1

02. UVOD – JEZIK STRUKE – OSNOVE

1. (Internacionalni) jezik struke • 20. st. ...: nagli razvoj (scientific, technical and economic)

• engleski jezik – najrasprotranjeniji medij komuniciranja (Hutchinson, Waters 1987, 6).

• Novi pojmovi zahtijevaju nove termine – stvaranje brojnih novih termina u specifičnim područjima

the 'cover term': ESP: ­ the language of computers, ­ the language of the law, ­ the terminology in building and architecture,

­ the language of medicine, etc.

• ‘all special languages are derived from the basis of general language or one of its regional and social variants’

• nejasne (blurring, fuzzy) granice između: EGP (general language: English) i jezika struke (LSP/ESP)

2

2. Pojmovi – (metajezik)

definicija JS:

a) anglo­američka teorija i praksa:

­ komunikacija u struci kao komunikacijski čin (Sager et al 1980)

­ "special languages are semi­autonomous, complex semiotic systems based on and derived from general language;

­ their use presupposes special education ­ and is restricted to communication among specialists in the same or closely related fields" (1980, 68).

­ This definition highlights the significance of communication, which means the usage of the language as a distinguishing factor

­ LSP/ESP ­ teaching/learning oriented­ definition: no clear cut definition (Sager et al. 1980, Dudley­Evans & M.J. St John 1998)

b) njemačka teorija i praksa

­ 'Varitäten einer Einzelsprache' (Roelcke 1999) ­ ukupnost svih jezičnih sredstava (varijacija) koje se koriste unutar

3

određene struke radi osiguravanja uspješne komunikacije (Pritchard 1995)

­

dominantne vrste aktivnosti u ESP: teaching and translation

osnovna obilježja ESP ­ leksička dimenzija (+ other linguistic elements of ESP

­ discourse­rhetoric­stylistic dimension ­ jezični oblici slijede proces i logiku stvaranja stručnog teksta (npr. opis proizvoda; opis proizvodnog procesa, slijed radnji, itd.)

4

3. JEZIK STRUKE ­ OSNOVNI POJMOVI (LSP)

Izvori: ‘language use’ Malinovski, Firth, Halliday, Strevens, Sager, Bhatia

Communicaton process (speech / communicative acts, speech / communicative events, communicative situation, factors in the context of situation) Beaugrande, R. & W. Dressler 1981, Brown, G. & G. Yule 1983, Swales 1990: 45­58, Bhatia 1993, Hatch 1992, Hatim & Mason 1997, Katan 1999) ­

1 Variation Totality of language vs language use Halliday, Strevens, McIntosh: sub­languages or varieties within a total language: a)USER­RELATED VARIATIONS (dialects) b)USE­RELATED VARIATIONS (registers)

2 Register Use­related varieties (in stylistics, sociolinguistics): a variety of language defined according to its use in social situations (scientific , technical, formal register) the linguistic features typically associated with a configuration of situational features – (with particular values of field, mode, and tenor) 'Register is postulated to account for what people do with their language. When we observe language activity in the various contexts in which it takes place, we find

5

differences in the type of language selected as appropriate to different types of situation' (Halliday et al. 1964:87)

Field Reference to 'what is going on' (content & activity) The total event in which the text is functioning, together with the purposive activity of the speaker or writer – it thus includes the subject­matter (but not the same) as one element in it (political discourse, a physics lecture, courtroom interaction) NB: problems when translating from languages with a 'scientific' or 'technical culture' (borrowings, neologisms, coinages)

Mode Medium / channel / code of the language activity: The function of the text in the event, including both the channel taken by the language (spoken/written, extempore/prepared) and its genre, or rhetorical mode (narrative, didactic, persuasive, phatic communication; written to be spoken / read only), cf. diagram: Gregory & Caroll /1978; end of file

Tenor Relationship between the addresser and the addresses: Type of role interaction, the set of relevant social relations among the participants involved (polite­

6

colloquial­intimate; formal­informal; casual­ intimate­deferential)

NB: Inherent fuzziness of registers

3 Variety Any system of linguistic expression whose use is governed by situational variables, such as regional, occupational, or social class factors. (scientific, religious, legal, formal conversational, America, Welsh, Cockney)

4 Variable, Variant A linguistic unit subject to social or stylistic variation, with reference to such factors as region, social class, age and sex.

