Analysis of the contextual environment of English military aviation terminology in professional texts

Solovyeva Alexandra Educator, the department of foreign languages, Syzran branch of the Military Educational and Scientific Center of the Air Force of the "Air Force Academy named after Professor N. E. Zhukovsky and Y. A. Gagarin  ul. marshala Zhukova 320- 66, Samarskaya oblast, Syzran, Russia sandraS91@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

English military aviation terminology is “a set of terms denoting concepts related to the design, conditions and features of the operation of military aircraft” ^[2].

The study of the texts in which this terminology functions has shown that they belong to the following genres:

- textbooks and teaching aids;

- technical instructions;

- catalogs of aircraft manufacturing companies' products;

- articles in professional journals;

- internet articles (sites dedicated to military aviation and designed for specialists, as well as sites whose readers are the general public).

Most of these genres (with the exception of online media articles with a wide range of readers) are designed for military aviation specialists. Textbooks, manuals, technical instructions and product catalogs are classified as professional texts (since they are closely related to the implementation of the professional functions of military pilots), articles in professional journals and online articles are journalistic. The focus of this article is on professional texts.

First of all, it should be noted that by contextual environment we mean ""the linguistic environment of a given language unit; conditions, features of the use of this element in speech", "...a meaningfully completed segment of written speech that allows you to establish the meaning of a word or phrase included in it" ^[1].

Contextual environment of terminology in technical instructions.

Next, we will proceed to the direct analysis of the contextual environment of the terms under study. Let's start with the technical instructions (instructions for helicopters CH-47, OH-58, AH-1, AH-1Z, CH-53, AH-64). The terms in them can be divided into 3 aggregates: the most frequent, the least frequent and occupying an intermediate position. The most frequent terminological units (totality 1) are system, controls, engine, helicopter, rotor, indicator, landing, torque, weight, airspeed, speed. The least frequent (set of 3) are: laser rangefinder/designator, autorotate, land as soon as possible,transponder, ditching, length, crosswind, tailwind, wing, clearance,stabilizer. The intermediate position (totality 2) is occupied by: hover, cruise, machine gun, gearbox, fuselage, altimeter, rocket, avionics, instrument flight, visual flight, transponder, airframe.

The analysis showed that the terms form phrases according to the following models:

1.noun+noun (landing gear, torque indicator, hover ceiling, attack helicopter, cruise flight, flight controls);

2.noun+noun+noun (fuel quantity indicator, tail rotor gearbox, engine compressor stall);

3. noun+preposition + noun (landing without delay, reaction of helicopter);

4.adjective+noun (autorotative landing, cyclic controls, barometric altimeter);

5.adjective+noun+noun (vertical velocity indicator, visual flight conditions, heavy machine gun);

6.noun+noun+noun+noun (tail rotor control system, transmission oil temperature indicator);

7. verb+noun (to execute a landing, to start engine, to reduce weight);

8. noun+ preposition+noun+noun (rate of climb indicator);

9.noun+abbreviation+noun (rotor RPM indicator);

10. adjective + adjective + noun (maximum gross weight);

11.abbreviation+noun (IFF transponder, APU generator);

12.noun+ conjunction+noun+noun (power and accessory gearbox);

13.adjective+noun+noun+noun (airborne target handover system).

The contextual environment of terms, therefore, is different, their ability to enter into syntagmatic relations is not the same and is directly proportional to the number of structural models. During the analysis of military aviation terminology in the technical instructions, a tendency is found, according to which more frequent terms have a greater syntagmatic potential, have a more diverse contextual environment compared to less frequent ones. So, for the term indicator, 7 models were identified, and for the term torque, which is less frequent - 5/ However, this pattern clearly manifests itself only if the terms are considered in 3 aggregates (aggregate 1, aggregate 2 and aggregate 3). So.aggregate 1 with a more diverse and extensive structure of phrases has a greater syntagmatic potential than aggregate 2. Aggregate 2, in turn, has a more diverse contextual environment and the ability to form phrases using more models than aggregate 3. Aggregate 1 has an average of 5 models, aggregate 2 has 2 models, and aggregate 3 has an average of the totality of 3 - less than 1 model. If we consider the terms within each set, we can notice the following:

