U.E. Mussabekova1, Zh.T.Taubayev2
1Doctor of philological sciences, al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Almaty, Kazakhstan, email: Ulzhan.Mussabekova@kaznu.kz
2docent; senior teacher, al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Almaty, Kazakhstan, email:
zharasxiansheng@mail.ru
STRUCTURAL (MORPHOLOGICAL) CLASSIFICATION OF EPONYMS
IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE
This article considers structural (morphological) classification of eponyms in political discourse. Political discourse is taken from American periodicals from 2011 -2017. Apart from giving comprehensive definitions of several scholars to the term eponym, authors demonstrates structural (morphological) and appellative classification of eponyms which is the crucially important constituent of eponyms. Structurally eponyms classify as simple (root word), derivative, possessives, compound and blendings. According to appellative direction compound eponyms classify as act, pact, law, conference, forum and others. As a result we can arrive at a conclusion that the eponyms mostly derive not only from the anthroponyms, in but also to a large extent from the toponyms.
Key words: eponym, appellatives, political discourse, classification
INTRODUCTION
At present time in many branches of science we have a huge number of terms. They become casual and we use them regularly in our speech. Of course, people do not think about them, especially where they come from . One of them is an eponym.
There are a number of scientists, linguists who dealt with eponyms such as R. Trahair, T. Tuleja, R. Boycott, J. Raffner, J. B. Marciano, N. Novinskaya, M. Blau,
V. Leichik, Z. Konova and others.
MAIN PART
In the dictionary of M. Freeman we can find the definition of an eponyms as: «The wordcoined from Greek words epi – «on», «upon» and onama «a name» [1, 3].
According to R. Boycott: «An eponymous word is one that has entered the English language because of a person or that person’s deeds» [2, 9].R. Trahair mentions that «Eponyms are words that originated with a name of a person. The person may be a living or deceased individual, a hero, or a character from fiction. Persons either give their name or have it attached by others to an event, state of affairs, activity or institution» [3,4].
On the base of these definitions we can figure out that eponyms derive from anthroponyms. But R. Trahair also points out that «Eponyms begin with a name, and the name is usually that of a person. In the social sciences, many eponymous events are associated with the names not of people but of important places» [4,3].Therefore eponyms derive from not only anthroponyms, but also from toponyms.
J. Marciano mentions that «An eponymis anything that’s ever been named after anybody. The title of autobiography, the name of a legal firm — anything»[5,6].
That means we can understand eponyms cover many names even name of firms, factories and others.
Eponyms are investigated in many branches of science such as medicine, physics, mathematics, chemistry and others. But not investigated in politics and political discourse. As we consider eponyms in political discourse, let me first of all draw your attention to the notions «politics» and «political discourse».
P. Chilton gives comprehensive definition: «On the one hand, politics is viewed as a struggle for power, between those who seek to assert and maintain their power and those who seek to resist it. On the other hand, politics is viewed as cooperation, as the practices and institutions that a society has for resolving clashes of interest over money, influence, liberty, and the like» [6, 3].
We can understand than politics deals with power, how to keep and share it with the members of political institutions. It has collaborative character and must be used to make decision even in insufficient information and uncertainty. So, politics is decision-making process.
Political discourse comprises many aspects of communication concerning politics and it shows that it is a part or form of political communication.
W. Thiele points out that «Political discourse is understood as the political process and / or the result of (political) language production referring to one or more interrelated themes which are presented as complete» [7, 6].
As we clearly understand, political discourse is the realization of politics which can be realized only with political language production. Politics is decision-making, political discourse is the deliberation of political issues.
As a resource, we consider political discourse from American periodicals from 2011 to 2017. There are periodicals such as The New Republic, The National review, Politico. We collected 200 eponyms. On the base of these eponyms we are supposed to make structural classification of political eponyms in political discourse.
N. Novinskaya on the base of general classification of terms make structural classification of eponyms as follows:
1) simple (without any suffixes);
2) derived (with suffixes: -ism, -ist, — ian);
3) compounds (Two or more words);
4) abbreviation (shortened variant of several words) [8, 27].
On the base of these general classification we can make structural classification of political eponyms in political discourse:
1) simple. There are several eponyms which are simple or without any affixes such as boycott, quisling, gerrymander, tsar and others.
Right now there are hundreds of establishment quislings, Trojan horses trying to get into this administration, swearing, ‘Oh I was for Trump this whole time’ when they weren’t,” complained Roger Stone, an informal Trump adviser who met with Trump this week, on Alex Jones’ radio program (Politico., 12. 10. 2016);
2) derived. There are considerable quantity of eponyms with – ism, — ian,-ite.
Machiavellian, Machiavellism, Thatcherism, Stalinism, Leninism, Blairite, Nixonian, Maoism, Clintonian, chauvinism and others.
Khrushchev, who died in 1971 at age 77, came to power after the death of Josef Stalin in 1953. He denounced at the time what he said were the “excesses” of Stalinism and proclaimed that he sought “peaceful co-existence” with the United States (Politico, 09. 24. 2016).
3) compounds. Compound eponyms comprise two or more words. We can divide them into 2 groups: a) from anthroponyms: Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, Molotov cocktail, Truman Doctrine, Carter doctrine, Eisenhower doctrine, ; b) from toponyms: Potsdam conference, Yalta conference, Vietnam syndrome, Warsaw Pact, Nuremberg process
(trial).