5 Genre 'Conventionalised forms of texts which reflect the functions and goals involved in particular social occasions as well as purposes of the participants in them. A class of communicative events, the members of which share some communicative purpose. These purposes are recognized by the expert members of the parent discourse community, and thereby constitute the rationale for the genre'. (Swales 1990:58):

7

vrste žanrova u struci: ­ Literary – non­literary ­ Linguistic – non­linguistic ­ casual conversation ­ radiotelephony (air, sea): turn­taking rules, special conventions

­ political speech, journalese, ­ sport ­ medical ­ legalese ­ legal drafting (nothwithstanding, without prejudice, terms and conditions)

8

4. Aspekti jezika struke (ESP, Fachsprache) 4.1 VRSTE

­ various linguistic approaches to ESP ­ razlikovati: EGP – ESP: ­ language for specific purposes and general language

­ classifying concepts as abbreviations (Robinson 1991, xii):

ESP (English for Specific Purposes), EGP (English for General Purposes), LSP (Language for Specific Purposes), LGP (Language for General Purposes), EAP (English for Academic Purposes), EOP (English for Occupational Purposes), EPP (English for Professional Purposes), EVP (English for Vocational Purposes), and EST (English for Science and Technology)

­ EST: historically ­ linguistic research in the 60s and 70s concentrated on EST when considering special English.

EST danas:­ a crucial issue ­ a subdivision of ESP (Hutchinson, Waters 1987, 7­9).

9

­ ­Hutchinson and Waters: EBE (English for Business and Economics) and ESS (English for Social Sciences) (1987, 17).

­ ­Sager, Dungworth, and Mc Donald: SE (Specific English): subsets of Special English: SE(Sci.), SE(Tech.), SE(Phys.), SE(Chem.)

10

Language (LGP, Gemeinsprache)

LSP1 LSP2 LSPn

ESP(LSE)

EST EBE ESS

EAP EOP EAP EOP EAP EOP

e.g. EAP (medicina­znanost): what terms are used in the medical language, where do they come from, what do they refer to, EOP (lječn. struka): what words does a doctor need to know, how can they effectively communicate with their patients

11

5. General English vs. ESP ­ dva koncepta (general English vs Special English) – različit pristup u literaturi

1.Sager, Dungworth, and McDonald (1980): general language and special languages are part of a natural language: Øboth share the same fundamental characteristics, i.e.: ­ same core elements of the English language

Ødifferences: ­ special languages concentrate on the use of certain features ­ preference of nominal groups, ­ passive sentences, or ­ reduced ambiguity of lexical items ­ specific lexical items which only occur in a specific context

­ statistical distributions of grammatical patterns (Hoffmann 1987, 36)

­ stresses the importance of the lexical level,

12

­ nomenclatures of medicine, chemistry...

­ standardisation processes by national institutions (eg. British Standards Institution, Deutsche Industrienorm),

­ linguistic research ­ finding regular patterns of word association / formation

­ the socio­economic argument ­ special languages develop as a result of socio­economic change

­ dependent on the people who speak it and their needs.

­ new terms are needed in order to classify the concepts

­ new coinings are derived from the immediate social surrounding often referring to the name of its discoverer (eg. Parkinson Syndrome).

2. Specialist vs lay communication: ­ less redundant and less ambiguous because the context is restricted and thus more predictable

­ In case a specialist talks to a non­ specialist, their communication will be build on more vague concepts of

13

general language in order to guarantee successful information transfer (znanstv­popularni stil, vulgarisation)

ZAKLJUČAK: ­ EGP i ESP – zasnovani na istim jezičnim načelima

MEĐUTIM: ­ Semantička jednoznačnost (termini) ­ (statistički) preferiraju se određena gramatička obilježja (eg.: passive, nominal groups)

­ retorički elementi / formule (diskurs, tekst, intertekstualnost)

NB: ­ no stable border line between ESP and EGP but only fluid transitions /blurred /

­ fuzzy edge between general and special language, between EGP and ESP respectively

14

6. Definition: LSP ­ ESP The fuzzy edge (ESP/EGP) ­ prevents a clear cut definition of ESP ­ Hutchinson and Waters (teaching point of view), consider ESP to be an approach to language and not a product (1987, 19)

­ the learners' needs define ESP ­ Sager, Dungworth, and McDonald regard ESP as a kind of language within the all including system of general English (1980, 68­69).

