Studies of the peculiarities of terminological paradigm formation process are related to thorough distinguishing regularities of various relations within a certain terminological system. Definite and clearly structured terminological paradigm of a certain scholar opens a possibility for a qualitatively new approach to understanding term formation and term usage phenomena. The article focuses on an attempt to take a separate view of certain principles of Ivan Denisyuk’s terminological paradigm creation on the basis of the analysis of his literary studies and, logically, possibility to offer a hypothesis concerning term creation vectors and peculiarities of structural and creative function of a literary term.
Methodological basis of terminology studies in linguistics was laid down by B. Holovin, V. Danylenko, T. Kandelaki, T. Kyyak, I. Kochan, V. Leychyk, D. Lotte, H. Melnykov, T. Panko, O. Reformatskyi, Ye. Skorohodko, S. Shelov, and others. A lot of researches deal with linguistic description of specific terminological systems. By analyzing various terminological systems the scholars (S. Bulyk-Verkhola, M. Hodovana, B. Mykhailyshyn, I. Protsyk, L. Symonenko and others) highlight the phenomenon of multi-lexeme terms that proves its importance as term semantic unity. Ukrainian term scholars also focus on Literary Studies terminology. The objects of their research are separate literary texts, creative heritage of authors and the very scholarly text about literature as a kind of art (I. Babiy, І. Halenko, L. Hnatiuk, V. Derkach, Yu. Karpenko, V. Кarpova, D. Кyryk, О. Maslykova, Ye. Regushevskyi, Т. Panko, О. Serbenska, О. Shatalina).
І. Denisyuk uses the term поет at the beginning of the article «Світло високої зорі» (The Light of High Dawn) (Радощі і смутки цього короткого життя оповів батько поета, затамувавши біль по великій втраті.) with double lexical load: direct meaning and meaning of additional load – to create intrigue for the reader as the term unit поет is combined with the family word батько and in this way becomes an evident «hiding place» of the name of the object that is of scientific interest to the corresponding sentence (rather far from the beginning of the text) where the reader’s avid interest will be satisfied and s/he will get both the name of Maksym Bohdanovych and repeated statement of him being a poet in combination with the other more broad term units: критик, публіцист. Such term usage indicates the direct relation between the term unit and development of scholarly text structure for which one term becomes compositionally formative. This can be proved by the last lines of «lyrical introduction» to the article in question where І. Denisyuk after revealing the first intriguing element immediately creates another one and also (!) – by using the term поет. The scholar is able to inform in two highly condensed sentences not only about popularity («ім’я не сходило із сторінок преси»), creative heritage («повне видання творів», «два солідні томи») but also about patriotic spirit of a person whom he for the second time nominates as поет. Only after this statement, supported with the quotation of poetic lines introductory episode І. Denisyuk unfolds the text of scholarly research. It is proved in the very doubling of this term: «Хто ж він такий, той юнак, той поет [1, p. 204], якому не судилася старість? Яким був Максим Богданович, улюблений поет [1, p. 204] Білорусії, зблизька?» Thus, term usage is directly related to the compositional structure of the scholarly text. In this case the term поет has acquired additional functional load concerning the structure of the scholarly text.
The term новела in the article by І. Denisyuk «Про два типи новели у творчості Івана Франка» (“About Two Types of Short Stories in the Works by Ivan Franko) considering the topic and author’s objectives acquires the central function as far as the scholarly text structure formation is concerned. The scholar builds his text exactly on different semantic features of this term unit. Тhe term новела acquires first of all historical and literary context – an indication of how it was applied for the first time (Шостого липня 1861 р. в листі до Б. Дідицького Юрій Федькович, пропонуючи до друку кілька своїх творів, називає їх новелами. Тоді вперше в історії української літератури вжито термін “новела”) [2, p. 74]. The following variants of term usage are a logical continuation of etymological motivation of the plot line of the text – the author step by step adds facts following historical chronology. Structurally marked term unit is further extended in the word combination новелістичні тенденції that gives the scholar additional field for associative search among small form genres. Structure-formating (concerning the text) function of the term новела is further unfolded in the following modificants: анекдоти-новели, новелістична структура, новелістичний поворот розкриття характерів, по-новелістичному, particularly in the metaphoric combination – новелістична мускулатура стилю, новелістичні тенденції, модель новели, новела психологічна, форми новели, і новела акції, etc. The scholar, diversifying his view of the object of the research, involuntarily creates the whole range of derivatives for the term unit новела and presents each of them in a certain perspective, thus explaining the motivation for such term usage.
