Paradigmatic Approach in Terminology Studies
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2025-14-10-32-52
Abstract
This study is dedicated to the history of terminology studies, tracing its hundred-year development trajectory. It highlights that the definition of a term remains a subject of ongoing debate within terminological research. The article aims at identifying the reasons for changes in the scope of the concept “term.” It examines the interrelation between scientific progress and stages of development in terminology studies. Questions are raised regarding the application of new parameters for analyzing terminological processes. An overview of the evolution of scientific thought based on theoretical analysis of philosophy-of-science concepts is provided. Sociocognitive conditions underlying the formation of scientific paradigms — classical, non-classical, post-non-classical science — are investigated. A novel authorial conception of terminology’s evolution is presented, distinguishing three paradigms: traditional (prescriptive), cognitive-discursive (descriptive), integrative (prescriptively-descriptive). Dominant processes of term formation in these paradigms — divergent, convergent, divergent-convergent — are identified and substantiated. For the first time, an emerging integrative paradigm of terminology studies is described. The relevance of this investigation lies also in presenting a coherent conceptualization of the regularity governing changes in the scope of the notion “term” as related to salient term-forming processes characteristic of each paradigm.
About the Authors
O. B. Burdina
Perm State University; Academician Ye. A. Vagner Perm State Medical University of the Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation; Perm State Pharmateutical Academy of the Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Olga B. Burdina, Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor, Professor of the Department of Linguodidactics; Professor of the Department of Foreign Languages and Medical Terminology; Head of the Department of Humanities and Socio-Economic Disciplines
Perm
S. L. Mishlanova
Perm State University; Academician Ye. A. Vagner Perm State Medical University of the Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Svetlana L. Mishlanova, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Head of the Department of Linguodidactics; Head of the Department of Foreign Languages and Medical Terminology
Perm
References
1. Alekseeva, L. M., Mishlanova, S. L. (2002). Medical discourse: theoretical foundations and principles of analysis. Perm: Perm State National Research University. 200 p. (In Russ.).
2. Alekseeva, L. M., Mishlanova, S. L. (2021). Age-Old Path of Russian Terminology. Nauchnyi dialog, 9: 9—34. https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2021-9-9-34. (In Russ.).
3. Alekseeva, L. M., Mishlanova, S. L. (2020). Towards the origins of sociotermology: socio-cultural contexts of the functioning of the term. Sphere of culture, 1: 77—86. DOI: 10.48164/2713-301X_2020_1_77. (In Russ.).
4. Antia, B. E. (2000). Terminology and language planning: an alternative framework of practice and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co. 265 p.
5. Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Situated simulation in the human conceptual system. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18: 513—562.
6. Budin, G. (2011). Designing and implementing strategies of global, multilingual “Disaster Communication”. In: Special language and innovation in multilingual world: book of abstracts. Perm: Russia. 11—26.
7. Burdina, O. B. (2024). Terminological processes in pharmaceutical discourse: sociocognitive modeling. Doct. Diss. Perm. 480 p. ISBN 5-8241-0302-X. (In Russ.).
8. Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2013). The medial turn in linguistics: polycode and hybrid texts. IGLOO Bulletin, 2 (23): 122—127. (In Russ.).
9. Dake, T. A. van. (2000). Language. Cognition. Communication. Blagoveshchensk: BCG named after I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay. 308 p. (In Russ.).
10. Dijk, T. A. van. (2003). Specialized discourse and knowledge: a case study of discourse of modern genetics. Cad. Esp. Ling., Campinas, 44: 21—55.
11. Ermolenkina, L. I. (2021). The discursive picture of the world of modern radio. Doct. Diss. Tomsk. 422 p. (In Russ.).
12. Faber, P. (2012). A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language. Berlin-Boston. 301—307.
13. Faber, P. (2019). Specialized Knowledge Representation: From Terms to Frames. Research in Language, 17 (2): 198—203. DOI: 10.2478/rela-2019-0012/.
14. Fedyuchenko, L. G. (2020). Terminological database as a transfer model of technical knowledge. Doct. Diss. Tyumen. 407 p. (In Russ.).
15. Felde, O. V. (2013). Languages for special purposes in the historical and linguistic aspect. Bulletin of the Buryat State University, 10: 50—55. (In Russ.).
16. Fillmore, C. J., Johnson, Ch. R., Petruck, M. R. L. (2003). Petruck. Background to FrameNet. International Journal of Lexicography, 16 (3): 235—250.
17. Golovanova, E. I. (2007). The subject and tasks of cognitive-historical terminology. Scientific and technical terminology, 1: 12—13. (In Russ.).
18. Grinev, S. V. (1993). Introduction to terminology. Moscow: Moscow Lyceum. 309 p. (In Russ.).
19. Ha, A. Y. H., Hyland, K. (2017). What is technicality? A Technicality Analysis Model for EAP vocabulary. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 28: 35—49.
20. Humbley, J. (2018). Socioterminology. In: Languages for Special Purposes: An International Handbook. Berlin; Boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG. 469—488. ISBN 978-3-1102-2800-7.
