|Sažetak (engleski)|| |
he doctoral thesis will for the first time exhaustively research the creation of Croatian military terminology, primarily with regard to mechanisms of term-formation and principles of terminological standardization, as well as its linguistic normative acceptability. Particular attention will be given to the contemporary terminology that has its terminological origins in the Anglo-American NATO terminology. In particular, the mirroring of English term-formation patterns will be investigated at all linguistic levels, as well as calquing being a mechanism of creation of Croatian equivalents. The research is preceded by the collection of materials, preparation of the corpora and the excerpt of terms to be subjected to terminological analysis. For the purpose of the systematization of military terminology and the introduction of stability into the conceptual system, it is beneficial to go beyond the purely descriptive level of research and to render solutions for terminological gaps or the terminology requiring revision and normative preference by undertaking concrete normative interventions and providing practical paradigmatic models. While doing so, the need to reconcile the functional requirements of the military profession and linguistic rules will be taken due account. The Introductory Chapter explains the background of research and motivation for work, the goals of research and the postulated hypotheses that the thesis is trying to confirm, the current scientific research insights and achievements from a diachronic and synchronic perspective, and finally the importance of the work from the point of view of the first monograph-type linguistic-terminological research of the Croatian military terminology. The linchpins of the thesis are generally laid out in the Introduction. This primarily concerns the influence of the Anglo-American military terminology on the creation of the contemporary Croatian military terminology and the extent of its internationalization at all linguistic levels. The basic theoretical and methodological instruments used to analyze the terminology are terminological principles and methods of term-formation in line with the Croatian Manual of Terminology authored by Lana Hudeček and Milica Mihaljević. Chapter Two details the theoretical cornerstones of this thesis, more specifically the fundamental theoretical and terminological postulates upon which it rests and which will later serve in supporting hypotheses, aligning paradigmatic examples with terminological principles, and exhaustive analysis of corpus-verified terminology according to the seven methods of termformation. The methodological and corpus fundamental principles of the research are discussed in Chapter Three. Two basic approaches are presented: 1) application of instruments of Eugen Wüster’s classical theory of terminology and Viennese school of terminology which proves to be the most suitable for the systematization of Croatian military terminology and practical and applicable outcomes 2) methodological procedures of corpus linguistics, more precisely the utilization of corpus-based approach. Chapter Four presents a diachronic compendium on the origins and development of Croatian military terminology. The analysis delves deep into the linguistic past – from the first known official documents that record the military lexicon in the Croatian language in the 16th century, through the lexicographic and terminographic heritage over the centuries, ending in 1990, which in the thesis is taken as a diachronic-synchronic boundary line. The chapter specifically discusses some of the less explored or almost unexplored areas thus far – the Tanzlingher’s annexed manuscript military dictionary dating back to 1699 Raccolta d’alcuni termini militari che s’attrovano sparsi nel Libro Maresciallo (annexed to the London manuscript), the authorship and terminology corpus of pre-Šulek military manuals, monumental endeavors of Bogoslav Šulek in the field of organization of military terminology, the official military terminography breakthroughs from the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, and the forceful elimination of the Croatian terminology in 1918 and 1945. Chapter Five presents the pivotal subject of research – an exhaustive linguistic-terminological study of contemporary Croatian military terminology. Timewise, 1990 is taken as the outset of the contemporary terminology that is, the independence of the Republic of Croatia. The terminology is researched in-depth according to the term-formation methods, extensively verified with corpus endorsements contrasted to terminological principles The results are rendered as recommended terms to subject matter experts for valorisation and selection. The impact of Anglo-American military terminology at all linguistic levels is particularly analyzed. The prototype examples show the dimensions of Anglo-Americanization of Croatian terminology, primarily in terms of lexical, syntactic, and semantic mirroring of English patterns. Inter-term semantic relations are studied likewise – most notably synonymy, the scale of which permanently burdens and interdicts the sorting-out of Croatian military terminology. The starting hypotheses are verified by analysis in this chapter. The Concluding Chapter discusses the verification status of hypotheses and summarizes the results of the research. Likewise, the terminological analysis of prototype and selected examples and its outcomes are recommended as a model for organization of terminology, complementing existing general language and terminological dictionaries, and as an impetus for future terminological work, analysis and systematization of military terminology. For the first time, the Croatian military terminology has undergone extensive research in a monograph-type work, along two fundamental axes: linguistic-terminological analysis and diachronic-synchronic perspective. Given the fact that Croatian military terminology has thus far been scientifically scarcely and peripherally researched – primarily the contemporary terminology – it was intended to postulate the subject so as to cover as broad