­ "special languages are semi­autonomous, complex semiotic systems based on and derived from general language;

­ their use presupposes special education ­ and is restricted to communication among specialists in the same or closely related fields" (1980, 68).

­ This definition highlights the significance of communication, which means the usage of the language as a distinguishing factor,

Dudley­Evans, StJohn (1998) – ESP: 1. Absolute characteristics:

­ ESP is designed to meet specific needs of the learner ­ ESP makes use of the underlying methodology and activities of the

disciplines it serves

15

­ ESP is centreed on the language (grammar, lexis, register), skills, discourse and genres appropriate to these activities

2. Variable characteristics: ­ ESP may be related to or designed for specific purposes ­ ESP may use, in specific teaching situations, a different

methodology from that of general English ­ ESP is likely to be designed for adult learners (tertiary level

institution, in professional work situations), and also for learners at secondary school levels

­ ESP is generally designed for intermediate or advanced students

­ »special languages comprise all the language features which are used in a limited field of communication in order to guarantee communication between people working in this field« (Hoffmann 1989, 53).

­ ESP ­ a matter of language use

­ the occurrence of certain linguistic features in communication determines whether we speak of ESP or EGP

16

7. ESP Activities

• Upotreba jezika u komunikaciji

• Osnovni komunikacijski činovi:

• Prevođenje i učenje jezika struke 7.1 Jezik u komunikaciji

­ to communicate ideas, emotions and desires

­ »in special languages we tend to use language to convey information about our knowledge and experience of reality to others as specific as possible«

­ »the more elaborated and specific the concepts the more specialised are the words we use to refer to them« (Sager, Dungworth, McDonald 1980, 19).

level of communication: that is to say interaction between two specialists of the same field or between specialist and non specialist

(A typical example: A patient with broken legs is lying in her hospital bed; two doctors come by and start analysing the x­rays of the injured body parts. Depending on her education, the patient will not understand much of the Latin terms referring to bones and ligaments. If she wants to know what is wrong with her legs, the

17

doctors will have to shift to a more general level of language explaining her which bones she has broken)

principles for effective communication can be established:

1.contributions should be made as informative as required

2.effective communication in ESP aims at avoiding to say something wrong, or something that lacks adequate evidence.

3.relevance to the topic, restriction of ambiguity, accurateness, and structure are further principles

7.2 Teaching ESP 1. the demand for understanding special Englishes 2. a range of specific English vocabulary. Word corpora covering various fields of ESP »because ESP is based on the same principles as general English, teaching and learning techniques for Special English do not in any kind vary from the general methods of English teaching« (1987, 18). Therefore, courses in ESP are to be structured in line with learners' needs.

18

7.3 Translation ­ centrality of the concept of equivalence in order to convey a meaning very similar to the original

­ the phenomenon that two linguistic entities can under certain conditions replace each other (Catford 1965, Nida 1974, Nielsen 1991, 93).

­ »'equivalence' covers the same aspects as synonymy, but between two different languages"« (Nielsen 1991, 93).

­ difficulties translating ESP texts ­ finding an equivalent expression for a special term because

(a) there is either no equivalent concept or (b) because a literal translation would

create a wrong concept. e.g.

PIGGY­BACK train /HUCKEPACK: connotations (uprt) FEDERATION (EU, US) SNOWBOARD

"snowboard" ­ "Schneebrett" ­ a certain kind of avalanche Tri moguća postupka u prevođenju:

19

1. posuđivanje (jezične tradicije: purizam vs liberalizam) 2. parafraza (rephrasing the original term into an explanatory sentence & coining a new phrase; opasnost od neekonomičnosti jezika) 3. neologizmi (prevedenice i semantičke posuđenice ­ opasnost od zbrke u terminologiji;: e.g. sve kolokacije ili višečlane leksičke jedinice tipa N+N: ALI ­ sintaktičke teškoće u HR)

Kostenlokation, cost location: mjesto troška Trade mark, Warenzeichen: marka proizvoda

20

8. Linguistic Features of ESP ­ key element of ESP­ lexis ­ special terms conveying limited reference ­ the major distinguishing factor between ESP and general English ­ monoreferencijalnost

­ tvorba/kreiranje novih riječi ­ how special concepts are designated

­ syntactical features ­ textual features 8.1 The Lexical Level

(a) Word Usage (Wortschatz) vocabulary of ESP ­ three levels according to their degree of semantic ambiguity:

