Проблемы формирования научной речи в технических вузах

MOKSLO KALBOS KULTŪROS IR TERMINOLOGIJOS PROBLEMOS LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXIV (1985) VYTAUTAS BUDA PROBLEMS IN THE FORMATION OF SCIENTIFIC SPEECH IN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITIES In the age of the scientific and technological revolution, in which our technical universities also participate, we must not lose sight of the fact that a full life for society means not only an abundance of material goods and high achievements in technical science and practice. Spiritual values are no less important, as is language—as a means of communication between people, and as the keeper and means of transmitting from generation to generation what has been created by the human mind. Yet this truth is forgotten by those who, while creating material goods and advancing technological progress, regard spiritual riches and language as things that may be used but require no care from their consumers. In our view, this explains why the culture of speech received insufficient attention for many years at our technical universities, where a significant proportion of instructors—technical specialists—infect their students with linguistic errors during classes and even outside the classroom. It is therefore not surprising that applicants who entered university with fairly good command of spoken and written language sometimes leave technical higher-education institutions with a poorer culture of speech. This was confirmed, for example, at the Vilnius Civil Engineering Institute during an inspection in 1979, carried out at the direction of the USSR Ministry of Higher and Secondary Specialized Education, which examined, among other things, the linguistic correctness of future engineers’ diploma projects. The texts of some such projects, each several dozen pages long, contained hundreds of serious linguistic errors—evidence of weak knowledge not only of spelling and punctuation but also of the deeper levels of language: vocabulary, word formation, word semantics, and syntax. The written assignments prepared by department heads or instructors—assistant professors or even professors—and attached to the diploma projects fare no better. The same picture can be observed in the spoken language of our institute’s instructors and students at public meetings, in classes, and in everyday life (incidentally, the situation is no better at other higher-education institutions in the Lithuanian SSR). 28 What can one expect from the speech of a respected professor in lectures if, at meetings of the institute council and the rectorate, he keeps repeating: vot… vot… vot (=va, taigi, tad «here») or says, for example: D a v a i t e, u g i m k i m e «Let’s take up»; Mes suradome sprendimą iš išeities «We found a solution from the way out»; Mokslinė kvalifikacija nėra p i l n u m o j (=pakankama «Scientific qualification is not fully [i.e., it is not sufficient or complete]»; S t u d e n t a s (=Studento duomenys) bus skaičiavimo mašinoj nuo įstojimo ligi diplomo gavimo «The student (i.e., the student’s data) will be in the computer from admission until receiving a diploma». Let us now take a quick look at the errors that distort the speech of the technical intelligentsia. Although, in my conviction, spelling and punctuation are the external aspect of language, having only an indirect relation to the language system (yet let us recall the historical anecdote—the comma both acquits and condemns to death!), careless use of punctuation marks and an inattentive attitude toward spelling norms indicate an insufficient level of literacy in the writer, that is, a person who is about to receive a university diploma. This includes not knowing how to spell hyphenated forms, for example: g i p s o - b e t o n o (=gipso ir betono, gipsbetonio) blokai “gypsum-concrete blocks”; k a l k i u - c e m e n t o (=kalkių ir cemento) skiedinys “lime-cement mortar”; p a r o s - v a l a n d i n i s (=paros valandinis) grafikas “daily hourly schedule.” This also includes placing punctuation marks where they are unnecessary, or omitting them where they are required, for example: Trobesys projektuojamas K a u n u i, p a g a l (=Kaunui pagal) situacijos planą “The building is designed for Kaunas according to the site plan”; Gerinti darbo s ą l y g a s, (=sąlygas) partija numato ir ateityje “The party also intends to improve working conditions in the future”; Želdiniai, esantys g r e t a (=greta,) paliekami “All green spaces located nearby are retained”; Kadangi kolonų ž i n g s n i s 6 c m (=žingsnis 6 cm,) tai <…> “Since the column spacing is 6 cm, then <…>”; N u s t a t o m e (=Nustatome,) kokiu atstumu turi būti “We determine at what distance it should be installed.” Future engineers do not know which forms to use for the diacritic nosinė (hook) over the vowels a, e, i, u, or the length mark over the vowel i, for example: Sklypo c h a r a k t e r i s t i k a (=charakteristiką) aprašyti “Describe the characteristics of the plot”; š i u k š l i u (=šiukšlių). They write the vowel a after a softened consonant and the vowel e by ear, rather than in accordance with the system of forms of inflected words, for example: t o l e s n i a s (=tolesnes “further”), but s e n e i (=seniai “long ago”); nor do they follow specific rules for abbreviating words and forming various letter symbols. The internal structure of the language fares no better. Errors in this area abound in both written and spoken speech, including some that are not encountered in our public speech outside the walls 29 of the institution. There is no need even to mention such inaccuracies, which sometimes also afflict our speech in general—they too add to the list of language errors made by students and instructors at technical universities. The unacceptable distortion of the entire sentence structure