верховного суда США как типа судебного дискурса. Дис. …канд. филол. наук, Москва. Vo on-Ko alskaya V. E. 2016: Ворон-Ковальская В. Е. Языковые особенности описания феномена шизоф- рении в художественном и специальном англоязычном дискурсе. Дис. …кандидата филол. наук, Москва. Sage j. C. 1990: A P ac ical Cou se in Te minology P ocessing, Ams e dam: john benjamins. Zyablo a Olga. 2005: Зяблова О. А. Принципы исследования языка для специальных целей (на примере языка экономики). Дис. …доктора филол. наук, Москва. СТРУКТУРЫ ЗНАНИЯ И СПОСОБЫ ИХ ОПИСАНИЯ В ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯХ ПО КОГНИТИВНОМУ ТЕРМИНОВЕДЕНИЮ Резюме Когнитивное или когнитивно-коммуникативное терминоведение появилось как продолжение предыдущих этапов развития терминоведческой науки, вобрав много ценного из прошлого опыта из смежных дисциплин, таких как филосо- фия, логика, теоретическая и прикладная лингвистика, информатика и т.д. На основе логико-философского и структурного подходов стали использоваться различные виды анализа в терминологических исследованиях. В 70-ые годы ХХ века изучение терминологических единиц начинает связываться с изучением 6 9Te minologija | 2019 | 26 свойств знака в рамках специальных текстов. Антропоцентрический принцип и внимание к ономасиологическому анализу привели к формированию новых тен- денций в исследовании термина, позволившему обратить внимание на когницию и коммуникацию. Когнитивное терминоведение ввело новые цели, основания, методологию и процедуры анализа. Становится очевидным, что термин является важной состав- ляющей когнитивной и функциональной перспективы профессионального дис- курса и представления языков для специальных целей и терминологических си- стем как динамических моделей человеческого сознания. Для цели этого меж- дисциплинарного комплексного подхода внимание отдается терминологическому значению и экстралингвистической информации, оказывающей влияние на про- цесс коммуникации. Формирование значения в терминологических единицах описывается на основе наиболее важных концептов и когнитивных механизмов, категоризации и концептуализации в протекающем взаимодействии, выражая личностные смыслы в специальном дискурсе. Автор представляет своеобразный отчет об изучении разнообразных видов специального дискурса, в рамках которых изучены терминологические единицы и терминологические системы. В дискурсах современной техники и телекомму- никации, представляющих точные сферы человеческого знания, основную семан- тическую нагрузку несут номинативные и синтаксические единицы. В дискурсе современной техники мы наблюдаем превалирование терминологических единиц, обозначающих артефакты. Из этих единиц строятся категории: наименования транспортных средств, видов оружия, машинам, инструментам, устройствам, и т.д. Каждый класс единиц организован иерархически в соотвествии с пятью уров- нями категоризации. В статье представлена категория наименований транспорт- ных средств, в которой большинство номинативных единиц имеют отношение к субкатегориальному уровню. В дискурсе современной техники от 70 до 95 про- центов текстового пространства выражено номинативными фразами. Считается, что концепты представляют ментальные операции категоризации и концептуализации, представляя действительность. Концепт ВЕЩЬ, доминирую- щий в технической сфере, способен описать наименования артефактов. Эта кон- цептуальная сущность характеризуется связями с другими, такими как ПРО- СТРАНСТВО, ПРОЦЕСС, СВОЙСТВО, СОСТОЯНИЕ и т.