THE SUGGESTIONS FOR UKRAINIAN SYNONYMS SPELLING OF LATINIZED MINERALS NAMES
Keywords:
mineralogy, nomenclature of minerals, terminology, name of the mineral, Cyril-lic synonyms, transcription, transliteration.Abstract
The article proposes the solution of three problems of minerals nomenclature – the method of creation of Cyrillic synonyms, the spelling of names of chemically similar species and the unifi-cation of changeable prefixes named after chemical element in the names of minerals. The main requirement for minerals nomenclature is to ensure the uniqueness of mineral type identification by means of the name. Nomenclature should have the simplest structure, agree with minerals classification and be clear for all professionals. Current minerals nomenclature is not rational because mineral names do not contain information on the main attributes of the mi-neral type – its chemical composition and crystals structure. In contract to biology and chemistry where nomenclatures are just improving, mineralogy is still in the process of search. The names given to minerals for the past semi-centenary are so diversified that is seems that authors are competing in finding the most complicated name. The vast majority of them are personifies names – in honour of mineralogists, minerals collectors and dealers, the owners and managers of mines. The primary goal of these names is to make a place for these people in the historic books. The name of the mineral is approved by the international organization. It is spelled with the letters of the extended Latin alphabet. Therefore, it is necessary to write down either the pronun-ciation of the name or its spelling with the letters of the Ukrainian alphabet. Surnames and geo-graphical names are distorted when pronounced in different languages. Therefore, only small amount of mineral names can point at their occurrence or inform the memorial data to the audi-ence. That is why the authors of the article propose to move away from the prevailing method of recording of pronunciation as in most cases this approach does not perform its main task – to preserve the recognition of the source of the name. Even discoverers do not recognize the name with the Ukrainian suffix applied. The method of transliteration seems to be simpler, especially when the borrowed language is ignored and the mineral name is perceived as the set of Latin let-ters. To facilitate the work on the creation of Cyrillic synonyms and reduce the number of erro-neous variants, the authors propose to spell the orthography of Latinized names of minerals in fu-ture with the letters of the Ukrainian alphabet using the passport standard of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. Trivial names predominate in the modern international nomenclature of minerals. However, positive changes occur which make it more rational, similar to rational nomenclature for organic chemical compounds. The trivial name of the existing species is used more and more often as the parent word for generating a new name, chemically similar species, adding it to the prefix with the name of replaced element. The mineral name expands considerably when the modifiable pre-fix is applied (the use of three–four prefixes is admissible). That is why, the authors propose to add a modifying prefix using hyphen in the Ukrainian names of minerals in all cases when chemical and structural analogues exist. And vice versa – if the similarity between species is only in pronunciation and the types are not interrelated either structurally or chemically – it is pro-posed to spell the term in one word. It will help to distinguish the affiliation of types to different groups and will facilitate the pronunciation of too long mineral names. It is also proposed to unify the form of the prefix in the names of chemically modified ana-logues, using only the systematized names of chemical elements recommended by the State stan-dard of Ukraine. It is shown that Schaller’s modifier, which should define cations with smaller and bigger charge, is consistently used in current classification only for the names of minerals which contain Fe (ferro-, ferri-). Valent state of the other elements is reflected in modifiable pre-fixes only for some minerals. When Ukrainian synonyms are created, automatic unification of prefixes is possible only for the names of cations of constant valence. It is proposed to write them down with the joining vowel “o” (magnesio-, fluoro-) in all cases. Spelling of prefixes formed af-ter cations of modified valence requires tailored approach and data of mineral’s chemical compo-sition. Unification does not relate to cases when the name of the element is the part of trivial name created by using the chemical composition of the mineral.
References
Булах Г. А. Химические, структурные и химико-структурные разновидности минералов, и еще раз о путях рационализации минералогической номенклатуры / Г. А. Булах // Зап. Рос. минерал. об-ва. – 2008. – Ч. 137, № 31. – С. 101–103.