Nizon’s determination to “Vietnamize” the conflict came to be known as the “Nixon Doctrine.” He pledged that the withdrawal of the first 25,000 troops would be completed by Aug. 31 (Politico, 07. 25. 2012).
4) abbreviation (shortened variant of several words). We could not find any abberiaviated eponyms.
To this classification, we would like to add eponyms in the form of blendings such as Obamacare (Obama + care), Rogernomics (Roger + economics), Reaganomics (Reagan + economics).
A “typical” consciousness – white, male, Protestant, heterosexual, bobbing the middle class- as it made its way, becoming ever less typical, through the 1960s and 1970s and 1980s:
Vietnam, recession, Reaganomics (The New Republic., 15.09. 2015).
As we understand, eponyms apart from anthropyms and toponyms, consist of appellatives or reference words. Classification of compound eponyms by appellatives or reference words:
1.Treaty, аct, pact, protocol. Hitler-Stalin pact, Helsinki act,Kyoto protocol, Versailles Peace Treaty.
2.Conferences, summits, forums. Davos forum, Wannsee conference.
3. Law, plan. Baruch plan, Marshall plan (aid), Barbarossa plan (Barbarossa).
4. Doctrines. Monroe doctrine, Eisenhower doctrine.
Picture 1 – Classification of political eponyms by appellatives.
CONCLUSION
This classification shows that eponyms derive not only from anthroponyms, but also from toponyms. In many branches of science, we can mostly find eponyms derived from toponyms. But in political discourse unlike anthroponyms, there are many eponyms from toponyms. They are functioning dramatically well and play a significant role in considering topical issues, in making decisions and entirely in political discourse.
Eponyms are unique notions and their individuality is reflected in proper names (anthroponyms and toponyms). Due to proper names, people get politіcal explicit or implicit knowledge from them, as a result expand background knowledge. That’s why we can not consider eponyms separately from political disсourse.
REFERENCES
1 Freeman S. Morton «A new dictionary of eponyms». Oxford University press, 1997.– p.73.
2 Boycott R. A little etymology of eponymous words. Hutchinson Publisher, 1982 – p.
423
3 Trahair R.С.S.What’s in a name? Oxford university press, 1990. –79 p.
4 Trahair, R. From Aristotelian to Reaganomics (a dictionary of eponyms). Greenwood Press, 1994. –721 p.
5 Marciano J. B. Anonyponymous. The forgetten people behind everyday words. Bllomsbury, New York.
6 Chilton P. Analysing Political Discourse: theory and Practice. London 2004.
7 Wolfgang Thiele / Joachim Schwend / Christian Todenhagen. Political Discourse:
Different Media – Different intentions – New Reflections, Stauffenburg Linguistik, 2005. –300 p.
8 Новинская Н.В. Эпономические названия в составе современной русской терминологии: дисс. канд. дис.наук / Институт русского языка, 1989. – 219с.
Ұ.Е. Мұсабекова, Ж.Т. Таубаев
Саяси дискурстағы эпонимдердің құрылымдық (морфологиялық) топтастырылуы
Әл-Фараби атындағы қазақ ұлттық университеті,
Қазақстан Республикасы, Алматы
Мақала саяси дискурстағы эпонимдердің құрылымдық (морфологиялық) топтастастырылуының ерекшеліктерін қарастырады. Саяси дискурс ретінде 2011-2017 жылдар аралығындағы ағылшын мерзімді басылымдарының материалы алынып отыр. Эпонимге жан-жақты анықтама беріле отыра, құрылымдық (морфологиялық) және эпонимдерді негізгі құраушы компоненттердің бірі болып табылатын апеллятивтер бойынша да топтастырылу жасалды. Эпонимдер құрылымдық топтастыруы бойынша түбір сөз, туынды сөз, өздік, күрделі сөз, кіріккен сөз болып топтастырылды. Апеллятивтік топтастырылу бойынша акт, пакт, заң, конференция, форум, идеологиялық бағыт секілді болып топтастырылды. Ғылымның өзге салаларында (медицина, физика, химия, математика) эпонимдер негізінен антропонимнен жасалса, құрылымдық және апеллятивтік топтастыру негізінде саяси дискурста антропоним мен қатар топонимнен шыққан эпонимдер де өте көп кездесетіні анықталды.
У.Е. Мусабекова, Ж.Т. Таубаев
Структурная (морфологическая) классификация эпонимов в политическом дискурсе
Казахский национальный университет им. аль-Фараби,
Алматы, Республика Казахстан
Статья рассматривает особенности структурной (морфологической) классификации эпонимов в политическом дискурсе. Материалом исследования послужили тексты из американских периодических изданий с 2011 по 2017 годы. Помимо структурной классификации эпонимов, авторы предлагают апеллятивную классификацию эпонимов. В структурной классификации рассматриваются непроизводные, производные, притяжательные, сложные и смешанные способы образования эпонимов. Апеллятивная классификация разделяет эпонимы на акты, пакты, законы, конференции, форумы. На основе структурной и апелятивной классификаций можно сделать вывод о том, что эпонимы в политическом дискурсе образуются не только от антропонимов как в других отраслях науки (медицина, химия, физика, математика), но и в значительной мере от топонимов.