论文部分内容阅读
目前在嗓音(注1)学中,一些学科定义有名实不符(如生理声学),专业术语有同名不同义、同义不同名(如声区与模式,掩盖、关闭与掩蔽)的情况,甚至有的译名与术语之意相距甚远,令人费解.本作者认为:对这些术语需经讨论而加以规范(有些“标准”术语及其定义似应进一步修定);尤其是对术语的内涵应要求能把握住概念的本质内容,反映学术的进展;外延要能概全,且符合逻辑;译名也应尽可能地提供内涵信息;有一些词(包括由其构成的词组)已习惯广为使用而又不太因词害义的(例如“声”
At present, there are some definitions of scientific discourse (such as physiological acoustics) in some aspects of vocals (v. 1), jargon of synonymous dissent, synonyms of different names (such as vocalization and modalities, cover up, closure and masking), and even Some of the translation of the term meaning far apart, puzzling .This author believes that: these terms need to be discussed and regulated (some “standard” terms and their definitions should be further revised); especially for the meaning of terms Should be able to grasp the essence of the concept on demand and reflect the progress of the academic; the epitaxy should be comprehensive and logical; the translation should also provide connotation information as much as possible; some words (including the phrases formed by them) have become widely used Use less harmless than words (such as “sound”