Animacijos terminų apibrėžčių struktūrinių modelių ypatumai

Standard Language 2025, No. 98, p. 1–19 Contents link ISSN 2351-7204 (electronic / online) Copyright © 2025 Aušra Rimkutė-Ganusauskienė. Published by the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. // Published by the Lithuanian Language Institute. This article is open access, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction of the content in any media, provided that the author and source are acknowledged. Received: / Gauta: 2025-06-16. Accepted: / Priimta: 2025-11-03. 1 ANIMATION TERMS DEFINITIONS STRUCTURAL MODELS SPECIFICATIONS Structural Models of Definitions of Animation Terms AUŠRA RIMKUTĖ-GANUSAUSKIENĖ Institute of Lithuanian Language El. email: [email protected] ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8655-7333 Research fields: terminology, terminography. https://doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2025.98.06 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ANNOTATION The article examines the definitions of animation terms that have not been tested from a terminological point of view, and briefly discusses the concept of definition. Based on the material of animation glossaries, types of definitions and their structural models are identified. The study showed that according to the relationship with the system of concepts definitions can be divided into systemic, semi-systemic and non-systemic. The most common are systemic definitions (56%), of which intensive ones are predominant (55%), while extensive ones are very rare. The rarest are non-systematic definitions (14%). The analysis of the structural models of animation terms revealed that intensive and extensive definitions best meet the requirements – they are characterized by a logical structure and they allow to determine the place of the concept in the system. Other models (descriptive, mixed, incomplete, encyclopedic) only partially satisfy terminological needs, but can be adjusted to systemic definition models if necessary. Reference and synonym definitions do not perform the true function of definition – to reveal the content of the concept and its place in the conceptual system – but help to maintain consistent presentation of terms in the sources. The results of the study show that all definitions perform a certain function, and their relevance is determined by how they meet the general requirements of definition development. KEY WORDS: animation term, definition requirements, definition, definition type, definition structural model, concept, terminological meaning, term. ABSTRACT The article examines the definitions of animation terms that have not previously been analysed from a terminological perspective and briefly discusses the concept of definition. Using material from animation term glossaries, the study identifies types of definitions and their corresponding structural models. The analysis shows that, in relation to the concept system, definitions can be classified into three categories: systemic, semisystemic, and non-systemic. Systemic definitions are the most common (56%), with intensional definitions predominating within this group (55%), while extensional definitions are very rare. Non-systemic definitions are the least common (14%). The analysis of structural models of definitions of animation terms shows that intensional and extensional definitions best meet the requirements, as they have a clear logical structure and allow the concept’s place within the system to be established. Other models (descriptive, mixed, incomplete, and encyclopaedic) only partially satisfy terminological needs but can, where necessary, be revised into systemic definitions. Referential and synonymous definitions do not fulfil the function of a proper definition, but they contribute to the consistent presentation of terms in the sources. Overall, the results indicate that all definitions serve specific functions, while their suitability for terminological purposes depends on compliance with the general requirements for drafting definitions. 2 KEYWORDS: animation term, definition requirements, definition, definition type, definition structural model, concept, terminological meaning, term. INTRODUCTION Animation is an interdisciplinary field that has existed for more than a century. It is associated with the emergence of moving images and the first animated films. This, like other fields, is influenced by scientific progress and new technologies such as digital technology or artificial intelligence, and is constantly changing. At the same time, we need new terms for animation concepts. The subject of this article is not the terms of animation themselves, but their definitions, so let’s first remember what is considered a definition of the term. According to Stasys Šalkauskas, the creator of the theory of Lithuanian scientific terminology, to define the name of an action, “the ad modum substantiae name is a definition” (Šalkauskis 1991: 204), and the term definition also means the performed action and is the result of the definition. According to the terminologist Kazimieras Gaivenis, the definition is the content of the term (Gaivenis 2014 [1998]: 250) – it “must reflect the intentional sems of the term” (Gaivenis 2002: 19). A slightly broader definition is given in the Educational Terminology Dictionary: “a detailed verbal