Structural and Semantic Characteristics of the Names and Descriptions of Dishes in German Restaurant Discourse

About the authors:

Nadezhda G. Kantysheva, Cand. Sci. (Philol.), Associate Professor at the German Philology Department, University of Tyumen, n.g.kantysheva@utmn.ru; ORCID: 0000-0002-1629-4205
Inna V. Solovyova, Cand. Sci. (Philol.), Associate Professor, Department of German Philology, University of Tyumen; i.v.solovyova@utmn.ru; ORCID: 0000-0002-2128-3287

Abstract:

This article is devoted to a comprehensive study of the structural and semantic features of dish names and their descriptions in German in the field of restaurant discourse. The study employs cognitive discourse analysis, elements of comparative and contextological approaches, taking into account linguocultural parameters.

The relevance of the comprehensive study of the names of dishes in restaurant discourse is due to an increased interest in the parameterization of lexical units in different types of institutional discourse. The scientific novelty of this work lies in the fact that for the first time, within the framework of a restaurant menu, not only the nomination of a dish is considered, but also the structural and semantic characteristics of its description are analysed.

An attempt is made to analyse a connection between the nominations of dishes and their description in the restaurant menu, as well as to determine the semantic dominants of the genre under study. It is concluded that the text of the menu as a whole presents a combination of the language for special purposes and the language of advertising. In interaction with extralinguistic factors, the nominations of dishes and their descriptions not only document the culture of food in society, but also reflect the ethnocultural picture of the world.

Based on the analysis of the menu texts, it is established that structurally the names of dishes are complex words or phrases, built mainly according to the attributive model.

The description of dishes performs the function of verbalizing the sensations of taste and clarifying the method of preparing dishes, characterizing the quality of dishes, their ingredients, and the intensity of taste. Evaluative parameters in descriptions are expressed at the lexical, grammatical, syntactic and stylistic levels.

References:

1. Golovnitskaya N. P. 2007. “The linguocultural space of the German-speaking gluttonic discourse”. Changing Communication in a Changing World: a Collection of Scientific Articles Based on the Materials of the International Conference Dedicated to the 15^th Anniversary of the Volgograd Academy of Public Administration, pp. 315-322. [In Russian]

2. Gradaleva E. A. 2015. “Realization of culturally significant images in the onomastic space of the English language”. Universum: Philology and Art History, no. 5 (18). Accessed on 3 March 2021. https://7universum.com/ru/philology/archive/item/2142 [In Russian]

3. Ermakova L. R. 2011. “Gluttonic pragmatonyms and national character (on the material of Russian and English culture)”. Dr. Sci. (Philol.) diss. Belgorod. 236 p. [In Russian]

4. Ivin A. A. 2001. Descriptions, ratings and descriptive-evaluative statements. Moscow: Russian Libmonster (LIBMONSTER.RU). Accessed on 28 March 2021. https://libmonster.ru/m/articles/view/ОПИСАНИЯ-ОЦЕНКИ-И-ОПИСАТЕЛЬНО-ОЦЕНОЧНЫЕ-ВЫСКАЗЫВАНИЯ. [In Russian]

5. Kapkan M. V. 2010. “The phenomenon of gastronomic culture: specificity of forms of representation (on the example of Russia in the 19^th-20^th centuries)”. Dr. Sci. (Cult.) diss. Ekaterinburg. 173 p. [In Russian]

6. Makarova O. V. 2007. “The linguistic-cognitive aspect of utterances representing the frame of taste in modern Russian”. Cand. Sci. (Philol). diss. abstract. Barnaul. 21 p. [In Russian]

7. Olyanich A. V. 2015. “Gastronomic discourse”. Discourse-Pi, no. 2. Accessed on 27 March 2021. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/gastronomicheskiy-diskurs. [In Russian]

8. Ochirova D. P. 2003. “The names of meat food among the Buryats and Mongols”. Vestnik Buryatskogo Universiteta. Seriya Filologiya, vol. 7, pp. 83-90. [In Russian]

9. Pavlova E. B. 2017. “Genre and discursive characteristics of British restaurant internet discourse”. Scientific Dialogue, no. 8. Accessed on 11 February 2021. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/zhanrovo-diskursivnye-harakteristiki-britanskogo-restorannogo-inte.... [In Russian]

10. Tsentner M. S. 2016. “Gastronomic Russisms in German. Lexical composition. Semantic analogies”. Philological Sciences. Questions of Theory and Practice, no. 5 (59): in 3 vols. Vol. 1, pp. 159-163. Accessed on 11 February 2021. www.gramota.net/materials/2/2016/5-1/47.html. [In Russian]

11. Faivre C. 2012. “Onomastique de l’art culinaire en France: Thèse de doctorat en Sciences du Langage”. Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense. 470 p.