-in some cases, the statement about the direct dependence of the syntagmatic potential, the diversity of the contextual environment of the term on its frequency is true (for example, the term avionics, for which 2 models are allocated, is more frequent than the term endurance, which has 1 model);

- at the same time, there are examples that refute this pattern: despite the fact that the term fuselage is less frequent than the term hover, its syntagmatic potential is higher. For the term fuselage, 3 models were allocated, and for the term hover - 2, the term drag has a greater frequency of use compared to the term range, however, 2 models were allocated for it, while for range - 4.

Thus, the syntagmatic potential, vastness and diversity in the structure of phrases is not always determined by the frequency of the terms that make up their core. The analysis of the contextual environment of military aviation terminology in the technical instructions showed that for each term it is possible to identify the most and least productive structural models, as well as to compile a list of the most common phrases. So, for the term torque, the most productive models are “noun+noun” and “adjective+noun”; the least productive are “noun+noun +noun+noun" and “adjective+noun+noun".The most frequent phrases are: mast torque, engine torque, minimum torque, maximum torque, actual mast torque, power turbine output torque.

The “adjective+noun” model turned out to be the most productive for the term airspeed, and the ”noun+noun” model was the least productive. The most frequent phrases are: indicated airspeed, true airspeed, maximum airspeed, calibrated airspeed, knots indicated airspeed, autorotational airspeed. The productivity of a particular model has the ability to change from term to term. Thus, the “adjective + noun +noun” model is one of the most productive for the terms speed, flight instruments, landing and one of the least productive for the terms rotor, torque, helicopter, controls, indicator.

The analysis also showed that there are a number of models whose productivity is low in relation to all terms. We are talking about some three- and four-component models: “noun+preposition+noun" (reaction of helicopter), “noun+abbreviation+ noun" (rotor RPM indicator), “noun+preposition+noun+noun" (rocket to skid clearance), “noun+conjunction+noun+noun" (power and accessory gearbox).

Thus, the terms in the technical instructions form two-, three-, four-component phrases with adjectives, nouns, conjunctions, prepositions, abbreviations. Two- and three-component structures dominate. If we talk about the nature of these phrases, then for the most part they are phrases- terms (free phrases in the texts of instructions are extremely rare).Terminological phrases (phrases-terms) include: rotor speed, autorotational rotor speed, power turbine speed, climb speed, main rotor, tail rotor, tail rotor driveshaft, rotor head, rotor hub, rotor disk,main rotor driveshaft, flight control system, fuel system, hydraulic system, power train system, landing gear system, FADEC system, antitorque control system, collective control system, stability and control augmentation system, inertial navigation system, cyclic control stick, drivetrain system, gross weight, empty weight, basic weight, maximum gross weight, etc.

Contextual environment of terminology in the catalogs of avistroenie products.

Next, let's look at the contextual environment of terms in the catalogs of aircraft manufacturing companies. We have analyzed the catalogs of such giant aircraft companies as McDonnell Douglas, Bell, Boeing and Sikorsky.

The most frequent terms in them are: system, helicopter, range,engine, control, rotor, speed, cockpit, weight, aircraft.

The least frequent ones are: height, autopilot, length, instrument flight rules, altitude, turbine, skid, sonar, rotorcraft, payload, fenestron, transponder, torque, torpedo, propulsion,airspeed, transmitter, pitch, cannon, auxiliary power unit, width, tachometer, undercarriage, torquemeter, sonobuoy. The intermediate position is occupied by: avionics, display, gun, radar, rocket, landing, laser, ceiling, transmission, gearbox, endurance, missile, hover, controls, blade, sling, airframe, tiltrotor, refuelling, fuselage.