description reflecting the nucleus of the term meaning and defining the content of the concept, which at a certain level of abstraction reveals the essential characteristics that distinguish it from neighboring concepts” (Kvašytė 2005: 13, cf. Gaivenis, Keinys 1990: 22). It can be linked to the description of terminology work in the latest international standard ISO 704 Terminology work – Principles and methods. The standard states that the definition must present the essential characteristics of the term to be defined and thus distinguish the term from other terms in the same subject area (ISO 704 2022: 33). Thus, on the basis of this concept, it is possible to say that the definitions must be selected necessary and additional features, revealing how the defined concept is related to other concepts of the same field and at the same time how it differs from them, and it is also possible to assume that the features must be universal and independent of the context (it is traditionally stated that the term, unlike a simple word, must be understood without definition or context). In practice, however, this is not always the case: it is often impossible to establish all the necessary and sufficient features of the concept, and sometimes all of them may not be necessary. Terminologist Juan C. Sager argues that a definition as a product is a linguistic description of a concept based on the enumeration of certain characteristics that convey the meaning of the concept. He also points out that the definition is like an equation – the sum of the meaningful elements of the concept (Sager 1990: 51). The concept of the definition discussed is considered classical and has a long history of application. The first theory of definition through genus and species difference was formulated by the Greek philosopher Aristotle. This type of definition, where a concept is defined through the closest relative concept and its distinguishing features, was also preferred by the pioneers of terminology as a separate branch of linguistics, Eugen Wüster and Helmut Felber. This type of definition is considered to be relatively strict and in modern terminology not always sufficiently corresponding to practical needs compared to other possible types of definitions. This idea is confirmed by the statement of Rita Temmerman, a representative of sociocognitive terminology, that many concepts are not clear. According to the researcher, the traditional argument of terminology that concepts should be clearly defined in order to ensure unambiguous, unambiguous and therefore effective communication is not convincing (Temmerman 2000: 7). Thus, the static and immutability of the definition of the term is not considered by the representatives of the aforementioned terminology as a necessary feature. While they do not avoid the rules for the formulation of these definitions, they note that the form and content of the definitions vary depending on the types of categories and user requirements. (Temmerman 2000: 8). 3 Teresa Cabré sees the definition as a description of the content of the concept. She points out that following Wüster’s idealistic conception of terms and definitions, terms partly lose their specificity as natural language units (Cabré 2023: 13). Antonio San Martín talks about terminological definition as the description in natural language of the most important conceptual content conveyed by a term (San Martín 2025: 1) and focuses heavily on the analysis of the contexts in which terms are used. The scientist does not deny the concept of definition formulated by Aristotle, but emphasizes that the content of the definition depends on the context and can change. San Martín speaks of "flexible definitions" and argues that the exclusion of necessary and sufficient attributes of the concept, which are considered independent of the context, should be abandoned as the sole and most important criterion. Instead, it is proposed to define the concept by choosing relevant characteristics. The researcher believes that context is particularly important: it determines which features will be included in the definition. Out of context, definitions can be either too abstract or misleading. The context allows definitions to be called flexible because they adapt to the context of use (San Martín 2022). A brief overview of what is considered to be a definition shows that this question is relevant in terminology, especially in its practical application, when it comes to defining a concept. The definitions of the term are examined from various points of view – logical, lexical semantic, cognitive, contextual and others, which due to the limited scope of the article are not analyzed here. Although there are many approaches to modern terminology, none of them deny the existence and necessity of a definition. The definition is considered a means of scientific knowledge and communication, which is subject to clarity, accuracy, systematicity and other requirements. The differences become apparent only when the definition is conceptually modeled and combined in a system of concepts, its structure elements are selected and adapted to communication goals and consumer needs. It has already been mentioned that definitions differ in structure and can be divided into different types. The differences in definitions may be caused by the logic of the concept system, the