д. Эти сущности ис- пользуются в пропозициях – основного этапа в когнитивно-ономасиологическом моделировании номинативных словосочетаний. Модель состоит из ономасиоло- гического признака и ономасиологического базиса, последний представлен про- стым, сложным и составным видами. Ономасиологический базис и ономасиоло- гический признак связаны друг с другом предикативными отношениями. Наибо- лее частотными и прототипическими в терминологических конструкциях, обо- значающих артефакты, являются [THING1 (whole) – composed o – THInG2 (pa )], [THInG – ha e – QUALITY], [THInG – is used o (pe o ming) – FUNCTION (ac i i y)]. Описание концептуальной категории ВЕЩЬ указывает на восприятие объекта человеком на основе абсолютных и относительных свойств, отраженных в словосочетаниях. 7 0 La issa Mane ko Knowledge S uc u es and Ways o Thei Desc ip ion in Cogni i e Te minology Resea ch В дискурсе телекоммуникации представлены категории ВЕЩЬ, ПРОСТРАН- СТВО, ПРОЦЕСС, СВОЙСТВО, СОСТОЯНИЕ, ПРОБЛЕМА в телекоммуникаци- онных системах, ПАРАМЕТР, ИЗМЕРИТЕЛЬНАЯ ЕДИНИЦА и т.д. Пропозиции и образные схемы как простые когнитивные конструкты используются для объясне- ния особенностей семантики терминологических единиц. В сфере телекоммуника- ции концептуальные категории, отношения между ними и образные схемы далее организуются в разновидности фреймов, представляющих систему телекоммуника- ции в сознании создателя компьютерных технологий или ВЕЩЬ ее потребителя. В судебных прениях и дискурсе клинической психиатрии терминология зави- сит от социальных и прагматических факторов, влияющих на коммуникацию от- дельной языковой личности. Данные виды языка для специальных целей стано- вятся более сложным с развитием научного знания и человеческого опыта. В юридической коммуникации в Верховном суде США доминируют наименования участников, которые вовлечены в различные эпизоды событий. В устных прениях в суде конфликт между людьми в реальной жизни описан посредством языковых единиц, указывающих на специальные юридические и каждодневные виды знания при отражении обстоятельств СОБЫТИЯ, индивидуальных интересов и причин конфликтной ситуации. Профессионально-ориентированная картина мира пред- ставляет юридический конфликт, социальные роли участников, иногда нанося- щих непредумышленно вред другим субъектам права, в конфликта как СОБЫ- ТИИ. Структуры знания раскрывают то, как рассмотрение дела приводит к РЕ- ЗУЛЬТАТУ, что находит отражение в решении суда по каждому делу. В научных текстах в области психиатрии основной концептуальной сущностью является человеческий мозг и его свойства, стадии болезни, диагностика и лече- ние. Анализ семантики термина включает обыденные слова с переосмысленным значением в специальном дискурсе. В статье была сделана попытка представить различные типы терминов, функ- ционирующих в дискурсе и соотносимых с разновидностями концептов. Свиде- тельство о концептуальной сфере человеческого опыта получено на основе раз- личных форматов знания: пропозиций как части когнитивно-ономасиологическо- го моделирования, образных схем, концептуальной метафоры и метонимии, фреймов, представляющих структуру терминологических систем. Они помогают описать концептуализацию терминологических единиц в профессиональном дис- курсе и ответить на запутанные вопросы по поводу истоков восприятия и кон- цептуализации при формировании термина в процессе общения и при построе- нии терминологических систем. ŽINIŲ STRUKTŪROS IR JŲ APRAŠYMO BŪDAI KOGNITYVINĖS TERMINOLOGIJOS TYRIMUOSE San auka Kogni y inė, a ba kogni y inė-komunikacinė, e minologija a si ado kaip anks esnių e minologijos y imų ąsa i pe ėmė e ingiausią