The analysis of catalog texts showed that the terms form combinations according to the following models:

1.noun+noun+noun (skid landing gear, fly-by-wire flight controls, tail rotor gearbox, instrument landing system);

2 noun+noun+noun+noun (traffic collision avoidance system, missile approach warning system);

3.noun+noun+ noun+noun +noun (helicopter terrain awareness warning system);

4.noun+ conjunction+noun+noun+ noun (health and usage monitoring system);

5.adjective +noun+noun (tactical transport helicopter, composite rotor hub, main landing gear, active dipping sonar)

6.noun+noun (attack helicopter, combat range, flight controls, turboshaft engine, tail rotor, cruise speed, density altitude);

7.adjective +noun (utility helicopter, main rotor, free turbine, true airspeed, vertical lift)

8. adjective + adjective + noun (maximum gross weight, naval utility helicopter);

9. noun+ preposition+ noun (endurance without reserve, capability of helicopter);

10.noun+adjective+noun (knots indicated airspeed).

Different terms are characterized by a different number of models, that is, their ability to enter into syntagmatic relations (syntagmatic potential) is not the same. We can say that it is directly proportional to the number of syntactic models. During the analysis of military aviation terminology in the catalogs, the trend highlighted earlier, when analyzing the terms of technical instructions, is clearly traced. According to it, more frequent terms have a greater syntagmatic potential compared to less frequent ones. So, the term system is characterized by 7 models, and for the terms cockpit and weight, which are less frequent-4. However, this trend is ambiguous. It is valid if we consider terms in groups, in three aggregates: a set of the most frequent (set of 1 or high-frequency), a set of terms occupying an intermediate position (set of 2 or mid-frequent) and a set of the least frequent terms (set of 3 or low-frequency). Thus, aggregate 1 with a more extensive and diverse contextual environment has a greater syntagmatic potential than aggregate 2. Aggregate 2, in turn, has the ability to form phrases for more models than aggregate 3. Calculating the average number of models per each aggregate gave the following result: aggregate 1 - 4 models, aggregate 2 - 3 models, a set of 3 - 1 model. At the same time, within each set of terms, the above trend is not so unambiguous. In some cases, its effect is confirmed. For example, the term engine, for which 4 models are allocated, is more frequent compared to the term speed, which has 3 models. At the same time, a number of terms refute this pattern (we traced a similar situation when analyzing the terms of technical instructions). Despite the fact that the term rocket is less frequent than the term avionics, its syntagmatic potential is much higher. For the term rocket, 4 models were allocated, while for the term avionics, only 1 term radar has a greater frequency of use compared to the term blade, however, 2 models were allocated for it, and for the term blade - 4 Thus, the syntagmatic potential, vastness and diversity in the structure of phrases do not always depend on the frequency the terms that make up their core.

The analysis of the contextual environment of military aviation terminology in the catalogs showed that for each term it is possible to identify the most and least productive structural models, as well as to compile a list of the most common phrases. So, for the term weight, the most productive models are: “adjective+adjective+noun” and “adjective+noun”; the least productive model was “adjective+noun+noun". The most frequent phrases are: maximum gross weight, alternate gross weight, increased gross weight, maximum takeoff weight, empty weight, maximum weight. The model “adjective+noun” has become the most productive for the term aircraft; the least productive models are: “noun+noun”, “adjective+noun+noun”, “noun+preposition+noun". The most frequent phrases are: multirole aircraft, multimission aircraft, fixed-wing aircraft, tiltrotor aircraft, tactical transport aircraft. The productivity of a particular structural model can vary from term to term. Thus, the adjective+noun model is one of the most productive for the terms helicopter, range, rocket, missile, endurance, avionics, height, length, visibility, rotorcraft and one of the least productive for the terms rotor, transmission, airframe, tiltrotor, airspeed.