recipient, the publishing environment, the scope of expression and presentation of the term, e.g.: standard, terminology dictionary, database. Based on logic and other criteria, definitions can be divided into a wide variety of types – from a few to several dozen. For example, the latest international terminology standard ISO 704 Terminology work – Principles and methods (2022) distinguishes two types – intensive and extensive definitions. Terminologist K. Gaivenis, based on the study of the definitions of compound terms from dictionaries published in Lithuania in the post-war years, distinguishes six types: complete, synonymous, enumerative, comparative, incomplete and reference definitions of compound terms (Gaivenis 2004: 114–115). The Polish terminologist Stanisław Gajda distinguishes eleven types of definitions, which may still have subtypes (see RimkutėGanusauskienė 2021: 180). The abundance of classifications indicates that the classification criteria are not uniform. Regardless of the type of definition, it has a structure that is characteristic of that type. The aim of the article is to reveal the components of the definitions of animation terms. Recent publications on the theme of animation – Ilja Bereznickis’s scientific monograph Animacija: nuo idėjos iki ekrano (2017) and Tomas Mitkaus and Vaida Nedzinskaitė-Mitkė’s higher education textbooks Animation industry in Lithuania: analysis and opportunities (2018) and Animation basics (2020). All these publications are accompanied by glossaries of animation terms. 1) based on the theoretical insights of terminology, to examine the definitions of animation terms given in the sources and to identify their types; 2) create structural models of animation terms definitions. It should be noted that this study does not discuss definitions from the point of view of the norm and does not raise the question of their shortcomings (defects). For the purpose of the study and the analysis, the most important is the structure of the definitions of the animation terms and their relationship with the conceptual system of the field under consideration. It is expected that the research material will show what terminology principles guide the definitions of animation terms in the scientific and educational discourse. It should 4 highlight structural features of definitions that are likely to be useful for refining existing or writing new definitions in any other field. Furthermore, the structural analysis of the animation definitions of terms will allow to check whether the established and usual concept of the definition of the term, when the definition is understood as a verbal description of the content of the concept, corresponds to the practical formulation of definitions recorded in the dictionaries of the selected type of terms. The assignment of types of definitions of animation terms and the study of structural models is relevant and new for several reasons. First, the terminology of animation itself, as already mentioned, is almost unexplored. Secondly, the study of the source definitions will show which structural parts are most commonly used in animation definitions and will reveal which features are considered essential when defining animation terms. Furthermore, the study will allow to assess whether the definitions are formulated in accordance with the principles of uniformity and consistency, analogy, regularity and other terminological principles. Thirdly, it will allow for a re-examination of the traditional definition concept in relation to the definitions in practice. The definitions of animation terms in selected sources are examined using several methods. The analytical descriptive method is most often used, which allows not only to describe the object of the study – the definitions of animation terms, but also to critically assess their compliance with the definitions requirements. This method helps to identify inaccuracies in definitions – ambiguities, uncertainties, lack of logical consistency and similar cases. In addition, a comparative method is used to highlight the similarities and differences of definitions and their structural models and to identify cases of unification. If necessary, a computational method is used, which helps to justify the research data not only qualitatively but also quantitatively and reveal the observed patterns. 1. RESEARCH SOURCES As already mentioned, the latest publications on animation are examined. They are written by experienced and knowledgeable specialists in the field of animation, both from a theoretical and practical point of view. Glossary of animation terms are provided at the end of all resources. It is likely that animation specialists have included the most important and most commonly used terms and their definitions. It should be noted that these are not comprehensive terminographic sources, but rather sets of terms designed to help the reader better understand new, less heard concepts and reveal the content of familiar concepts. In the scientific monograph Animacija: od ideje do zaslona (Animation: from idea to screen) on pages 254–257 there is a glossary of 35 terms with definitions. The footnote indicates that a broader view should be taken in the Dictionary of Audiovisual Media (AIE 2017: 254). This dictionary was prepared in 2013 on the initiative of the Lithuanian Film Centre, its