In the above-mentioned article, the scholar, while uncovering the nature of the term unit новела психологічна, at the same time considers motives for its classification that results in the temporary domination of the term психологізм and its variations психологічний аналіз, форми психологізму, інтервентний психологізм, екстервентний психологізм, психологічний емпіризм, психологічні деталі, etc. At first sight it looks as if the author «got involved» into psychologism and «forgot» about structure-forming term unit, however, such functional change does not influence the integrity of the literary text, as it has its own objective. І. Denisyuk uses the marked term units only to make one of the aspects of the term новела more expressive, which is proved by the following compositional change – after domination of the term психологізм in the structure of the text the term новела Франка is brought in the foreground. Two Franko’s short stories are used to illustrate various types of «psychologism». At the end of the article the author uses the term новелістика, which fully corresponds to the content of generalizations in the conclusions of the scholarly text.
While новела was a structurally dominating term in the previous article by І. Denisyuk, in the article «Казковий чудесний покажчик у новелі Франка «Неначе сон» (“Fairy-tale Wonderful Guide in Franko’s Short Story “As If in a Dream””) this term already acquires a different functional load. At first the author groups around this term a number of term units which are mutually related in the text: поезія в прозі, сюжетна інтрига, позасюжетний авторський відступ, мікростудія, белетрист, автор, образ, поезія, ідилія, листи, жанр, герой, апокрифи. Gradually, compound term units start dominating the text час акції новели, штрихи новелістичного письма, новелістичний несподіванковий Wendepunkt, мажорна гамма пейзажного обрамлення, поетичні стежки художніх прийомів, авторська недомовленість, літературно-фольклорний символізм і сюрреалізм, etc. Domination of the compound term units with evident compositional function in the scholarly text indicates the necessity to search for some new, brighter and more specific means of expressions. The usage of the unusual (above-mentioned – мажорна гамма пейзажного обрамлення, поетичні стежки художніх прийомів) term units makes the text poetically attractive and full of intrigue that corresponds to the topic of I. Denisyuk’s research. First of all, such «formal» experiments with terminological lexis create favorable environment for constructing new means of expression in the scholarly text, secondly, it is possible to state that one or more term units influence the compositional structure of the scholarly text and, consequently, creation of various structural connections among term units.
The terminological system of Prof. Denisyuk’s article «Гуцульські оповідання Івана Франка» (“Hutsul Stories by Ivan Franko”) envisages a bit different terminological dominant. The name of the text declares the Literary Studies term оповідання, however, as the author’s thought is unfolding, this term unit is related to the other terms in different ways. Іvan Denisyuk outlines a terminological paradigm by means of the already mentioned intrigue, which is achieved through usage in the text term units with certain latency of their meaning. Thus, having the term оповідання as the object of research, the author builds the whole range of term units which explicate the primary objective, while at the same time preserving certain latency which creates certain intrigue of the subtext: твори – пейзаж – белетристика – Франкові герої – наукові статті, вірші та оповідання. It looks as if at the beginning of the scholarly text the scholar «prevents» appearance of the main term unit (though it has already been named in the title!). The term оповідання acquires full functional features only in combination with the attribute гуцульські. Earlier the scholar at the «text time scale» managed to explicate biographic and stylistic features regarding the term мала проза by І. Franko.
