- 㳿

| Staff | Address | Structure | Conference | Herald | Archive | Announcement |


of L'viv Polytechnic National University

"Problems of Ukrainian Terminology"


Mentynska I., Nakonechna H. Verbal adjectives in computer terminology //  Website of TC STTS: Herald of L'viv Polynechnic National University "Problems of Ukrainian Terminology". 2017. # 869.


Iryna Mentynska

Halyna Nakonechna

L'viv Polytechnic National University


Verbal adjectives in computer terminology


Mentynska I. B., Nakonechna H. V., 2017


The article deals with the actual problem of Ukrainian terminological science peculiarities of verbal adjectives functioning on the material of modern computer terminology (MCT). The structure and ways of creating the verbal adjectives denoting active and passive ability of object are examined, i.e. its ability to take part in a process (active ability), to undergo an action (passive ability) or the assignment to perform an action. The relevance of research consists in the need of normalization of adjective terms indicating the names of the process features as well as and their lexicographical fixation.

Keywords: Ukrainian language, modern computer terminology, derivational model, adjective terms, verbal adjectives, process features, adjectival suffixes, infinitive stem.


The article aims to analyze and describe the functioning of verbal adjectives in modern computer terminology (MCT), to find out the difficulties of their formation and to try offering the best models of adjective derivatives in MCT. The topicality of the research consists in the need of accurate morphemic, semantic, conceptual and lexicographical dealing with the adjective terms, indicating the names of the process characteristics.

In MCT, we distinguish the following groups of verbal adjectives:

1)    indicating the ability to be subject to a certain action:

  )  -() (, , , , , , ). Adjectives and participles differ semantically in MCT as well: the one that you can connect, integrate, build in (indicates a constant passive characteristic), the one that is already connected, built in (indicates the characteristic of the action over a period of time). Participles, pointing out the characteristic of the action, denote the attribute acquired as a result of the action performed on the object. Adjectives indicate a constant attribute of the object. We consider that for the description of the process characteristics capable of being exposed to the action, it is appropriate to use verbal adjectives with the suffixes -(), -().

  b)  -(), -(). Verbal adjectives formed by means of these suffixes from the stem of the infinitive of perfective aspect, denote the ability of an object to be exposed to the action (to perform a passive action) ( ; , ), as well as -() ( ).

2)   indicating the ability to be the subject of the corresponding action:

  )  -() (, , , , , , , , ) and also -() (, , ). Such adjectives clearly show the ability to be the subject of action, they are mainly used to denote the names of technical devices ( ). Recently, in lexicographical sources of MCT, verbal adjectives with the suffix -() displace intensively the active present participles, which are not typical of Ukrainian language ( , , , , );

  b)  some verbal adjectives with the suffix -(), formed from the imperfective aspect verbs, are able to indicate the characteristic of the subject of the action rather than purpose (). It is emphasized that exclusion of the adjectives with the suffix --(--) has caused the inability to distinguish between the adjectives denoting active ability (, , , ) and those denoting purpose (, , , ) as well as their substitution with participles (, ).

Conclusion: 1) the problem of  verbal forming of adjectives is a topical issue for MCT; 2) the productivity of derivational models and appropriate formants for creating verbal adjectives is not the same in MCT; 3) the most productive suffixes are -(), -(), -(); affixes -(), -(), -(), -() have less derivational activity; and morphemes -(), -(), -() remain in the derivational reserve of MCT.


1. Zasady i pravyla rozroblennia standartiv na terminy ta vyznachennia poniat. DSTU 3966-2000. K.: Derzhstandart Ukrainy, 2000. 32s. 2. Kocherha O. Problema prykmetnyka v naukovii terminolohii / Olha Kocherha // Visnyk Nats. un-tu Lvivska politekhnika. Seriia Problemy ukrainskoi terminolohii. 2002. 453. S 224227.3. Kocherha O. Protsesovi prykmetnyky v naukovii movi / Olha Kocherha, Volodymyr Piletskyi // Visnyk Nats. un-tu Lvivska politekhnika. Seriia Problemy ukrainskoi terminolohii 2002. 676. S. 2326. 4. Mishchenko N. Formuvannia viddiieslivnykh terminiv na prykladi prohramnoi inzhenerii/ N. Mishchenko / Zb. nauk prats uchasnykiv KhI Mizhnarodnoi nauk. konferentsii. ClovoSvit 2010. Lviv. Vyd-vo Lvivska politekhnika, 2010. S. 19 25. 5. Morhuniuk V. Pro deiaki vymohy do terminiv, vstanovleni DSTU 3966-2000 / Vytal Morhuniuk // Visnyk Nats. un-tu Lvivska politekhnika. Seriia Problemy ukrainskoi terminolohii. 2002. 453. S. 194202. 6. Piletskyi V. Nazvy opredmetnenykh dii u naukovo-tekhnichnii terminolohii / V. Piletskyi // Visnyk: Problemy ukrainskoi terminolohii. Lviv: Natsionalnyi universytet Lvivska politekhnika, 453. 2002. 7. Rozhankivskyi R. Zvedennia pravyl unormuvannia ukrainskoi fakhovoi movy / Roman Rozhankivskyi // Visnyk Nats. un-tu Lvivka politekhnika. Seriia Problemy ukrainskoi terminolohii. 2002. 453. S. 203209. 8. Syniavskyi O. Normy  ukrainskoi literaturnoi movy. /Oleksa Syniavskyi // Lviv : Ukrainske vydavnytstvo, 1941. S. 130-136. 9. Slovnyk ukrainskykh morfem /L.M. Poliuha// Lviv: Svit, 2001. 448 s. 10. Taranenko O. Aktualizovani modeli v systemi slovotvorennia suchasnoi ukrainskoi movy (kinets KhKh pochatku KhKhI st.): Monohrafiia/ O. O. Taranenko. K: Vydavnychyi dim Dmytra Burato, 2015. S. 168..



    - 㳿