editor – Neringa Kažukauskaitė, and the author of the monograph I. Bereznickas contributed to its preparation. The dictionary is not approved by the State Lithuanian Language Commission, no terminologist is specified. This shows that it was prepared only by the efforts of the specialists themselves, feeling the need to help all those who come into contact with audiovisual media to better understand the concepts of this field. Comparing the two glossaries, it is clear that the terms and/or their definitions presented in the monograph do not always coincide with those presented in the larger Audiovisual Media Dictionary. This suggests that the terms of animation, as well as their definitions, are not settled. In the textbooks of Tomas Mitkaus and Vaida Nedzinskaitė-Mitkė Animacijos industrija Lietuvoje: analizė ir galimybės and Animacijos pagrindai, almost three times larger sets of terms and their definitions are presented – 94 terms in the first (AIL 2018: 126–133) and 95 terms in the second (AP 2020: 195–202). Both are also called – Animation Terms Dictionary. Comparison of the second dictionary with the first one revealed that it differs by 16 terms, for example, the material from textbooks was collected during the 1 implementation of the project “Terminology development trends in higher education textbooks (2025–2027)” funded by the State Lithuanian Language Commission. 1 5 The glossary of the textbook prepared in 2018 does not include the terms animation frame scheme, twinning, rough animation, cut-out, project presentation bible, fixing holes, etc., and the glossary of animation terms presented in the 2020 publication does not mention the terms animation presentation bible, sketch animation, co-production, etc., both sources coincide with 79 terms and their definitions. The authors of the textbooks draw attention to the fact that “not all international industry terms have established or approved translations into Lithuanian (often in the industry (the animation industry in person – aut. p.) Lithuanianized English versions of these terms may be used)”, and note that “different individuals or animation studios may use different definitions of some terms” (AP 2020: 195), thus letting us understand that the definitions recorded in dictionaries are not the only possible ones. The selected sources are alphabetical explanatory glossaries of animation terms. 2 In total, they record 145 different terms and their definitions. Although animation terms are presented in different sources – scientific and educational, and although these glossaries differ quantitatively, all of them try to scientifically define the most important terms in the animation field. The compilation of such dictionaries suggests that the definitions of the terms presented in them represent not only theoretical, but practical use of terms, reflect the content and scope of the defined concepts. The definitions of the terms in the animation itself and their structural models show how their authors generally understand what the definition of the term is. 2. STRUCTURAL MODULES OF DEFINITIONS The study revealed that there are various structural models of definitions of animation terms in the examined sources. It has been noted that the aforementioned classification of definitions of compound terms by K. Gaivenis is only partially applicable to this study, because the various classifications are based on an uneven basis of division. Therefore, the definitions of animation terms found in the study are classified according to their relationship with the conceptual system. The conceptual framework is the reference point for selecting the distinctive features and formulating the definition. It is taken into account that the content (intent) of the concept is determined by its relationships in the conceptual system. In addition, it was decided not to rely on the classifications of definitions in international standards, which are characterised by their strict and formalized nature. Since the study examines the definitions of animation terms in scientific and educational discourse publications, it is believed that such strict standardization would not be appropriate and could even complicate the understanding of definitions. Nevertheless, the definitions are examined in accordance with the requirements for drafting definitions. There are three types of definitions: systematic, semi-systematic and non-systematic. This three-tier classification is not the only one possible and can be refined according to the definitions of terms in a particular field. 2.1. Systematic definitions of animation terms are those which indicate the place of the term in the conceptual system and which are characterised by either an intensive or an extensive form. The analysis of 145 definitions of animation terms found in the sources shows that two subtypes of systematic definitions can be distinguished. 2.1.1. It has been established that the so-called classical definitions of terms prevail: the first part indicates the closest relative concept, and the second part - the species difference that distinguishes the defined concept from others. These definitions account for more than half of all the definitions examined – 55%. K. Gaivenis calls them full definitions (Gaivenis 2004: 114), the term used in ISO 704 is intensive definitions (ISO 704 2022: 33). The terminologist claims that their definitions of close logic, called definitio per genus proximum et differentiam specificam, and points out that in them "species difference can be 2 There are some inaccuracies, for example, in the glossary published in 2018, the term motion capture is given after the term editing, and the term feature (or full-length) film is given after the term pixel (AIL 2018: 131). 