­ special terms which are only used in a certain field and specifically refer to an elaborated concept (5­7%):

­ Deutlichkeit, Verstaendlichkeit, Oekonomie, Exaktheit, Eindeutigkeit, Mehrdeutlichkeit (Polysemie, Synonymie, Vagheit, kontextueller Exaktheit), Metaphorik,

­ semi­technical, sub­technical or general scientific/ technical words that occur in a number of areas (30­35%)

21

­ close to general English. Terms on this level are of a high semantic ambiguity and can be found in almost any kind of communication (Jumpelt 1961, Wolf 1969, Robinson 1991)

1st Level (ESP only) ­ Almost no term or expression fits in the narrow definition of the first level.

­ This is probably due to the fact that conferences do not represent a scientific or technical area as such, they merely function as frameworks to deal with problems and questions in research, business, politics, and many more.

­ However, this framework function of Conference English inhabits its own terminology in connection with setting, equipment, social hierarchy, certain rituals, and surrounding elements (eg.: travelling, accommodation). ­ E.g. "rostrum", »floor«, "arbitration tribunal", "subsidiary body", or "verbatim record", »minutes«

2nd Level: general scientific terms ­ comparably higher

e.g. "forum", "committee", "conference", "e­mail", "CD­ROM drive", "appendix", »my (right)

22

honourable friend« ­ refer to specific concepts in other disciplines as well ("e­mail", "CD­ROM drive" from computer language for example)

beam:1.a. (dimenzija): širina broda, b. (konstruktivni element): sponja, nosač palube, c. (smjer u odnosu na vlastiti brod): po boku, subočice lijevo/desno: ‘on the port beam’), 2. zraka (rendgen, …) itd…

3rd Level ­ Most of the terminology e.g. "regular", "illegal", "to cancel", "session", "requirement", "to announce", "volume", "information" ...

e.g. "session": ­ in a variety of contexts, cf.

1. in youth culture: ­ popular kinds of music as rock, pop, hip­ hop and hard­core the term (several musicians or bands playing together loosely, often in front of a small audience) ­ found somewhere in between mere practice and an organized concert.)

2. in medicine – round of treatment

23

3. In conference English: "session" ­ a formal expression semantically close to a sit in.

(b) Word Formation / Creating new words ­ based upon the same principles as general English, ­ However, due to the fact that terminologies in ESP strive for semantic uniqueness, designation of terms tends to become a more systematized process. Therefore, specific kinds of word formation are more relevant in ESP (Sager, Dungworth, McDonald 1980, 78­79). (b1) Borrowing ­ a special pattern of ESP terminology (a) Latin and Greek suffixes commonly used in EST. (b) the number of affixes in Special English is considerably higher than in general English (Sager, Dungworth, McDonald 1980, 258). Conclusion: derivation via affixation is an important approach towards systematizing special terminology

24

In medicine, for example, the suffix »­ity« (a state), in physics and chemistry (property) (Sager, Dungworth, McDonald 1980, 258).

b2) Methods of (synthetic) compressing words like abbreviations, clippings, and blends support a general strategy in ESP which is to present specific information as concise as possible (Sager, Dungworth, McDonald 1980, 277) b3) compounding (analytical level) ­ most productive (language­dependent)

­ noun compounds ­ prevails in terms of occurrence and low semantic ambiguity ­ compound adjectives ­ (eg.: water­ absorptive Heavy­duty, ­based) are characterized through their compactness and transparency of expression ­ compound verbs (eg.: to outline) often carry a heavy load of ambiguity because of their frequent and metaphorical usages etc.

b4) MWLU (multi­word lexical units: collocations, etc.

8.2 Other Linguistical Approaches analysis of texts in EST – features such as: SENTENCES (Fachsprachengrammatik)

25

­ declarative, imperative sentences, passive voice, and nominal groups.

­ The vast majority of sentences ­ of declarative nature which seem to be basically structured according to the grammatical relationship of their nominal groups

­ Despite the tendency to avoid imperative constructions in the language of science, they play a role in technical English.

­ They symbolize the normal method of expressing instructions, and so imperatives are found in various instruction manuals

­ statements: the passive represents the most prominent form used in technical and scientific writing.

­ The proportion of passive clauses in scientific and technical texts ranges between 28% to 32%, whereas in literary works these figures decrease to a paltry 2% to 3% (1980, 209).

