The relevance of this article is determined by the need to examine how the category of “object” is represented in English biotechnology terminology. The aim of the study was to identify the subcategories of the concept of “object” that find their lexical expression, as well as to investigate the linguistic mechanisms – particularly morphological and syntactic structures – used to denote them. To achieve this aim, a set of selective, analytical, morphological, structuralsemantic, classificatory, systemic, and statistical methods was employed. It was found that within the English biotechnology terminological system, the category of “object” comprises four main subcategories: biological (36.5%), chemical (23.8%), technological (21.0%) objects, as well as materials and products (18.7%). Both simple and compound structures are employed to represent the category of “object” linguistically in English biotechnology terminology. Biological objects are predominantly expressed by simple nouns, whereas technological objects, materials, and products are more frequently represented by compound phrases. Chemical objects exhibit an almost equal distribution between simple and compound forms. Overall, the majority of terms are nouns, which is consistent with the norms of scientific and technical terminology. The obtained results confirmed the findings of modern studies regarding the dominance of nominal structures and the tendency to use compound names in biotechnology terminology, which is driven by the need for precision and systematicity in professional nomination. The practical significance of the study lies in the potential application of its results in teaching English for Specific Purposes to students majoring in Biotechnology and Bioengineering
Rozhkov et al. (Fri,) studied this question.