The analysis also showed that there are a number of models whose productivity is extremely low in relation to all terms. We are talking about five-component models: “noun+noun+noun+noun+ noun" (helicopter terrain awareness warning system) and “noun+conjunction+noun+noun+noun" (health and usage monitoring system).

Thus, the terms in the catalogs of military aircraft products form two-, three-, four- and five-component phrases with adjectives, nouns, conjunctions and prepositions. Two- and three-component structural models dominate. If we talk about the nature of these phrases, they are both free and terminological phrases. The latter make up the majority. These include:maximum gross weight, empty weight, maximum takeoff weight, gross weight, multirole aircraft, tactical transport aircraft, fixed-wing aircraft, multimission aircraft, tiltrotor aircraft, primary flight display, flight navigation display, multifunction display, landing gear, main landing gear, skid landing gear, skid-type landing gear, gun, machine gun, weather radar, surveillance radar, radar warning receiver, useful length, maximum length, density altitude, turbine engine, free turbine, tail skid,radar altimeter, vertical lift, active dipping sonar, etc.

Contextual environment of terminology in textbooks and teaching aids.

Now let's move on to the terminology of textbooks and teaching aids. Like the terms of technical instructions and product catalogs, the terms of textbooks and manuals on frequency can be combined into three sets: the most frequent (rotor, helicopter, control, lift, engine, aircraft, landing, blade, airspeed, altitude, weight, hover, pitch, thrust), the least frequent (vortex ring state, flapping, rotorcraft, lead and lag, autopilot, feathering, freewheeling unit, payload, twist grip, useful load) and occupying an intermediate position (torque, disk area, disk loading, speed, drag, autorotation, angle of attack, angle of incident, airfoil, mast, turbine).

The analysis showed that the terms form phrases according to the following models:

1.noun+ noun (density altitude, blade span, pitch

angle, feathering axis, mast bumping);

2. verb+noun (to check the altimeter, to tailor airfoil, to transition the rotor);

3. noun+ preposition+ noun (curvature of airfoil, dissymmetry of lift);

4.verb+noun+noun (to adjust antitorque pedals, to control pitch angle, to eliminate torque effect);

5.noun+noun+ noun (density altitude chart, tail rotor disk);

6.adjective+noun (true altitude, cyclic feathering, free turbine);

7. adjective+noun + noun (high density altitude, collective pitch control);

8. adjective+noun+ preposition + noun (aerodynamic terms of airfoil);

9.noun + abbreviation (rotor rpm);

10. verb+ adjective +noun (to avoid dynamic rollover, to compensate useful load);

11.abbreviation+noun (VRS condition);

12. noun + preposition + abbreviation (development of VRS, change in AOA);

13.verb + reduction (to reduce AOA);

14.adjective + abbreviation (negative AOA);

15.numeral+noun+noun (two axis autoplot);

16.preposition+noun+noun+noun (in ground effect hover);

17. adjective+ adjective+noun (maximum allowable weight, lateral cyclic thrust);

18. adjective+ adjective + adjective +noun (internal maximum gross weight);

19.noun+preposition+noun+noun+noun (loss of tail rotor effectiveness);

20. noun+preposition+adjective+adjective+ noun ельное (loss of effective translational lift).

The contextual environment of the terms is thus different. Their ability to enter into syntagmatic relations is not the same and is directly proportional to the number of structural and syntactic models. During the analysis of military aviation terminology in textbooks and manuals (as well as in instructions and catalogs), there is a tendency according to which more frequent terms have greater syntagmatic potential, have a more diverse contextual environment compared to less frequent ones. So, 3 models were allocated for the term torque, and 1 for the less frequent term disk area. This pattern clearly manifests itself only if the terms are considered in 3 aggregates (aggregate 1, aggregate 2 and aggregate 3). Thus, set 1 with a more diverse and extensive structure of phrases has a greater syntagmatic potential than set 2. Set 2, in turn, has a more diverse contextual environment and the ability to form phrases for more models than set 3. On average, set 1 has 6 models, set 2 has 4 models, and for a set of 3 - 2 models.If we consider the terms within each set, the direct relationship between syntagmatic potential, contextual environment and frequency is no longer so unambiguous. For example, the term feathering is less frequent than the term autopilot, but its syntagmatic potential is higher. For the term feathering, 3 models were allocated, and for the term autopilot - 2, the term mast has a greater frequency of use compared to the term skid, but only 1 model is allocated for it, while for the term skid- 3, thus, syntagmatic potential, vastness and diversity in the structure of phrases are not always it is determined by the frequency of the terms that make up their core.