a problem as possible of its creation and to illuminate the focal points that burden its sorting-out and systematization. This applies above all to Anglo-Americanization of Croatian terminology at all linguistic levels, inconsistency with terminological principles, and the necessity for its systemization. The history and evolution of Croatian military terminology is tremendously turbulent. It was often predestinated by extra-linguistic factors and, as the thesis proves, shared the dire fate of the Croatian language in its path of standardization, probably even more ill-fated. The research sought to delve as deeply as possible into the linguistic past, leading to 1578 official documents in the Croatian language of the day concerning military and warfare – the military edicts of Charles II, Archduke of Austria (Kriegsartikel). In all probability, we can consider them to be the foundations of the official Croatian military terminology. An in-depth analysis confirms that Croatia’s centuries-old lexicographic heritage – from the first Croatian dictionary authored by Faust Vrančić, printed pre-revival dictionaries of Jakov Mikalja, Juraj Habdelić, Ivan Belostenec, Sušnik-Jambrešić and Ardelio Della Bella, to manuscript dictionaries of Bartol Kašić, Pavao Ritter Vitezović and Ivan Tanzlingher Zanotti and finally the national revival period dictionaries of Mažuranić-Užarević and Bogoslav Šulek – in each subsequent dictionary regularly documents the ever-expanding corpus of words that we associate with military and warfare. This has been extensively exemplified by this research. A special contribution of this work to Croatian military-linguistic history – but also to the history of the Croatian language in general – is the exhibiting and analysis of Ivan Tanzlingher Zanotti’s annexed military dictionary entitled Raccolta d’alcuni termini militari che s’attrovano sparsi nel Libro Maresciallo dated 1699, added to the London manuscript and preserved in the British Library. It is a lexicographic opuscule containing about 380 Croatian military terms, multiple word units and idioms. With this work, some of them are finally brought to light. In terms of military terminography breakthroughs, the dissertation has also treaded novelscientific paths – from official beginnings from the time of Napoleon and the Illyrian Provinces, and linguistic analysis of the first Croatian official military manual Mushtranje (1811) to detailed terminological insights into the oeuvre of the founder of the Croatian military terminology Bogoslav Šulek and his epochal term-formation engagements and the impressive two-volume / two-way military dictionary authored by Mavro Špicer and associates. As a special contribution the almost unexplored pre-Šulek military manuals by Stjepan pl. Šašić-Kirinski, along with the German-Croatian military dictionaries of the late 19th-century by officers Isak Ljuština and Alois Vuković, all of whom have thus been saved from scientific oblivion and presented to the general public. The thesis also documents and linguistically contextualizes all the calamities of the development of Croatian military terminology throughout the 20th century, which was condemned on two occasions in 1918 and 1945 to damnatio memoriae. Concisely, the diachronic part of the thesis sought to encompass the broader and more representative range of Croatian lexicographic and terminographic achievements timeframe and dialect-wise, to excerpt the military terminology, demonstrate in scores of examples its development over the centuries and thus prove the deep interplay of Croatian military terminology with the development and fate of the Croatian language. The pivotal subject of the research is the contemporary Croatian military terminology, the time span of which was set from the beginning of the independence of the Republic of Croatia, that is 1990 – a dividing line that coincides with the fifth sub-period of the third standard language period of the Croatian language – up to the present day. Already, preliminary corpus studies have pointed to certain contentious spots in the terminology that then served as a starting point for formulating the starting hypotheses of this thesis. Linguistic-terminological analysis confirmed all the hypotheses of the research. By combining the methodological procedures of corpus linguistics, methods of term-formation and compliance with terminological principles, the first hypothesis was verified – Croatian military terminology is affected by the process of Anglo-Americanization at all linguistic levels. There are a number of examples of Croatian terms that are standard-wise problematic from the standpoint of uncritically relying on typical English structures. First of all, this refers to lexical, syntactic, semantic and metaphorical mirroring of English models, which often result in inappropriate equivalents from the perspective of compliance with the standard Croatian language. It has been noticed that certain English term-formation structures penetrate the syntactic system of the Croatian language to the extent that it is latently destabilized and redefined. Likewise, the hypothesis about the prominent effort to build contemporary Croatian military terminology with Croatian language material was confirmed. However, the Croatian (terminological) term-formation – as the most desirable term-formation method – is extremely underrepresented and dominated by latent linguistic borrowing (calques) and multiword term units. Despite the rich term-formation potentials of the Croatian language, English formation patterns often assume precedence, often on the pretext of their supposed precision and transparency. In the thesis, contemporary Croatian military terminology is split into two periods – precisely due to terminological prompts and insights. Namely, after the independence of Croatia, on the wave of the revival of the Croatian standard language, the Croatian military terminology was zealously sought to be established and organized. Indeed, in this context, it is necessary to emphasize the extra-linguistic specificity and symbolic-identity value immanent in military terms. It has been