­ The main reason for this significant difference lies in the fact that the passive voice enables scientists to efficiently transfer information.

­ Attention is focused on the effect or result, which, in science and technology, is more

26

important than knowing who or what performed the action (1980, 209).

NOMINAL GROUPS act as the main building blocks from which sentences in EST are constructed because:

­ as content units, they contain information relating to processes, logical exposition of ideas and theories, explanation of natural phenomena, and evaluation of experimental data

­ Their prevalence in EST is especially due to three reasons:

­ nominal groups can be both subject and object thus being capable of taking various positions in a sentence according to emphasis

­ they can be combined by connective words (eg.: conjunctions) and their information content is easily subject to expansion through pre­ and postmodification as, for example, by adjectives in front or post position (1980, 219).

8.3 TEXT (Fachtextualitaet) texts in ESP as unities ­ a theoretically restricted conception of lexical and syntactical elements is not sufficient in

27

grasping a complete picture of LSP texts (Gläser 1992, Nord 1994).

interdisciplinary approach: (holistic) involving sociology, psychology, sociolinguistics, linguostylistics, semantics, statistics and textlinguistics in order to work out an integrative analysis of LSP texts ESP is not a socially autonomous phenomenon. In fact, it depends on social classes and groups, division of labour, and appropriate usage of language means (Gläser 1992, 172).

PHILOSOPHICAL ABSTRACTNESS (LDB) Geist in his essay, Allez­Hopp! Fachsprache und Paradigmenwechsel (Grindstett, Wagner 1992, 243­65)

terminology in LSP is concerned, one of his fundamental arguments is that »every time a term is specifically defined a greater number of terms are used, which again have to be classified«. Conceptual lexicons / terminology (LDB, KDB) – tezaurusi, EU, UN, IT sustavi (UDK, biblioteke, informacijske baze)

28

8.4. Normizacija (Normierung)

29

9. Conclusion two factors have contributed to the growing importance of ESP since WW II. 4.Scientific, economic, and technical progress on the one hand and

5. the increasingly important role of the English language on the other hand cause new terminologies to flourish in a variety of fields.

As ESP is a matter of language use, communication activities function as a backbone to the understanding of ESP. Teaching and translating special words are two major problem areas in this respect. On the word­level, linguistic research particularly tries to establish certain guidelines of word formation in ESP. Bearing in mind Latin and Greek influences, affixation, compounding, and borrowing represent the three most important concepts. Recent research has widened the scope of understanding ESP from the lexical and syntagmatical level to an interdisciplinary approach involving other scientific areas as well.

30

LITERATURA

Beard, Adrian. The Language of Sport. London and New York: Routledge, 1998.

Gläser, Rosemarie, ed. Aktuelle Probleme der Anglistischen Fachtextanalyse. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1992.

Grindsted, Annette, Johannes Wagner, eds. Communication for Specific Purposes/ Fachsprachlich Kommunikation. Tübingen: Günter Narr Verlag, 1992.

Hoffman, Lothar. Kommunikationsmittel Fachsprache. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1987.

Hutchinson, Tom, Alan Waters. English for Specific Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1987.

Katan, D. (1999) Translating Cultures. St. Jerome Publ.

Kennedy, Chris, Rod Bolitho. English for Specific Purposes. London and Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1984.

Markus, Manfred. Conference English/ Konferenzsprache Deutsch. Vol.2. English for Specific Purposes. Ed. Manfred Markus. Essen: Die Blaue Eule, 1995.

Morgenroth, Klaus. Terminologie und Nomenklatur. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1996.

Nielsen, Niels Davidsen. Nine Studies on Language for Special Purposes. Denmark: Handelshøjskolens Forlag, 1991.

Robinson, Pauline C. ESP Today: A Practitioner's Guide. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall International, 1991.

Sager, Juan C., David Dungworth, and Peter F. McDonald. English Special Languages.Wiesbaden: Oscar Brandstetter Verlag. 1980.

31

TRANSLATION vs PURPOSE & ADDRESSEE Mode variation: Gregory & Caroll /1978)

Speaking

Spontaneously non­spontaneously writing

Conversing monologuing ‘reciting’ speaking of what is written

To be spoken to be spoken not necessarily as if not written to be spoken

to be read as if to be read (a) heard (to be read as speech) (b) overheard (to be read as if thought)

32