6 go not one, but several signs” (Gaivenis 2002: 30). Alvydas Umbrasas points out that “[N]etting out the distinctive features of the concept is one of the most important goals that the author of the definition should set for himself” (Umbrasas 2022: 133). Based on his study of the definitions of terms in legal acts, he calls such definitions explanatory (significant): “As a support, such a definition usually refers to a more general concept (sometimes more than one) and distinctive features” (Umbrasas 2022: 132). The structural model of intensive definition is described by the following scheme: the defining term is equal to the combination of the closest relative term and the essential characteristic(s) that describe the species difference of the defining term (Figure 1). This definition consists of one sentence. The definitions of the type in question are recommended as the basic type of definitions of terms (ISO 704 2022: 33). If the definitions in the terminology source are written consistently according to this structural model, the systemic relationships of the concepts are visible, and tokio šaltinio terminams ir jų apibrėžtims būdingas nuoseklumas ir loginis tikslumas. 1 pav. Intensinės apibrėžties struktūrinis modelis 3 Let us consider examples: A colorist is a person who colours animation 4 frames using traditional animation techniques. AIL 2018: 132 A voice actor is a person who voices animated characters. AIL 2018: 129 The structure of the definitions of the singular term colorist and the composite term sound actor is the same and corresponds to the structural model of the intensive definition: term = related term (in both definitions the word person) + distinctive activity characteristic that distinguishes the defined person from other persons of the same conceptual system (coloring animation frames and voice-over animated characters). According to K. Gaivenis, species composite terms should not be interpreted by intensive definitions “in the case when they designate the same phenomenon (reality) as their main separately defined feature, only characteristic of different objects” (Gaivenis 2004: 106). Thus, the definition of the term sound actor could be refined – using actors as a related term and naming the distinctive features. In summary, it can be said that intensive definitions are a complete linguistic expression of a conceptual relationship based on distinctive features. Thus, a distinctive feature or several distinctive features, the number of which depends on the scope of the definition, are an important part of such a definition, on the basis of which the concepts are classified. The structure of a system of concepts in a particular field depends on which distinctive features are chosen. That is why the definitions of the terms of animation are not the only possible – their structure, together with 3 Illustrations made using Napkin AI (https://www.napkin.ai/). 4 The examples are given as recorded in the sources, their language is not corrected. 7 structural models are the result of the concept of the authors who formulated the definition of the terms (remember the definition of the term sound actor already discussed). According to Reiner Arntz, Heribert Picht and Felix Mayer (Arntz et al. 2002: 63), Georg Löckinger, Hendrik J. Kockaert and Gerhard Budin (Löckinger et al. 2015: 66–67) and other terminologists, intensive definitions are considered useful because they refer to a higher concept that allows the defining concept to be assigned to the system of concepts of the relevant field, and emphasize such features that help distinguish one concept from others. In terms of normative evaluation, intensive definitions can be divided into regular and irregular: the first ones are defined by properly describing the closest relative concept and distinguishing the necessary distinctive features, the second ones are defined by inappropriately naming the relative term or distinguishing non-necessary or non-essential distinctive features. For example, the term actor's stunt is defined as follows: A gag is a scene in a film or television series that is used to show a short, humorous scene. IEA 2017: 254 As can be seen from the given definition, it formally corresponds to the structural model of the intensive definition, but the term actor's stunt is interpreted by the inappropriate relative term film location. The term in question could be defined in two ways: interpreting either the first element of the compound term – trick, or the second – actor. There are no inaccuracies in the formulation of other intensive definitions in the sources examined. It should be added that intensive definitions, in terms of the types of definition structural models, are distinguished by the presence of clear structural units and are considered a subtype of systemic definitions, since they most clearly show the place of the concept in the system. 