21. Krasnykh, V. V. (2003). “Our own” among “strangers”: myth or reality? Moscow: Gnosis. 375 p. (In Russ.).
22. Kubryakova, E. S. (2008). The concept of “paradigm” in linguistics: an introduction. In: Paradigms of scientific knowledge in modern linguistics: Collection of scientific papers. Moscow: Institute of Scientific Information on Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 184 p. ISBN 978-5-248-00436-2. (In Russ.).
23. Kubryakova, E. S. (1995). The evolution of linguistic ideas in the second half of the 20th century (the experience of paradigmatic analysis). In: Language and science at the end of the 20th century. Moscow: Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 238 p. (In Russ.).
24. Kuhn, T. (1977). The structure of scientific revolutions. Moscow: Progress. 300 p. (In Russ.).
25. Lebedev, S. A. (2019). Classical, nonclassical and post-nonclassical methodology of science. Humanitarian Bulletin of the Bauman Moscow State Technical University, 2 (76): 1—15. DOI: 10.18698/2306-8477-2019-2-596. (In Russ.).
26. Leichik, V. M. (1986). On the linguistic substratum of the term. Questions of linguistics, 5: 87—97. (In Russ.).
27. Leychik, V. M. (2007). Terminology: subject, methods, structure. Moscow: LIBROCOM Book House. 256 p. ISBN 978-5-397-06819-2. (In Russ.).
28. Lotte, D. S. (1931). Current tasks of scientific and technical terminology. Moscow: Nauka Publ. 158 p. (In Russ.).
29. Manerko, L. A. (2024). Cognitive theory of language: philosophical foundations and research directions. Moscow: Gnosis. 448 p. ISBN 978-5-94244-086-2. (In Russ.).
30. Manerko, L. A. (2015). European terminology: from the Westerian understanding of the term to the understanding of cognition and communication. Bulletin of the Moscow State Regional University. Series: Linguistics, 5: 24—32. (In Russ.).
31. Manerko, L. A. (2021). Professional discourse at the intersection of general semiotic problems of cognition and communication. Cognitive language research, 1 (44): 32—40. (In Russ.).
32. Massalina, I. P., Novodranova, V. F. (2009). Discursive markers in the English language of naval affairs. Kaliningrad: Publishing house of FGOU VPO “KSTU”. 278 p. ISBN 978-5-94826-258-1. (In Russ.).
33. Mishlanova, S. L. (2003). Term in medical discourse: Education, functioning, development. Doct. Diss. Moscow. 392 p. (In Russ.).
34. Novodranova, V. F. (2006). Cognitive terminology. In: General terminology: an encyclopedic dictionary. Russian Terminological Society Ross Term. Moscow: Moscow Lyceum. 82—84. (In Russ.).
35. Ogdonova, Ts. Ts. (2010). Scientific paradigm as a key concept of modern language science. Bulletin of the Buryat State University, 10: 43—49. (In Russ.).
36. Picht, H. (2013). Concepts as Reflection of Societal changes. In: Terminologija. Vilnius: Lietuviu kalbos institutas. 10—23.
37. Rosyanova, T. S. (2019). Cognitive aspects of the development and functioning of English marketing terminology. Author’s abstract of Doct. Diss. St. Petersburg. 40 p. (In Russ.).
38. Schubert, K. (2011). Specialized Communication Studies: An expanding discipline. In: Current Trends in LSP Research: Aims Methods. Bern, Berlin: Peter Lang. 19—58.
39. Skrebtsova, T. G. (2018). Cognitive linguistics: Classical theories, new approaches. Moscow: YASK Publishing House. 391 p. ISBN 978-5-6040195-7-3. (In Russ.).
40. Stepanov, Yu. S. (1985). In the three-dimensional space of language: Semiotic problems of linguistics, philosophy, art. Moscow: Nauka Publ. 334 p. (In Russ.).
41. Stepin, V. S. (2003). Theoretical knowledge: structure, historical evolution. In: Russian language: evolution of problems and aspects of learning. Moscow: Progress-Tradition. 743 p. ISBN 5-89826-053-6. (In Russ.).
42. Tatarinov, V. A. (2005). Terminological vocabulary of the Russian language: the evolution of problems and aspects of learning. In: Russian language in modern society: Functional and status characteristics. Ser. “Theory and history of linguistics”. Moscow: RAN. INION. 133—164. (In Russ.).
43. Temmerman, R. (2007). Approaches to terminology. Now that the dust has settled. Synaps: Fagspråk. Rjmmunikasjon. Kulturkunnskap, 20: 27—36.
44. Temmerman, R. (2000). Towards New Ways of Terminology Description. The sociocognitive approach. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 258 p.
45. Vinokur, G. O. (1959). Selected works on the Russian language. Moscow: Uchpedgiz. 492 p. (In Russ.).
46. Zhilov, R. A. (2016). On the issue of building cognitive maps for intelligent data processing. Bulletin of the University of Physics and Mathematics, 4—1 (16): 101—106. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Burdina O.B., Mishlanova S.L. Paradigmatic Approach in Terminology Studies. Nauchnyi dialog. 2025;14(10):32-52. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2025-14-10-32-52
Views:
6
Email this article 