In the process of working on the scholarly text the researcher establishes direct consequential relation of the term оповідання with other term units белетристика, філософський підтекст, сюжет твору, образ, композиційний прийом, автор, авторське обрамлення, твір, розповідь, сюжет, психологізм, розв’язка, психологічне оповідання, автобіографічний малюнок, тема, сцена, містика, алегорія, конфлікт, опис, авторська розповідь, ідея твору, діалектизми, мовні засоби, химерний сюжет, кульмінаційний момент, гостроконфліктна драма, драматичний діалог, реалістично-побутова манера, лірично-філософські відступи, малооригінальні тропи, поетичні деталі, еволюція образу, алітерація, кольорові епітети, філософська дискусія, фразеологізми в мові гуцулів, засоби індивідуалізації та передачі локального колориту, засіб образності, авторські порівняння, метаморфоза, оповідач-гуцул, етнографізм, екзотика, занепад реалізму. It is worth stressing that unlike the two above-mentioned articles, this text is characterized by minor dominance of the term unit оповідання. This latency does not denote a different or altered composition of the text and, logically, function of the term units; rather – altered accents of the research.
The marked examples of formation and functioning of the terminological systems indicate certain tendencies in terms usage depending on their structure. It is known that according to their structural peculiarities terms are divided into simple, complex and compound. Regarding their composition, «the most convenient are one-word terms. These terms give the best combination of the desirable qualities: stability, brevity, derivation potential, systemic character». [6, p. 208] Speaking about one-word terms, it is necessary to pinpoint their ability to create new terminological meanings. This takes place due to combination and distinguishing of their functional possibilities within a certain scholarly text. Thus, the term unit acquires an obvious additional meaning concerning its usage which we shall try to show on the basis of the last example of the analysis of the scholarly article by І. Denisyuk. In this terminological system simple terms consist of one stem word: образ, автор, твір, розповідь, сюжет, тема, сцена, містика, алегорія, конфлікт, опис, алітерація, метаморфоза, екзотика. Terminological stem-words are often filled with word-building elements. Suffixation is one of the most widespread ways of new words formation, both generally used and in terminology: оповідання, белетристика, психологізм, розв’язка, діалектизми. However, suffixation is not the only way of new terms formation. «To form a new word one can use various linguistic means, and choice of the optimal way of nomination is a complicated process, it is determined by objective and subjective issues, external and internal factors»:description, disharmony, titles [5, p. 160–161]
Regarding their structure, the terms are complex words, «the least widespread (particularly, terms that were coined on the basis of the already existing ones. This may be explained by the fact that terms are mostly used to name clearly defined single notions». [6, p. 208] Complex terms are particularly expressive. To achieve this, one uses the combination of two stems within one term unit (therefore, in such a term one can always separate two stems: оповідач-гуцул, етнографізм). In the process of formation of complex word-terms one achieves «necessary accuracy of the term as such term simultaneously includes the name of generic and specific notion, feature or several features that specify the meaning of the very term». [3, p. 89]
Compound word-terms that consist of two or more words are the most informative, however, often awkward and not always convenient for usage: філософський підтекст, сюжет твору, композиційний прийом, авторське обрамлення, психологічне оповідання, автобіографічний малюнок, авторська розповідь, ідея твору, мовні засоби, химерний сюжет, кульмінаційний момент, гостроконфліктна драма, драматичний діалог, реалістично-побутова манера, лірично-філософські відступи, малооригінальні тропи, поетичні деталі, еволюція образу, кольорові епітети, філософська дискусія, фразеологізми в мові гуцулів, засоби індивідуалізації та передачі локального колориту, засіб образності, авторські порівняння, занепад реалізму.«There are three types of such terms-word combinations: 1) all the components of the word-combination are, in their turn, terms of the same terminological system … 2) one of the components of the word-combination is a term of this terminological system while others are generally used words … 3) all the components of the word-combination are generally used words». [6, p. 209]
Thus, one can state certain domination of the compound term units in the literary terminological system of І. Denisyuk, frequent use of latency and long explication [4, p. 193–195] literary studies term units within the scholarly text. Such vector of scholarly observation opens prospects for new research since the influence of one or more term units on the compositional structure of the scholarly text results in creation of structural relations of various types both among term units within one text and within author’s literary terminological system.