2.1.2. The second subtype of systematic definitions are extensive, or enumerable, definitions, i.e. those in which, as stated in the latest ISO 704 standard, a term is described by listing all the species concepts or constituent parts of the whole belonging to one abstraction sublevel (ISO 704 2022: 34), in other words, by listing all the parts included in the term. Only one extensive definition was found in the sources (about 1% of all researched definitions). For example: Post-production includes the transfer of the work to appropriate media, adaptation to audiences, systems, audio and video editing, marketing and other final work. IEA 2017: 254 As is apparent from the definition of the term ‘final works of film’, it does not specify the closest relative term ‘film works’ and does not distinguish between the characteristics of the defining term, and the verb used instead of the hyphen which is customary to be placed after the term in explanatory glossaries covers and lists all the acts which are considered to be final works of film. It is clear from this definition that not all the constituent parts (and other final works) are listed, although a similar criterion has been tried to define the constituent parts of the concept. Furthermore, the marketing referred to in the definition is semantically more related to the marketing of films than to the final work of a film, and it is therefore questionable whether it should be included in the definition. The terminology literature (ISO 704 2022: 34; Nilsson 2015: 82–100) indicates that the drawback of extensive definitions is that it is in many cases impossible to provide all the narrower concepts or all the constituent parts distinguished by the same classification criteria, and therefore such definitions are not always accurate. Furthermore, it should be borne in mind that their volumes may vary over time. Based on the example found in the source, it can be seen that the extensive definition consists of the following structural parts: the defining term, the connective verb to include and the parts that make up the defining term (Figure 2). In terminology sources, a hyphen is usually used instead of the connective verb to encompass. These are one sentence definitions. 8 In practical terms, extensive definitions, which list all the components of the defining concept, would be useful only if they provided a specific and definitive set of components (objects, processes, phenomena, etc.). However, these definitions do not reflect the defining concept in the local conceptual framework. According to A. Umbrasas, such definitions “explicitly limit the content of the concept – only what is specifically specified is included” (Umbrasas 2022: 131). In the ISO 704 standard already mentioned, definitions of this type are not recommended. Henrik Nilsson argues that it is problematic to require extensive definitions to be completely complete, i.e. that all the concepts that make up the definition be listed, because in many cases this is simply not possible, and the definition would be considered incomplete if not. His reveal manymu, šio tipo apibrėžtys tam tikrais atvejais galėtų būti naudingos edukaciniais tikslais (Nilsson 2015: 95). Galima pridurti, kad tokios apibrėžtys ypač naudingos tada, kai padeda the whole and creates conditions for easier memorization and understanding of the concept. Figure 2. Extensive definitions are rarely used, but in cases where it is possible to list all the elements of the concept, they should be considered acceptable. The list should be exhaustive and logically justified. Failure to draw up a definitive list of elements would make such a definition incomplete and misleading and should therefore be avoided as not meeting the requirements of definitions. 2.1.3. Concluding remarks. After reviewing the two subtypes of systemic definitions, which comprise 56% of all the definitions of animation terms found (Figure 5), it is clear that the first one prevails – the model of intensive definition, whose structure most clearly shows the place of the concept in the conceptual system. It can be said that this is a typical, reference model of definition, which meets the requirements of terminology theory. Extensive definitions can also be systematic, when they list all the parts of the same sub-level that make up the defining concept, thus maintaining systematicity. 2.2 Semi-systematic definitions of animation terms will be considered those definitions that only partially reveal the place of the defining concept in the conceptual system. 2.2.1. Less than a quarter (about 24%) of all definitions of animation terms found in dictionaries are encyclopedic definitions. Their most characteristic feature is their length, they usually consist of two or more sentences. For example: 9 A production designer is the person responsible for the overall visual expression of an animated film. The production designer, working with the director and producer, selects the solutions that could best tell the story cinematographically. AIL 2018: 127 Sand animation is one of the techniques of stop-motion animation, where sand is used to create images. Most often, the animator attaches the glass panel vertically, lighting is installed at the bottom of the glass, and the camera at the top. The animation frames are created by the animator by manipulating the sand, which is splashed on the glass. AP 2020: 201 The examples show that the