immediately stands out. Sentences such as, for example: Čia parduodamos standartinės pramoninės ir ne- pramoninės prekės kaip pavyzdžiui karštom dėšrelėm, pieno pakeliais (=прекрас, павуздзіуі, карштош десрелес, пакелай пие-но «Here are sold standard industrial and non-industrial goods, such as hot sausages and milk in cartons»); Kiti aukštai, ten, kur gyvenamieji kambariai, (—Kitų, gyvenamųjų, aukštų) aukštis yra 2,8 m «The height of the other, residential, floors is 2.8 m» indicate that the future engineer is unfamiliar with the norms governing the general structure of the language. There are many cases of inaccurate use of cases that does not conform to the norms—the locative instead of the dative. In such cases, even the meaning of the entire sentence is distorted, for example: Namas projektuojamas Kaune (= Kaunui) «The house is being designed for Kaunas (not in Kaunas)»; Numeriuose numatytos (=Numeriams numatytos; Numeriuose bus) sieninės spintos «Wall cupboards are planned for the hotel rooms». The nominative case is incorrectly used in a sentence instead of the instrumental case of means or instrument, for example: Šis rodiklis geriau įvertina darbų kokybę (= Šiuo rodikliu geriau įvertinama darbų kokybė «The quality of the work is better assessed by this indicator»). The dative is used instead of the genitive in an uncoordinated modifier, for example: užduotis diplominiam projektui (= diplominio projekto užduotis «assignment for a diploma project»). These examples show that the writer and speaker simply fail to distinguish the dative of the subject (reikia kam? — įmonei «Who or what is needed? — The enterprise») from the dative of the object (reikia ko? — žaliavų «What is needed? — Raw materials»). The construction reikia kam «is needed by whom» and the construction poreikis kam «need—who has it» have the same meaning—that of a subject expressed in the dative; consequently, the construction reikia ko «is needed—what» and poreikis ko «need—for what» also have the same meaning—that of an object expressed in the genitive. Incidentally, this error is fairly common in our printed publications as well. The unwarranted use of the dative is generally very aggressive. It displaces other correct cases too, especially the accusative, for example: Butų nomenklatūra atitinka šeimos sudėtį (= šeimos sudėtį «The apartment nomenclature corresponds to the composition of the family»); Prekybos taškai išsidėstę betarpiškai gyvenamiesiems namams (= tiesiai prie gyvenamųjų rajono namų «Retail outlets are located in the immediate vicinity of the district’s residential buildings»). Examples of unacceptable use in both writing and speech of the locative with words such as these are frequently encountered, for example: daugumoje (= dažniausiai, daugiausia «mostly, for the most part»); pilnumoje (=visi «completely» 30 ); tikrumoje (=iš tikrųjų «in reality»); tokiame pavidale (= šitokiu pavidalu «in this form»). The use of various prepositions is wholly uncharacteristic of Lithuanian, especially that of pas «at/with» to express possession, when speaking of a person’s physical condition, etc., for example: Pas jį (=Jis turi) daug gerų sumanymų «He has many good ideas»; Pas studentą (=Studento darbe) daug techninių klaidų «The student’s work contains many technical errors». Agreement between words and word forms in terms of their lexical meaning leaves much to be desired. The present-tense adverbial participle (padalyvis) is used carelessly, and no attention is paid to the requirement that the main and secondary actions occur simultaneously, for example: Dviviečiai numeriai nutatomi sujungiant 2 viešbučio numerius (=Dviviečiai numeriai bus padaryti iš dviejų sujungtų viešbučio numerių «Double rooms are planned to be created by combining two hotel rooms»—after all, first the creation is planned, and only later are they joined!). Conversely, a past-tense participle or adverbial participle is improperly used to express a secondary action simultaneous with the main action expressed by the predicate, for example: Statybininkai įvykdė metinį planą, pastatę (=pastatė), kaip ir buvo numatyta, šešis namus «The builders fulfilled the annual plan by building, as intended, six houses». In Lithuanian, this use of a past-tense participle (or adverbial participle) is impermissible, since construction and fulfillment of the plan are simultaneous actions. Derivatives with the suffix -ėjas are used to denote an instrument or means of an action, although they have exclusively the meaning of a person performing the action indicated by the verb. Words with the suffix -ykla, denoting a place intended for an activity, are confused with words with the suffix -yklė, denoting a tool, for example: indų plovykla (=plovykle «dishwasher»), virykla (=viryklė «cooking stove»). The verb with the prefix pra- is incorrectly used with the instrumental of route, for example: Viena transporto linija praeina (=eina) Kęstučio gatve «One of the transport lines runs along Kęstutis Street». In this context, this prefix can be used only with the preposition pro «past». Errors in the semantic selection of words in a sentence also occur. These include using gautis instead of išeiti «to turn out», pasigesti instead of pageidauti, trūkti «to wish for, to be lacking», rastis instead of būti «to be, to be located», and so on. Words and phrases of foreign origin or incorrectly formed that contradict the norm should also be noted, for example: badė (=skiedinio dėžė «mortar tub»); basankės (=basutės «sandals»); chomutas (=pavalkėlis, apkała «clamp»); mažaaukštis (=mažaaukštis «low-rise»); pasėka (=padarinys «consequence»); sietka (=grafikas «schedule»); dalinai (=iš dalies «partly»); bendrastatybinės (=bendrosios statybinės) organizacijos 31 “general construction organizations”; interdepartmental technical, interdepartmental scientific, institute-wide (=general technical, general-science, institute-wide) departments “general technical, general scientific, institute-wide departments”. Scientific style has nothing in common with pseudoscientific style, which is characterized by an entirely unjustified desire to “enrich” itself with unnecessary foreign words that give speech a pretentious yet insubstantial appearance. Among such words, misused even by future engineers, are mini, minimumas, mak-simum “mini, maximum.” In this case, one can make do with either a Lithuanian word or even a word-forming element: minikirpykla (=kirpyk-lėlė “mini-hairdressing salon”); Maksimum (=Labiausiai patenkintų gyventojų poreikius “Would meet the population’s needs to the maximum extent”; Prekyba iš gyventojų atims minimumą laiko (=pareikalaus labai nedaug laiko “Trade will take a minimum of time away from the population” [better: “will take very little time”]). But in pointing out inaccuracies in the use of the words listed above, I do not mean to say that they are altogether unnecessary in Lithuanian. In connection with shortcomings in general vocabulary, it should be noted that the ordering of general-language and specialized technical terminology plays a major role in shaping the scientific style of speech of technical specialists. Distortions of terms from other branches of science or technology are unacceptable, for example: dur-aliuminijus (=duraliuminis “duralumin”); technoekonominiai (=techniniai ekonominiai) skaičiavimai, ro-dikliai “technical-economic calculations, indicators.” Particular attention should be paid to the formation of specialized terminology. In this field, no one can do more than university instructors who write various teaching aids and textbooks, imparting particular terminological concepts and skills to their students. But these skills must accord with the general principles of Lithuanian term formation. Therefore, terms such as the following, current in the usage of specialized technical universities, should either be corrected or radically changed: asfaltbetonas (=asfaltbetonis “asphalt concrete”; compare the term used by builders, asbestcementis “asbestos cement”; gipsbetonis “gypsum concrete,” etc.), aukštavertis (=vertin-gas) betonas “high-quality concrete,” gipso-betono (=gipsbe-tonio) pertvaros “gypsum-concrete partitions,” minvata (=minerali-nė vata “mineral wool”), palengvinti (=lengvesnieji) statybi-niai elementai “lightened construction elements,” prieijimo ir pravažiavimo (=takai ir privažiuojamieji) keliai “pedestrian and access roads,” stikloruberoidas (=stiklo ruberoidas “glass roofing felt”); sutankintas (=suplūktas “compacted”). In Lithuanian terminology, considerable importance is attached to compound terms with pronominal and non-pronominal forms of adjectives. The pronominal form terminologizes the phrase, distinguishes the defin- 32 This is illustrated by the following two examples: aukštoji mokykla and aukšta mokykla. The first (with the pronominal adjective form) denotes a type of school, a level in the hierarchy of educational institutions (a higher education institution); the second denotes only the height of the school building. Consequently, construction terminology, too, should follow the general tendency in Lithuanian term formation. For example: gyvenamas (=gyvenamasis) namas “residential building,” naudingas (=naudingasis) plotas “useful floor area,” surenkamos (=surenkamosios) konstrukcijos, detalės “prefabricated structures, components,” specializuotos (=specializuotosios) organizacijos “specialized organizations,” and so on. Phrases containing emotionally charged words are also not always suitable for terminology, such as apginkliuoti, perginkluoti, perginklavimas “to arm, rearm, rearmament,” used in the sense of “equip, equipment, re-equipment,” for example: energetinis darbo apginklavimas (=darbo aprūpinimas energija); statybinės organizacijos techninis perginklavimas (=aprūpinimas nauja technika). Thus, before seriously addressing the genuinely scientific style of speech of future engineers, technical specialists, and their instructors, they must first be instilled with the need to speak correctly, in accordance with the general norms of the literary language. Until they understand this necessity and make a serious, conscious effort to learn at least the basic elements of speech culture, successful development of their scientific style is impossible. Of course, this does not mean that there are no engineers or engineering scholars who care deeply about speech culture. Many prominent engineering specialists, including instructors at technical universities, devote their efforts and energy to the benefit of their native language, and much has already been accomplished. But the movement for speech culture must become a mass movement. To draw the entire technical intelligentsia into the struggle for correctness in both written and spoken language, serious efforts by the republican authorities responsible for higher and specialized secondary education are necessary. Although the efforts of the leadership of certain technical universities, for example the Vilnius Engineering Construction Institute, should be welcomed and duly recognized, they are not enough. It is probably the only technical higher education institution in the republic to have introduced a modest course in speech culture for students completing their degree. If there is a genuine desire to teach the republic’s university students a scientific style of speech, the Ministry of Higher and Specialized Secondary Education of the Lithuanian SSR should introduce a course in speech culture (Lithuanian and Russian) in the second, third, or fourth year at all technical universities and non-humanities faculties. Professor J. Balčiūkonis cherished such plans in the first postwar years, and it is time they became reality. 3 Užsāk. Nr. 1007 33