proven that Šulek’s vast terminological repertoire was the linchpin of future fundamental Croatian military terms, needless to say to the extent it proved to be adequate for contemporary terminological needs. It has been corpus and terminologically verified that today this very terminology is by far uniformly defined, systematic and standardized (ranks, units, names of branches, services, professions, command language, drill language). Moreover, the research sheds light on the role of a mixed expert working group – composed at the same time of linguists and military experts – which has been involved in the rehabilitation of the rich Croatian military-terminological heritage, but likewise in the challenging creation of a new terminology. The outcome was a terminologically well-regulated basic military terminology. On the other hand – relying first on US military doctrines and concepts, and with the admission of Croatia to NATO on those of Allies – the Croatian military terminology found itself confronted with a rich and elaborate terminology in English for which Croatian equivalents were to be established. Moreover, NATO’s terminology reservoir has been constantly growing, so it was illusory to expect that Croatian terminology would be able to keep up with the pace of its growth without first sorting-out, unifying and systematizing the terminology. However, much of the corpus has proven disputable from the standpoint of standard Croatian language acceptability by a number of criteria. First of all, this is pertinent to the acceptance of foreign or English terms in their original form in the absence of a Croatian term, and to numerous lexical, syntactic and semantic loans inappropriate from the standpoint of terminological principles and standard Croatian language. This is extensively exemplified by a multitude of such terms, further analyzed according to terminology principles. Finally, recommended Croatian equivalents are rendered to subject matter experts for expertise and selection. The research confirms the third hypothesis according to which the Croatian military terminology is insufficient, unsystematized and standard-wise disputable due to its persecuted tradition and impact of the English language. Subsequently, it requires interventions to comply with terminological principles. Given the lack of coordinated and combined action of subject matter experts, linguists and terminologists in the creation of contemporary terminology, the ad hoc, individual, authorial and dispersed approach has, for the most part, led to ununified and unsystematized terminology. This has primarily been manifested as saturation of terminological system with synonyms. Today, synonymy is one of the focal points of contention in Croatian military terminology, especially given the fact that synonymous solutions have not been attached their normative status. Straightforwardly, in many cases the establishing of the terminology was not approached as a construction of a terminology system, but as individual, isolated examples. It has been repeatedly emphasized throughout the thesis that the ideal of univocity is imperative in the military profession and that any other approach can have serious and far-reaching ramifications. In addition, many terminological gaps, periphrastic solutions, and solutions bordering on definition also contribute to the underdevelopment of the terminology. For many of them, terminology and standardology-wise more preferable solutions are rendered. Though the terminology was subject to an in-depth analysis of all the term-formation methods and the description of semantic relations, some of the issues were given due attention. Initially, the level of internationalization of the Croatian military terminology was determined – especially after joining NATO – and questioned why some Croatian terms did not took precedence but were overridden by internationalisms following their coexistence period. It has been noted that the terminology systematization is burdened by the enduring tension of the borrowed-Croatian relationship. In the light of the trend of increasing acceptance of internationalism, the reluctance about terminologization has been explored in detail. Thus, the ignorance of the dichotomy between terminological meaning and formation meaning is apparent – to rephrase it – a term has the meaning that the experts agrees it to have. Furthermore, the mystification of the Latin, Greek or English origin terms, which greatly hinders the creation of terminology with Croatian language resources, has been examined as well. Moreover, special attention was given to multi-word terms, especially bearing in mind that English structures and patterns are emulated most at this level of term-formation. Given the fact that multiword terms constitute today the most dominant subset of terms in general – same going for Croatian – they were closely studied to demonstrate the extent of the influence of English on the creation of contemporary Croatian military terminology. The extent to which such patterns of term-formation fit into the Croatian conceptual system, whether they provide the system with stability and whether or not they contribute to the terminology systematization, ultimately affecting the Croatian standard language whose terminology is its subsystem, was duly problematized. Ultimately, following the theoretical and methodological cornerstones of this thesis, concrete and practical recommendations for terminological systemization are put forward, at the same time seeking to reduce the gap between the functional requirements of the profession and the linguistic standard of the Croatian language. Paradigmatic models are rendered to catalyse future interventions in Croatian military terminology, to update existing general language and terminological dictionaries and to prompt the compiling of future ones. The results of the research are primarily intended for practical terminological projects, but above all to serve as a pioneering linguistic-terminological contribution and a long-awaited scientific exegesis of the origins and creation of the centuries-old terminology and its turbulent history.