Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology

Ye Qisong; Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology

Ye Qisong, Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov

Published in International Journal of Language and Linguistics (Volume 10, Issue 2)

Received: 8 January 2022 Accepted: 23 February 2022 Published: 3 March 2022

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

According to the traditional point of view, generic definition nominates the nearest generic concept for a defined expression (definiendum) and its specific features. This understanding implies that for any generic definition, you can specify one part of the defining expression (definiens) as a wording of the nearest generic concept (for a definiendum), and another part of the same expression – as naming specific difference/differences. However, in practice, parsing any arbitrary definiens into these parts is far from a trivial task. In this article a method of terminology definitions analysis is proposed in order to establish the definiens fragments that nominate the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and its specific features (Differentia specifica). The idea of the most remote generic (for the defined) concept (Genus Remōtum) is introduced, which is opposite to the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and which turns out to be very fruitful for the proposed analysis of generic definitions. The analysis and its results heavily depend on the semantics and syntax of the definiens. In particular, some defining expressions even in the form of substantive phrase do not nominate generic concepts and their specific characteristics, and in this sense, they are not generic definitions. Some definitions, assigned even to a single concept, on the contrary, can be interpreted as nominating several Genus Proximum concepts. Finally, it is demonstrated that the same generic definition can specify an entire hierarchy of generic concepts starting from the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and ending with the most remote generic concept (Genus Remōtum).

Published in	International Journal of Language and Linguistics (Volume 10, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11
Page(s)	59-66
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Term Definition, Concept, Definiens Fragment, Generic Concept, Specific Features

References

[1]	Bessé Bruno de, Nkwenti-Azeh Blaise, Sager Juan C. 1997. Glossary of terms used in terminology. Terminology 4 (1): 117-156.
[2]	Faber P., L’Homme M-C. 2014. Lexical semantic approaches to terminology. Terminology 20 (2): 143-150.
[3]	Malaisé V., Zweigenbaum P., Bachimont B. 2004. Detecting semantic relations between terms in definitions. Compu Term 2004. 3^rd International Workshop on Computational Terminology /Ed. by Sophia Ananiadou & Pierre Zweigenbaum: 55–62.
[4]	Martin W. 1992. On the parsing of definitions. EURALEX 92. PROCEEDINGS I – II: Papers submitted to the 5^th EURALEX International Congress (Part I). by Tommola, H. et al. 247-256. Tampere: U.P.
[5]	Meyer I., Bowker L., Eck K. 1992. COGNITERM: An Experiment in Building a Terminological Knowledge Base. EURALEX 92. PROCEEDINGS I – II: Papers submitted to the 5^th EURALEX International Congress (Part I). by Tommola, H. et al. 159-172. Tampere: U.P.
[6]	Nuopponen A. 2010. Methods of concept analysis – a comparative study. LSP journal 3 (1): 4-12.
[7]	Nuopponen A. 2003. Terminology. The International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, 2-nd Edition. Four volumes. Ed. in chief William Frawley. Oxford University Press.
[8]	(Preliminary version for this article: http://lipas.uwasa.fi/~atn/papers/artikkelit/OnTerminologySc.html).
[9]	Sager J. C. 2000. Essays on Definition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 254 p.
[10]	Sager J. C., L’Homme M. C. 1994. A Model for Definition of Concepts: Rules for analytical definitions in terminological databases. Terminology 1 (2): 351-373.
[11]	Sager J. C., Ndi-Kimbi A. 1995. The conceptual structure of terminological definitions and their linguistic realisations: A report on research in progress databases. Terminology, 2 (1): 61-85.
[12]	Seppälä S. 2007. La définition en terminologie: typologies et critères définitoires (Definition in Terminology: Typologies and Criteria). TOTh, Terminologie et Ontologie: Théories et Applications. Proceedings of the First TOTh Conference. 23–45Annecy.
[13]	Seppälä S. 2015. An Ontological Framework for Modeling the Contents of Definitions. Terminology 21 (1): 23-50.
[14]	Shelov S. D. 2003. On generic definition of a term: an attempt of linguistic approach to term definition analysis. Terminology Science & Research 14 (1): 52-58.
[15]	Shelov S. D. 2013. How much do we know when we know nothing but term definitions. Terminologija i znanije: Materialy III Мezhdunarodnogo simposiuma /Red. S. D. Shelov. Moscow: Institut russkogo jazyka im. V. V. Vinogradova. 169-182.
[16]	Sierra G., Alarcon R., Aguilar C. and Bach C. (2008). Definitional verbal patterns for semantic relation extraction. Terminology 2 (1): 61-85.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Ye Qisong, Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov. (2022). Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 10(2), 59-66. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Ye Qisong; Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov. Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2022, 10(2), 59-66. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Ye Qisong, Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov. Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology. Int J Lang Linguist. 2022;10(2):59-66. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11,
  author = {Ye Qisong and Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov},
  title = {Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology},
  journal = {International Journal of Language and Linguistics},
  volume = {10},
  number = {2},
  pages = {59-66},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijll.20221002.11},
  abstract = {According to the traditional point of view, generic definition nominates the nearest generic concept for a defined expression (definiendum) and its specific features. This understanding implies that for any generic definition, you can specify one part of the defining expression (definiens) as a wording of the nearest generic concept (for a definiendum), and another part of the same expression – as naming specific difference/differences. However, in practice, parsing any arbitrary definiens into these parts is far from a trivial task. In this article a method of terminology definitions analysis is proposed in order to establish the definiens fragments that nominate the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and its specific features (Differentia specifica). The idea of the most remote generic (for the defined) concept (Genus Remōtum) is introduced, which is opposite to the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and which turns out to be very fruitful for the proposed analysis of generic definitions. The analysis and its results heavily depend on the semantics and syntax of the definiens. In particular, some defining expressions even in the form of substantive phrase do not nominate generic concepts and their specific characteristics, and in this sense, they are not generic definitions. Some definitions, assigned even to a single concept, on the contrary, can be interpreted as nominating several Genus Proximum concepts. Finally, it is demonstrated that the same generic definition can specify an entire hierarchy of generic concepts starting from the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and ending with the most remote generic concept (Genus Remōtum).},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology
AU  - Ye Qisong
AU  - Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov
Y1  - 2022/03/03
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11
T2  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JF  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JO  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
SP  - 59
EP  - 66
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-0221
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11
AB  - According to the traditional point of view, generic definition nominates the nearest generic concept for a defined expression (definiendum) and its specific features. This understanding implies that for any generic definition, you can specify one part of the defining expression (definiens) as a wording of the nearest generic concept (for a definiendum), and another part of the same expression – as naming specific difference/differences. However, in practice, parsing any arbitrary definiens into these parts is far from a trivial task. In this article a method of terminology definitions analysis is proposed in order to establish the definiens fragments that nominate the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and its specific features (Differentia specifica). The idea of the most remote generic (for the defined) concept (Genus Remōtum) is introduced, which is opposite to the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and which turns out to be very fruitful for the proposed analysis of generic definitions. The analysis and its results heavily depend on the semantics and syntax of the definiens. In particular, some defining expressions even in the form of substantive phrase do not nominate generic concepts and their specific characteristics, and in this sense, they are not generic definitions. Some definitions, assigned even to a single concept, on the contrary, can be interpreted as nominating several Genus Proximum concepts. Finally, it is demonstrated that the same generic definition can specify an entire hierarchy of generic concepts starting from the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and ending with the most remote generic concept (Genus Remōtum).
VL  - 10
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Ye Qisong

