Culinaronym, The Term And Concept

Abstract

The article is devoted to one of the linguistic terms of the gastronomic sphere. The scientific significance of the subject of research is due to the insufficient knowledge of this term in the linguistic field, as well as its inaccurate and unclear use in other areas. In this article, the linguistic term "culinaronym" is studied and its basic concepts. The purpose of the work is to give a complete definition of the term “culinaronym” . The authors solve the following tasks: to characterize the nature of the term “culinaronym” based on the analysis of the properties of the concept “culinaronym” and some other terms of the onomastic science; to demonstrate the use of the term in the narrow and broad sense; etc. The following methods are used in the analysis of the term “culinaronym” and its concepts: analysis, composition, observation. The results of the study suggest the following: the similarity in the form of the term formation between the term “culinaronym” and other onomastic terms does not allow one to prove that culinaronyms belong to onomastic vocabulary, i.e. the totality of culinaronyms is not quite the class of onomastics because of significant differences. Subsequent review and study of similar terms in relation to the form and content are promising for further study of the topic. Thus, this study will contribute to clarifying the term "culinaronym", and also in identifying the distinguishing features of a set of culinaronyms.

Keywords: Culinaronymonomasticgastronomyterminologyterm formation

Introduction

The formation of terminology is one of the conditions for the further development of a scientific theory or field. In connection with the rapid development of science, many new terms appear, most of which have practical meanings. Term productivity is due to the following: firstly, the term is reproduced in various scientific studies; secondly, it serves as the basis for term formation, i.e. creation of new terms using existing ones. One of the problems of terminology is that it is necessary to consider the meaning of a term, its formation and development in a terminological system. Thus, the analysis of a term and its concepts are relevant for any scientific field.

Today, there is a growing interest in the gastronomic field in various fields of science. In particular, in linguistics, it became an object of philologists. “Gastronomy and linguistic picture of the world correlate primarily at the level of the nominative fund of national languages” (Sedykh & Ermakova, 2012, p. 44). It is the specifics of the gastronomic nomination that characterizes the arsenal of language means characteristic of each nation, which reflects the spirit and values of the people. In everyday life, this phenomenon often serves as such examples: борщ, щи, сочник, сырники, шашлык из барашка по-сочински, караси в сметане, котлета Пожарская, and others. The combination of the names of these dishes is called "culinaronym". The existence of the latter is confirmed by a range of scientific studies. However, giving a single concept and characterizing its properties seems to be insufficient.

The theoretical and methodological basis of the study includes the following works: on onomastic knowledge Superanskaya (1973), Bondoletov (1983); on the terminology Podolskaya (1988).

Problem Statement

The word “culinaronym” is absent in terminological dictionaries. Moreover, its concepts are interpreted differently in scientific studies.

Research Questions

What is culinaronym? What concepts does it mean?

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the work is to give a complete overview of the study of the term "culinaronym" and its definitions.

Research Methods

The research material has determined the use of a complex of the following theoretical and empirical research methods: analysis, compilation, observation.

Findings

Such a concept as the culinaronym has been used in scientific literature for almost two decades. The term was first used in 2003 in the thesis “Linguoculturological Specificity of Culinary Usage” by Leonova (2003). Internet data as of February 27, 2019 indicate the following frequency of use of the term culinary: the Runet has approximately 843 results, whereas in the English-speaking segment of the Internet today there are no analogues of this term. (Electronic resource)

The word "culinaronym" is a linguistic term which, as defined by its author, means "the names of dishes, drinks and flour products" (Leonova, 2003, p. 10). Recently, this term has been found not only in linguistics, but also in other scientific fields. This article discusses the problem of defining concepts that correspond to the term “culinaronym” , and also describes the groups of culinaronyms and their properties. After analyzing the definitions of the term “culinaronym” in a number of scientific studies, it was found that the term “culinaronym” has several interpretations. In some works, this term is used without definition.