The analysis of the contextual environment of military aviation terms in textbooks and textbooks has shown that for each term it is possible to identify the most and least productive structural models, as well as to compile a list of the most frequent phrases. So, for the term blade, the “noun+noun” and “noun+noun+noun” models are the most productive, and the “verb+noun+noun” model turned out to be the least productive. The most frequent phrases are: blade flap, blade damper, blade root, blade span, retreating blade tip, blade stall condition, to cause a blade stall. The most productive models for the term yaw are “noun+noun” and “adjective+noun", and the least productive are “verb+noun" and “noun+preposition+noun". The most frequent phrases are: yaw deviation, yaw rate, excessive yaw, rapid yaw, to produce yaw, direction of yaw. The productivity of structural and syntactic models has the ability to change from term to term. The noun+noun model is one of the most productive for the terms blade, feathering, flapping, drag, hover skid, torque, yaw, engine and one of the least productive for the terms thrust, turbine, lift, airspeed.The analysis also revealed a number of models with low productivity in relation to all terms. We are talking about some two-, three-, four- and five-component models:"noun + abbreviation" (rotor rpm);"abbreviation+noun" (VRS condition); "verb+abbreviation" (to reduce AOA); "adjective+abbreviation" (negative AOA); "numeral+noun+noun" (two axis autoplot); "adjective+adjective+adjective+noun" (internal maximum gross weight); "noun+preposition+noun+noun+noun" (loss of tail rotor effectiveness); "noun+preposition+adjective+adjective+noun" (loss of effective translational lift).

Thus, it should be noted that the terms in textbooks and textbooks form two-, three-, four-, - and five-component phrases with subjunctives, nouns, prepositions, numerals, verbs, abbreviations. Two- and three-component structures occupy a dominant position. If we talk about the nature of phrases, then among them we can distinguish both free and terminological. Free phrases are extremely rare.Terminological phrases (phrases-terms) include:density altitude, pressure altitude, true altitude, advancing blade, blade coning, blade damper, blade flap, blade grip, blade loading, blade root, blade span, blade stall, retreating blade, blade twist, aircraft pitch, pitch control, collective pitch control, cyclic pitch control, pitch angle, symmetrical airfoil, nonsymmetric airfoil, antitorque rotor, articulated rotor, coaxial rotor, dual rotor, rigid rotor, rotor force, semirigid rotor, tail rotor, main rotor, intermeshing rotor, loss of tail rotor effectiveness, rotor head, rotor hub, cyclic feathering, collective feathering, feathering axis, flapping hinge, delta flapping hinge, free turbine, shaft turbine, dissymmetry of lift, translational lift, vertical lift, symmetry of lift, etc.

Thus, after analyzing the contextual environment of English military aviation terminology in professional texts, we came to a number of conclusions. Firstly, the contextual environment of terms in professional texts differs. Their syntagmatic potential is also different. The ability of terms to form word combinations, on the one hand, does not depend on their frequency, and on the other, it depends if we consider them as aggregates. Secondly, calculations have shown that the set of the most frequent terms always has more structural and syntactic models on average than the set of terms occupying an intermediate position. And for a set of the least frequent models, fewer models are always allocated than for a set of those occupying an intermediate position. Thirdly, in professional texts, terms form both free and terminological phrases. The latter make up the majority. Terms-phrases in professional texts are, as a rule, two- or three-component combinations with adjectives and nouns.