Centre for Russian Philology and Culture Studies, Heilongjiang University, Harbin, China
Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov

Department of Russian Speech Culture, V. V. Vinogradov Russian Language Institute, Moscow, Russia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Ye Qisong, Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov. (2022). Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 10(2), 59-66. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Ye Qisong; Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov. Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2022, 10(2), 59-66. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Ye Qisong, Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov. Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology. Int J Lang Linguist. 2022;10(2):59-66. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11,
  author = {Ye Qisong and Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov},
  title = {Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology},
  journal = {International Journal of Language and Linguistics},
  volume = {10},
  number = {2},
  pages = {59-66},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijll.20221002.11},
  abstract = {According to the traditional point of view, generic definition nominates the nearest generic concept for a defined expression (definiendum) and its specific features. This understanding implies that for any generic definition, you can specify one part of the defining expression (definiens) as a wording of the nearest generic concept (for a definiendum), and another part of the same expression – as naming specific difference/differences. However, in practice, parsing any arbitrary definiens into these parts is far from a trivial task. In this article a method of terminology definitions analysis is proposed in order to establish the definiens fragments that nominate the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and its specific features (Differentia specifica). The idea of the most remote generic (for the defined) concept (Genus Remōtum) is introduced, which is opposite to the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and which turns out to be very fruitful for the proposed analysis of generic definitions. The analysis and its results heavily depend on the semantics and syntax of the definiens. In particular, some defining expressions even in the form of substantive phrase do not nominate generic concepts and their specific characteristics, and in this sense, they are not generic definitions. Some definitions, assigned even to a single concept, on the contrary, can be interpreted as nominating several Genus Proximum concepts. Finally, it is demonstrated that the same generic definition can specify an entire hierarchy of generic concepts starting from the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and ending with the most remote generic concept (Genus Remōtum).},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Analysis of Term Definitions: In Search of Domain Genus-Species Structure of Terminology
AU  - Ye Qisong
AU  - Serguey Dmitrievich Shelov
Y1  - 2022/03/03
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11
T2  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JF  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JO  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
SP  - 59
EP  - 66
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-0221
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.11
AB  - According to the traditional point of view, generic definition nominates the nearest generic concept for a defined expression (definiendum) and its specific features. This understanding implies that for any generic definition, you can specify one part of the defining expression (definiens) as a wording of the nearest generic concept (for a definiendum), and another part of the same expression – as naming specific difference/differences. However, in practice, parsing any arbitrary definiens into these parts is far from a trivial task. In this article a method of terminology definitions analysis is proposed in order to establish the definiens fragments that nominate the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and its specific features (Differentia specifica). The idea of the most remote generic (for the defined) concept (Genus Remōtum) is introduced, which is opposite to the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and which turns out to be very fruitful for the proposed analysis of generic definitions. The analysis and its results heavily depend on the semantics and syntax of the definiens. In particular, some defining expressions even in the form of substantive phrase do not nominate generic concepts and their specific characteristics, and in this sense, they are not generic definitions. Some definitions, assigned even to a single concept, on the contrary, can be interpreted as nominating several Genus Proximum concepts. Finally, it is demonstrated that the same generic definition can specify an entire hierarchy of generic concepts starting from the nearest generic concept (Genus Proximum) and ending with the most remote generic concept (Genus Remōtum).
VL  - 10
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download