Onomastics is known to be a complex science about the names of animate and inanimate objects. For instance: anthroponyms - the names of people; toponyms - names of geographical objects; ergonyms - names of business associations of people, including organizations, enterprises, societies, etc.; cosmonyms - names of objects of outer space, etc. In the system of onomastics exist the above-mentioned thematic series of proper names, each of which possesses not only common features of onomastics, but also its own features. ll these terms of the onomastic sphere contain the suffix "-onym" (from the Greek onym meaning name ). The term "culinaronym" is also formed using this suffix. Analyzing the process of formation of terminological vocabulary, we can conclude that the term “culinaronym” complies with such term formation requirements as accessibility and brevity , while the root and suffix are of Latin and Greek origin, respectively. Nevertheless, the question remains: does culinaronym belong to the group of onomastic terms, does it have onomastic features in a meaningful way? When analyzing the attributes of culinaronyms on the background of onomastics, we found several differences, which can probably be explained by the fact that culinaronym is not yet fully recognized as a term of onomastic science. Here are some differences between the culinaronym and analogous terms of the onomastic group:

• The absence of the term "culinaronym" in the dictionary of onomastic science. The reason for the absence is clear: for the first time it appeared in the work of Leonova (2003). Whereas the last edition of the “Dictionary of Russian onomastic terminology” by Podolskaya (1988) of Moscow publishing house "Nauka" dates back to 1988. This dictionary lacks fixed term for the names of dishes and drinks. This is explained by the fact that the direction in which the names of dishes are studied was not common among researchers of the onomastic sphere. Despite the fact that onomastics has been developing for a long time, the terms relating to the names of dishes are used in scientific research in this area quite rarely. Before the term “culinaronym” was made up, one could come across such free phrases in the works of the onomastic direction connected with cooking as “names of dishes” or “dish name”.

• The structure of culinaronyms includes not only common names, but also proper names which, of course, are the object of onomastics. Sometimes a culinaronym can have a mixed formula of the name "generic word + proper name" . One example of such a formula is cod "Murmansk" (this dish is named after cod fish that lives in Murmansk). The attribute of proper names has a formal expression in written form of culinaronym - the names of dishes can be written with either a capital letter or a lower-case letter. The diversity of the “self-nominal” composition of culinaronyms , so far, has not been given proper attention by onomastologists. This is due to the fact that at the moment there is no unified theory of the explanation of culinaronyms as onomastic vocabulary.

• To identify objects of onomastic vocabulary, it is necessary to determine the boundary between onomastic and common vocabulary by describing the properties of each of the groups. Many works of Russian authors associated with the development of onomastic spaces consider the differences between proper and nominal names. Different ideas on the border between onomastic and common vocabulary suggest the need to single out an object and onomastic properties to build possible subsystems of onomastic classes. In her work "The General Theory of a Proper Name", Superanskaya (1973) indicates the distinguishing features of proper nouns and common nouns. Words of general vocabulary, according to the author, should have a connection with the concept, a relationship with a class of objects and the lack of a direct connection with a specific object. And for proper names, the basic properties are a weakened connection with the concept, designation of a class of objects and a close connection with the named object. In a brief overview of the main features of proper and nominal names made by Bondoletov (1983) in the process of studying Russian onomastics in his work “Russian Onomastics”, it is noted that proper names are called individual items of a particular class, “the assignment of a proper name means to name a specific item by correlating it with a class of similar or related items” (p. 15). In the same paper, the author quoted Karpenko’s words that the function of proper names is nominal, i.e. it is to name certain objects, whereas common names perform a semasiological function, they not only name something, but also give rise to the concept of a named object. In relation to the culinary, the following is true: they call meals and drinks, as well as flour products. They are one of a kind. Cookery are used to distinguish one dish from another. For example: the dish "dumplings" is very different from dishes such as "borshch" and “shchi". Thus, it can be said that “dumplings” are a unique and concrete concept, since almost all of us know how it looks and what it contains. This is due to the presence of connotation in its name. Since the term "culinaronym" has specific properties, the question of whether it is an onomastic term remains open.

The idea of recognizing culinaronyms as one of the onomastic classes is noted in the article “Peculiarities of the names of dishes in the restaurant menus in Chinese” by Kovalev and Kozhevnikov (2018). The authors say that the names of dishes are understood as culinaronyms in the onomastic space. On the one hand, the names of the dishes correspond to onomastic vocabulary. However, in this work there are no factors that prove the identity of culinaronyms to onomastic vocabulary. On the other hand, such an idea suggests the existence of a link between culinaronyms and onomastics.

Summing up the process of considering the term “culinaronym” in the circle of such onomastic dominants, one can distinguish the verbal form of the term and the lexical composition of the totality of culinaronyms . It is the latter which the culinaronyms are distinguished from other members of the onomastic group.

