Metaphors in Anatomical Terminology

The article is concerned with the problem of metaphorisation as the most important cognition mechanism that plays a significant role in forming the anatomical vocabulary of the Kazakh and Russian languages. Terminology is a part of the literary language, whose formation and development is inseparable from the history and culture of its people. The article puts forward and scientifically substantiates the thesis that anatomical terminology differs from other terminological subsystems of the national language. It typically utilises terms developed from vernacular names that have not been formed through the logical comprehension of some scientific concept, i.e. they are categorised with the help of the everyday consciousness of native speakers. The key part of anatomical terminology is represented by proto-terms regarded as full-fledged terms in general scientific terminology. The article aims to analyse anatomical terms-metaphors of the Kazakh and Russian languages. To attain this objective, the authors of the article have compared metaphorical models of the Kazakh and Russian anatomical vocabulary, revealed their standard features and differences. The study uses the method of constructing metaphorical models and submodels for structuring the source area since conceptual metaphors have mental mappings between conceptual areas of the source and goal. The study material comprises single-word and compound anatomical terms of metaphorical origin (fifty-eight Kazakh nominations and fifty Russian) extracted from various dictionaries. As a result, the authors have identified and described four basic metaphorical models common to both languages. Some of them relate to the sphere of intradiscourse interaction of concepts ("parts of human body and organs", "fauna"), while the others belong to the sphere of interdiscourse interaction ("flora", "containers, reservoirs"). The study concludes that the language objectification of cognitive metaphorisation mechanism is a secondary result of mental processes, and such language phenomena as metaphors form generalised cognitive metaphorical models that function in the minds of speakers