a pusa yje susijusių s ičių – iloso- ijos, logikos, eo inės i aikomosios kalbo y os, in o ma ikos i k . – pa i į. Remian- is šiais loginiu- iloso iniu i s uk ū iniu pag indais, e minologijos moksle bu o ai- 7 1Te minologija | 2019 | 26 koma į ai ių ūšių analizė. XX a. aš un ajame dešim me yje e minologijos iene ų y- imai im i sie i su ženklo ypa umais specialiuosiuose eks uose. An opocen inis p in- cipas i dėmesys onomasiologiniams y imams lėmė naujus e minijos y imų pok y- pius, aip a k eip as dėmesys į pažinimą i komunikaciją. Kogni y inė e minologija iškėlė naujus ikslus, numa ė naujus pag indus, me odo- logiją i p ocedū as. Tampa aki aizdu, kad e minas y a s a bi p o esiniam disku sui būdingo kogni y inio i unkcinio požiū io dalis, eikšminga specialios paski ies kalbų i e minijos sis emų kaip dinaminių žmogiško pažinimo modelių dedamoji. Taikan okį daugiapusį a pdalykinį požiū į, dėmesys su elkiamas į e minologinę eikšmę i komunikacijai į akos u inčią eks aling is inę in o maciją. Te minologijos iene ų eikšmės ap ašomos emian is s a biausiais koncep ais i pažinimo mechanizmais, ben- d aujan aikomu ka ego iza imu i koncep ualiza imu, aip pe eikian specialiajame disku se asmens eikiamą p asmę. Au o ė pa eikia am ik ą specialiųjų disku sų, ku ių pag indu nag inė i e minolo- giniai iene ai i e minologinės sis emos, y imų a askai ą. Šiuolaikinių echnologijų i elekomunikacijų disku suose, a s o aujančiuose iksliosioms žmogaus pažinimo s i- ims, pag indinis seman inis k ū is enka nomina y iniams i sin aksiniams iene ams. Šiuolaikinių echnologijų disku se y auja e minologijos iene ai, žymin ys a e ak us. Viene ai suda o ka ego ijas: anspo o p iemonės, ginklų ūšys, mechanizmai, maši- nos, į ankiai, p ie aisai i . . Kiek iena e minų klasė y a hie a chinė, apiman i pen- kis ka ego iza imo lygmenis. S aipsnyje ap a iama anspo o p iemonių pa adinimų ka ego ija i a skleidžiama, kad dauguma nomina y inių iene ų suda o subka ego ijas. Šiuolaikinių echnologijų disku se nomina y iniais žodžių junginiais pe eikiama nuo 70 iki 95 p ocen ų eks o. Manoma, kad koncep ai pe eikia men alinius ka ego iza imo i koncep ualiza imo eiksmus, aip jie a spindi ik o ę. Technikos s i yje y aujančia DAIKTO są oka gali- ma ap ašy i a e ak ų pa adinimus. Šis koncep as apibūdinamas pagal yšius su ki ais koncep ais, okiais kaip ERDVĖ, PROCESAS, SAVYBĖ, BŪKLĖ i k . Tokie iene ai į aukiami į eiginius, ku ie y a kogni y inio-onomasiologinio nomina y inių žodžių junginių modelia imo dalis. Modelius suda o onomasiologinis požymis i onomasiolo- ginis pag indas, pas a ajam a s o auja pap as i, sudu iniai i sudė iniai ipai. Onoma- siologinis pag indas i onomasiologinis požymis susiję p edika iniais yšiais. A e ak us žyminčiose e minologinėse kons ukcijose dažniausi y a p o o ipiniai [DAIKTAS1 ( i- suma), suda y as iš DAIKTAS2 (dalis)], [DAIKTAS u i SAVYBĖ], [DAIKTAS nau- dojamas (a liekan ) FUNKCIJĄ ( ykdan eiklą)]. Koncep ualiosios DAIKTO ka ego- ijos ap ašymas odo objek o su okimą pe absoliučiąsias a san ykines ypa ybes, eiš- kiamas žodžių junginiais. Telekomunikacijų disku se yškėja DAIKTO, ERDVĖS, PROCESO, SAVYBĖS, VALSTYBĖS, elekomunikacijų sis emos PROBLEMŲ, PARAMETRO, MATAVIMO VIENETO i k . ka ego ijos. Te minologijos iene ų seman ikos ypa umams paaiškin i naudojami eiginiai i aizdinių schemos – pap as i pažin iniai kons uk ai. Telekomu- nikacijų s i yje koncep ualiosios ka ego ijos, jų san ykiai i aizdinių schemos i s a s uk ū ų į ai o e, ku i pe eikia elekomunikacijų sis emą kompiu e inių echnologijų kū ėjo a ba klien o su okimu.