first sentence corresponds to the structure of an intensive definition – it presents a related term (person; method of stop-motion animation technique) and a distinctive feature (responsible for the overall visual expression of the work; when sand is used to create images). Other sentences supplement, clarify or specify the defining term by indicating important but non-essential characteristics of the terminological meaning, and may also include historical, contextual or other additional (encyclopedic) information (working with the director and producer, chooses solutions that...; Most often the animator vertically attaches the glass panel,...). As regards the definition of a term, such additional information is not necessary in order to accurately describe the concept or to show its place in the conceptual framework, and therefore such definitions are not considered to be fully systematic. Another example: Animation style is the distinctive appearance of an animated work, determined by established design principles. Each animation technique can have many different animation styles. AIL 2018: 127 The definition of the term animation style, although it consists of only two sentences, is also considered encyclopedic. The first sentence is constructed according to the structural model of intensive definition (relative concept – appearance, distinctive feature – distinctive, determined by design principles), and the second provides additional (encyclopedic) information that expands the knowledge of the defining concept (the animation technique may have...), but is not terminologically necessary. After reviewing the encyclopedic definitions found in the sources, the following structural model can be presented: intensive definition (familial term + distinctive feature (s) – usually one definition sentence) + additional encyclopedic explanations (Figure 3). The structure of the definitions of encyclopedic terms in other sources may be different. Figure 3. Structural model of encyclopedic definition The presence of encyclopedic definitions of terms in the sources examined is probably related to the authors' aim to provide as much information as possible about the defining concept for educational purposes. It can be assumed that this is typical of educational publications. This assumption could be tested by conducting a broader study of this type of sources. 2.2.2. Based on the source material, it is possible to distinguish another subtype of definitions recorded in the glossaries of animation terms – mixed definitions. These are definitions that have more than one definition type attribute. For example: 16 Non-systematic definitions were found at least – 14% of all the researched definitions. Based on the research data, 4 subtypes are distinguished: descriptive, synonymous, reference and non-compliant definitions. Of these, the first – descriptive (6 per cent) – predominate. It can be assumed that the abundance of mixed, explanatory, encyclopedic definitions was determined by the nature of the sources examined, as well as the aim not only to define the terms, but also to explain them in more detail to the reader for educational and informational purposes. It is striking that these definitions are comprehensive and broad. They contain various additional information: some, in addition to the main, broadly explain the use of the term in the professional field of animation, others mention historical aspects, still others provide synonymous terms, etc. In the context of normative terminology work, such excessively broad definitions are usually edited and standardised – usually shortened to one comprehensive sentence, typical of an intensive definition, and adapted to the prevailing definition model in the source. The structural models of definitions of different types of terms allow to assume that the structure of the definition is determined by various reasons. One of them is the place of the concept in the system of concepts. The second is the type of definition chosen by the author. Thirdly, the source of the definition (dictionary, scientific or educational text, etc.). There may, of course, be more reasons. More and more diverse studies of source definitions could help to identify them more accurately. The assumption cannot be ruled out that the choice of the structure of definitions is indirectly determined by the very perception that a definition of a term is being written – this knowledge may encourage reference to examples of definitions or analogous schemes already seen in dictionaries or other sources. Based on the practice of explanatory glossaries and after analyzing explanatory definitions of animation terms, it is clear that some types of definitions are more appropriate, while others are correctable or even inappropriate. Different types of definitions and their structural models, even the rarest ones, are possible if the basic function of the definition is not forgotten – to reveal the content of the concept and show the place of the defining concept in the conceptual system. The more frequent choice of certain models of definitions indicates a desire to systematize and unify definitions, in compliance with the requirements for the preparation of basic definitions of terms. CONCLUSIONS The definition of a term is a logical, comprehensive statement that differentiates the term to be defined