Кривовичев В. Г. Минералогический словарь / В. Г. Кривовичев. – СПб. : Изд-во С.-Петерб. ун-та, 2008. – 556 с.
Кульчицька Г. Мінералогія України в контексті мінералогії світу / Г. Кульчицька, В. Павлишин // Мінерал. зб. – 2014. – № 64, вип. 1. – С. 25–32.
Кульчицька Г. О. Про утворення українських назв мінералів / Г. О. Кульчицька, Д. С. Черниш // Записки Укр. мінерал. т-ва. – 2015. – Т. 12. – С. 136–147.
Кульчицька Г. О. Така складна наука мінералогія / Г. О. Кульчицька, В. І. Павлишин, Д. С. Черниш // Записки Укр. мінерал. т-ва. – 2016. – Т. 13. – С. 5–13.
Лазаренко Є. К. Мінералогічний словник / Є. К. Лазаренко, О. М. Винар. – К. : Наук. думка, 1975. – 773 с.
Никель Э. Порядок рассмотрения материалов, представленных в Комиссию по новым минералам и названиям минералов при Международной минералогической ассоциации, и некоторые вопросы минералогической номенклатуры / Эрнест Никель, Джозеф Мандарино // Минерал. журн. – 1989. – Т. 11, № 1. – С. 51–86.
Основные понятия минералогии : [сб. науч. трудов] / [отв. ред. Е. К. Лазаренко]. – Киев : Наук. думка, 1978. – 138 с.
Павлишин В. І. Вступ до мінералогії / В. І. Павлишин. – К. : Вид-во ДГЦУ, 1997. – 40 с.
Першочергові завдання і перспективи регіональної мінералогії України / Г. О. Кульчицька, В. І. Павлишин, Д. С. Черниш, І. М. Герасимець // Мінерал. журн. – 2016. – Т. 38, № 3. – С. 3–8.
Поваренных А. С. Кристаллохимия минеральных видов / А. С. Поваренных. – Киев : Наук. думка, 1966. – 547 с.
Пономаренко О. М. Упорядкування українських назв мінералів у зв’язку з підготовкою Мінералогічної енциклопедії України / О. М. Пономаренко, Г. О. Кульчицька, Д. С. Черниш // Мінерал. журн. – 2015. – Т. 37, № 3. – С. 3–14.
Пономаренко О. М. Словник українських назв мінералів в інформаційному просторі / О. М. Пономаренко, Г. О. Кульчицька, Д. С. Черниш // Мінерал. журн. – 2017. – Т. 39, № 1. – С. 3–10.
Походження і формування мінералогічної термінології / Р. Вовченко, О. Матковський, Л. Бохорська, О. Полубічко // Мінерал. зб. – 2002. – № 52, вип. 2. – С. 14–23.
Флейшер М. Словарь минеральных видов / М. Флейшер. – М. : Мир, 1990. – 206 с.
Bayliss P. The use of chemical-element adjectival modifiers in minerals nomenclature / P. Bayliss, H. D. Kaesz, E. H. Nickel // Canadian Mineralogist. – 2005. – Vol. 43. – P. 1429–1433.
Burke E. A. J. A mass discreditation of GQN minerals / E. A. J. Burke // Canadian Mineralogist. – 2006. – Vol. 44. – P. 1557–1560.
Burke E. A. J. Tidying up mineral names: an IMA-CNMNC scheme for suffixes, hyphens and diacritical marks / E. A. J. Burke // Mineralogical Record. – 2008. – Vol. 39, N 2. – P. 131–135.
CNMNC guidelines for the use of suffixes and prefixes in mineral nomenclature, and for the preservation of historical names / F. Hatert, S. J. Mills, M. Pasero, P. A. Williams // Eur. J. Mineral. – 2013. – Vоl. 25. – Р. 113–115.
Nickel E. H. The IMA Commission on new minerals and mineral names: Procedures and guidelines on mineral nomenclature / E. H. Nickel, J. D. Grice // Canadian Mineralogist. – 1998. – Vol. 36. – Р. 3–16.
