Metaphorical Nomination in IT Terminology in Lithuanian and English Languages

Vilija Celiešienė 1  and Saulutė Juzelėnienė 1
  • 1 Kaunas University of Technology, , Lithuania

Abstract

Metaphorical nomination is peculiar in every language, it is related to reality and world view perception, it also reveals the traits of nation mentality. However, there are universal models of metaphorical nomination. In both languages, special concepts can be nominated according to similar areas, e.g. human body, its physiological and mental peculiarities, mode of life, fauna, flora, objects of natural world, etc.

The aim of this article is to analyse tendencies of metaphorical nominations in IT terminology in English and Lithuanian languages, reveal universalities and peculiarities of metaphorical nomination models. Research data of Lithuanian metaphorical terms and their English equivalents show that semantic loan-words constitute the major part of Lithuanian metaphorical terms. Consequently, their metaphorical meanings are borrowed but a substantial part of them are fairly motivated in the Lithuanian language and only a small part of them have a doubtful motivation. Having analysed various ways of metaphorical transference it is possible to claim that figurative nomination of concepts is the most universal with reference to flora names and items of mode of life. It is noted that there is a tendency to nominate concepts meaning particular objects in both English and Lithuanian languages whereas analogies of abstract things are less abundant.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Aubusson, P. J. A., Harrison, G., & Ritchie, S. M. (2006). Metaphor and analogy in science education. Springer, http://www.academia.edu/4469332/6909399_Metaphor_and_Analogy_in_Science_Education.

  • Andrade de, N. G. (2010). Technology and Metaphors: from Cyberspace to Ambient Intelligence. Observatio (OBS), 4, 121–146, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15847/obsOBS412010279.

  • Baltrūnaitė, R. (1998). Metaforiniai terminai. Terminologija, 5, 36–47.

  • Black, M. (1955). Metaphor. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, N.S., 273–294.

  • Boyd, R. (1996). Metaphor and theory change: What is ‘metaphor’ a metaphor for? Metaphor and Thought Cambridge (pp. 481–532). Cambridge University Press.

  • Bradie, M. (1999). Science and metaphor. Biology and Philosohpy, 14, 159–166. Kulver Academic Publishers.

  • Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and Rhetoric. The Persuasive Power of Metaphor, 28–51. Palgrave MacMillan.

  • D’Hanis, I. (2002). The Use of Metaphors in Scientific Development. A Logical Approach. Logical and Computational Acpects of Model – Based Reasoning, 21–35. Kulver Academis Publishers.

  • English, K. (1998). Understanding science: when metaphors become terms. Théorie et pratique des discours spécialisés, 19(22), 151–163, https://journals.openedition.org/asp/2800.

  • Forceville, Ch. (2002). Pictorial Metaphor in Advertising. Taylor & Francis eLibrary.

  • Knudsen, S. (2003). Scientific metapors going public. Journal of Pragmatics 35 (8), 1247–1263, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00187-X.

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1993). Metaphor in Science. Metaphor and Thought, 533–542. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

  • Lakoff, G., Johnsen M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. London: The university of Chicago press.

  • Marcinkevičienė, R. (1994). Metafora nemetafora. Naujasis židinys, 4, 76–81.

  • Marcinkevičienė, R. (1999). Atminties labirintuose: Kognityvinės ir tekstynų lingvistikos sąveika. Darbai ir dienos, 19, 109–124.

  • Marcinkevičienė, R. (2006). Konceptualioji metafora vertime. Darbai ir dienos, 45, 109–118.

  • Marina, V. (2006). The analysis of English metaphorical terms and their Lithuanian and Russian equivalents from the perspective of linguistic relativity. Tiltai, 2, 98–108.

  • Papaurėlytė–Klovienė, S. 2005. Probleminiai konceptualiosios metaforos EMOCINĖ BŪSENA ir ASMUO atvejai. Žmogus ir žodis, 1, 43 – 47.

  • Pielenz, M. (1993). Argumentation und Metapher. Tübingen.

  • Stunžinas, R. (2006). Metaforiniai statybos terminai. Terminologija, 13, 62–75.

  • Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904.

  • Šeškauskienė, I. (2010). Who discusses: the paper or the author of the paper? Inanimate subject + active verb in Lithuanian linguistic discourse as compared to English. Respectus Philologicus, 18(23), 83–99.

  • Šeškauskienė, I. (2011). The language of research: argument metaphors in English and Lithuanian. Vertimo studijos, 4, 46–60.

  • Šeškauskienė, I. (2012). Metaforų tyrimo klausimu, arba kaip nustatyti metaforas. Darbai ir dienos, 58, 65–79.

  • Tretjakova, J. (2013). Metaphor in Terminology: Visualization as a Way to Term Perception. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Cognitive and Language Sciences, 7(4), 891–894, https://waset.org/publications/3910/metaphor-in-terminology-visualization-as-a-way-to-term-perception.

  • Valiulienė, E. (2015). Temperature metaphors in lithuanian and english: contrastive analysis. Verbum, 6, 207–219, DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/Verb.2015.6.8819.

  • Vladarskienė, R. (2012). Metaforiniai ekonomikos terminai. Terminologija, 19, 83-92.

  • Zaikauskas, E. (2014). Terminų vertimo būdai Europos Sąjungos teisės aktų vertimuose į lietuvių kalbą. Terminologija, 21, 71-89.

  • Župerka, K. (2000). Kalbotyros terminai publicistikoje. Darbai ir dienos, 24, 175–182.

  • Волоснова, Ю.А. (2003). Особенности перевода метафорических терминов в сфере информационных технологий. Лесной вестник, 4, 39–45.

  • Гринев, С. В. (1993). Введение в терминоведение. Московсий Лицей.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search