TYPOLOGICAL AND DOMAIN-BASED CLASSIFICATION OF NEW TERMS IN THE KAZAKH LANGUAGE

Aida Aubakirova

2026

Full text Open access: Hybrid Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.53360/3080-3861-2026-3(7)-9
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This article examines the typological and domain-based systematisation of new terms that have emerged in Kazakh during the period of independence. The study aims to compare classification models proposed in Kazakh neology and terminology studies, develop an integrated model for describing new terms, and demonstrate the distribution of domain-specific terminology in actual usage through quantitative data. The research draws on dictionary material comprising 4,120 new designations and usages collected from the Kazakh press during the independence period, of which 1,336 items were selected as domain-specific terms. Descriptive, comparative and structural-semantic methods were combined with content analysis and quantitative analysis. A comparison of the classification criteria employed by S.M. Isaev, R. Syzdyk, Sh. Kurmanbayuly, T.V. Popova and Zh.O. Sagyndykova identified three interconnected levels at which new terms can usefully be examined: source of formation and etymological composition; structural and word-formation pattern; and semantic-functional and domain status. Corpus analysis showed that domain-specific terms account for 32.4% of all new designations. The highest concentrations were found in pedagogy, medicine, philosophy and political science, ecology, mechanical engineering, standardisation, and information-related and technical fields. The findings demonstrate that new terms cannot be adequately described solely in terms of word-formation processes: their structural type, domain-specific function and degree of standardisation must be considered together.