Unlike other terms, culinaronym has no synonymic row of terms. Consequently, the definition of the concepts of culinaronym with the help of the essential features of synonymic terms is impossible. At the moment in linguistics, there are many terms denoting the culinary sphere. The presence of a large number of terms with nominative dominants is explained by the fact that with each day the number of scientific research grows, and the terms are introduced to replace the free combination in the study of a particular field, in our case the culinary one. So, the culinary term was formed as a nominative term. Also, the nominative terms include trophonim , gluttonym , gastronym , trapezonim , gluttonic pragmatonym . They all have appeared recently. Trapezonyms are a set of names of places where you can eat. The largest meaning gas gluttonim , which refers to the gathering, processing, preparation, serving and consumption of food. The analysis of the terms that are close in meaning will enable determining own features of each of them. As a consequence, it will be possible to provide key points when choosing a term for a particular research object. However, difficulties arise in choosing the appropriate term in the case when the objects of research are identical. For example, the names of dishes refer to 3 terms at once: trafonim , culinaronym and gluttonym .

Recently, the topic “Food and Drinks” has been researched in many scientific papers. And the term "culinaronym" is quite frequency used in such studies. During the study of the gastronomic topic, it can be suggested that the term “culinaronym” is ambiguous. The article "The semantics of Adam biblism on the pages of modern media" analyzes the use of the biblical name Adam in modern media. The authors denote "culinaronym" as "the name of the recipe of the dish and the dish itself" (Qiao & Fomenko, 2016, p. 101). In this case, the word "culinaronym" is understood in a narrow sense. Kazantseva (2018) in her work "Features of the formal assimilation of Arabisms in modern English" defines the term "culinaronym" as a set of lexemes of Arabic origin in English. In the work, the author analyzes 26 culinaronyms . The analysis clearly shows that the term "culinaronym" is understood as the name of dishes, drinks and products. Since the author includes such words as “lemon” , “orange” , “sugar” , “candies” to the culinaronyms-neologisms of Arabic origin in English, the term “culinaronym” loses its original interpretation. This leads to ambiguity and confusion of presentation. More exact terms for the object of this study, in our opinion, are trafonim or gluttonym . The original definition of the term can be found in the work “Peculiarities of the internal form of Russian culinaronyms” by Kondratiev (2014), in which the author defines a culinaronym as “the names of dishes, drinks and flour products” (p. 25). The term formation with the word "culinaronym" is observed not only in the semantic aspect. The original term can serve as the basis for the formation of a new term. For example, the term “anthropoculinaronym” is used in the article “The phenomenon of personalization of a thing in the field of consumer communication based on the material of antrocululinronyms in the French language” by Aschenkova (2012). The author interprets the term "culinaronym" as the designation of the names of dishes and flour confectionery. Besides, according to the author, culinaronyms are “one of the lexico-thematic groups of the integral nominative sphere of gastronomy” (Aschenkova, 2012, p. 44). In this interpretation, it is understood that the term culinaronym is significantly different from its "traditional" concept of "name, naming, title”. Indeed, culinaronym indicates its appellate nature.

After analyzing the term "culinaronym" and its concepts, we should note the following:

• Despite the similar formation of terms with other onomastic terms, the word culinaronym is not fully established as onomastic vocabulary. However, a number of attributes of culinaronyms allows them to occupy an intermediate place in onomastic.

• The majority of interpretations of this term is associated with different ideas about its properties.

• The absence of the term in question in the terminological dictionary and its initial definition do not preclude the possibility of describing its characteristics.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it should be said that the term culinaronym will have been actively fixed in linguistics in the nearest future. We stick to the idea of expanding the term itself and its concepts on the basis of conscious, logical use of analysis within the framework of their close concepts of this field of scientific knowledge.

References

1. Aschenkova, G. A. (2012). Phenomenon of personalization of things in the field of consumer communication on the material of antroculineronyms in French.
2. Bondoletov, V. D. (1983). Russian Onomastics. Moscow: Prosveshchenie.
3. Kazantseva, O.A. (2018). Features of the formal assimilation of Arabisms in modern English, 55.
4. Kondratiev, A. A. (2014). Features of the internal form of Russian culinaronyms.
5. Kovalev, E. D., & Kozhevnikov, I. R. (2018). Features of the names of dishes in the restaurant menu in Chinese.
6. Leonova, A. I. (2003). Linguo-culturological specifics of the culinaronyms. Diss, 4.
7. Podolskaya, N. V. (1988). Dictionary of Russian onomastic terminology. Moscow: Nauka.
8. Qiao, L., & Fomenko, I. B. (2016). The semantics of Adam bibleism in the pages of modern media, 7(3), 111.
9. Sedykh, A. P., & Ermakova, L.R. (2012). Language picture and national gastronomy. Belgorod: Nauchnye vedomosti.
10. Superanskaya, A.V. (1973). General theory of proper name. Moscow: Nauka.