12. Hielscher M. 2003. “Sprachrezeption und emotionale Bewertung”. Psycholinguistik: Ein internationales Handbuch. Bearbeitet von Rickheit G., Herrmann T., Deutsch W. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. S. 677-707.

13. Kałasznik M., Szczęk J. 2012. “Wie macht man einen Namen in der Kochkunst? — Zur Analyse der Nominationsprozesse im Kulinarischen (am Beispiel der deutschen Bezeichnungen für Eisdesserts)”. Zbornik za Jezike i Književnosti Filozofskog Fakulteta u Novom Sadu. S. 139-156.

14. Kaufhoffer M. 1992. “Sprachliche Klassifikation und Analyse von Nominalkomposita in Speisenbezeichnungen anhand informatischer und statistischer Methoden”. Datenanalyse, Klassifikation und Informationsverarbeitung. Methoden und Anwendungen in Verschiedenen Fachgebieten. Bearbeitet von Goebel H., Schader M. Heidelberg: Physica. S. 37-45.

15. Nielsen M. 2004. “Die Speisekarte als fachsprachliches Untersuchungs- und Lehrobjekt”. Proceedings of the 14^th European Symposium on Language for Special Purposes (18‑22 August 2003). Communication, Culture, Knowledge — the University of Surrey, Guildford. S. 491-498.

16. Pohl H. D. 2004. “Die Sprache der österreichischen Küche — Ein Spiegelbild sprachlicher und kultureller Kontakte”. Internetzeitschrift für Kulturwissenschaften, nummer 15. Accessed on 11 February 2021. http://www.inst.at/trans/15Nr/06_1/pohl15.htm.

17. Reichelt M. 2017. “Judenapfel, Zigeunerschnitzel und Negerkuss — die Verwendung ethnischer Guppenzuschreibungen bei Nahrungsmittelbezeichnungen”. Diskurse des Alimentären: Essen und Trinken aus Kultur-, Literatur- und Sprachwissenschaftlicher Perspektive. Germanistik. Band 49. Berlin: Lit Verlag Dr.W. Hopf. S. 113-130.

18. Schwarz-Friesel M. 2013. “Sprache und Emotion”. Tübingen: Narr. 413 s.

19. Szczęk J., Kałasznik М. 2014. “Übersetzung im Bereich der Kulinaristik — Kulinarien als Stiefk ind der Translationstheorie und Translationspraxis”. Translationsforschung. Methoden, Ergebnisse, Perspektiven, vol. 5, s. 195-212.

20. Teuteberg H.-J., Neumann G., Wierlacher A. 1997. Essen und Kulturelle Identität. Europäische Perspektiven. Akademie Verlag, Berlin. 589 s.

21. Turska M. 2009. Internationalismen in der Fachsprache der Gastronomie und Kochkunst im Fünfsprachigen Vergleich. Peter Lang Verlag, Frankfurt am Main. 36 s.

22. Wachholz M., Weiß G. 1999. Speisekarten-Design. Grafik, Marketing, Corporate Design. Frankfurt am Main: Deutscher Fachverlag. 280 s.

23. Wilk N. M. (Hg.) 2010. Esswelten. Über den Funktionswandel der Täglichen Kost (Welt — Körper — Sprache). Perspektiven Kultureller Wahrnehmungs- und Darstellungsformen. Frankfurt am Main u.a.: Peter Lang. 200 s.

24. Wurm A. 2010. “Die Entwicklung der deutschen kulinarischen Fachsprache unter französischem Einfluss am Beispiel von Speisebezeichnungen”. Kölner Konferenz zur Fachübersetzung. Bearbeitet von Krein-Kühle M., Wienen U., Krüger R. Frankfurt am Main. S. 223-236.