from others and reveals its conceptual and systematic relationships with other terms in the same field. Terms can be defined by different types of definitions, which differ in structure and in the scope of information provided. The research data show that the definitions of animation terms according to their relationship with the conceptual system are of three types: systemic, semi-systemic and non-systemic. Systemic definitions are the most common (56% of all the definitions surveyed), with intensive definitions dominating (55%) and extensive definitions accounting for a smaller proportion. The rarest are non-systematic definitions – descriptive, reference, synonymous and non-compliant with terminological requirements (14% of all definitions). Definitions of terms are formulated according to established rules and requirements: they must reflect the essential characteristics of the concept, the definition must be logical, clear, concise, neither too narrow nor too broad, and must also reveal the place of the defining term in the conceptual system. In other words, the definition must reveal the meaning of the term. Some structural models of definitions correspond to the models recommended in terminology – intensive and extensive definitions. Other models are generally considered non-terminological, i.e. inappropriate or only partially suitable for terminological purposes. These are incomplete, mixed, descriptive, synonymous, enumerative and encyclopedic definitions. Structural models of animation term definitions depend on the type of definition selected. The intensive and extensive definitions best meet the requirements 17 requirements – they are characterized by a clear logical structure, they allow to precisely determine the place of the concept in the system of concepts. Descriptive, mixed, incomplete and encyclopedic definitions only partially meet the terminological criteria – some lack distinctive features, others have other structural or logical shortcomings, but can be adjusted and restructured into intensive ones if necessary. Reference and synonym definitions differ in structure from others – their function is not to define, but to direct the reader to the place where the actual description of the concept is given. They help to maintain a consistent and economical presentation of terms in termographic sources. The diversity of structural models of animation term definitions reveals uneven definition compliance with terminology principles and requirements. The classification of the definitions of terms, like their structure, is partly conditional. It depends on what aspects of the definition are interpreted and what requirements are imposed on it. Different researchers apply different (intensinės, ekstensinės), kiti – pagal taisyklingumo laipsnį (atitinkančios reikalavimus, taisytinos, netinkamos ir kt.), dar kiti remiasi kitais požymiais. Šiame tyrime klasifikavimo classification criteria: some classify according to the logical structure based on the chosen relationship of definitions with the system of concepts. Such diversity indicates that the classification of definitions is not absolute and cannot be the only one. ŠALTINIAI AIE 2017: Animacijos terminų žodynėlis [Glossary of Animation Terms]. – Ilja Bereznickas. Animacija: nuo idėjos iki ekrano [Animation: From Idea to Screen], Vilnius: Vilniaus dailės akademijos leidykla. AIL 2018: Animacijos terminų žodynas [Glossary of Animation Terms]. – Tomas Mitkus, Vaida Nedzinskaitė-Mitkė. Animacijos industrija Lietuvoje: analizė ir galimybės [Animation Industry in Lithuania: Analysis and Opportunities], Vilnius: VGTU leidykla „Technika“, 126–133. AP 2020: Animacijos terminų žodynas [Glossary of Animation Terms]. – Tomas Mitkus, Vaida Nedzinskaitė-Mitkė. Animacijos pagrindai [Fundamentals of Animation], Vilnius: Vilniaus Gedimino technikos universitetas, 195–202. BLKŽe: Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas (rengiamas) [Dictionary of the Standard Lithuanian Language], vyr. red. D. Liutkevičienė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Prieiga internete: https://ekalba.lt/bendrines-lietuviu-kalbos-zodynas/. LITTERACY Arntz Reiner, Picht Heribert, Mayer Felix 2002: Introduction to Terminology, Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag AG. Cabré Teresa 2023: Terminology: Cognition, Language and Communication, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ivitra.36. Cramer Irene Magdalena 2011: Definitions in dictionary and text: Manual annotation, corpus-based analysis and automatic extraction of defining text segments in the context of computer-aided lexicography: Inaugural dissertation, TU Dortmund. De Bessé Bruno 1997: Terminological Definitions. – Handbook of Terminology Management 1: Basic Aspects of Terminology Management, ed. S. E. Wright, G. Budin, Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co., 63–74. Gaivenis Kazimieras 2014 [1998]: A Few Thoughts about Terminology. – Selected Writings, K. Gaivenis, Vilnius: Lithuanian Language Institute, 248–251. 18 Gaivenis Kazimieras 2002: Lithuanian Terminology: Foundations of Theory and Standardization [Lithuanian Terminology: Foundations of Theory and Standardization], Vilnius: LKI leidykla. Gaivenis Kazimieras 2004: Presentation and Explanation of Complex Terms in Terminological Dictionaries [Presentation and Explanation of Complex Terms in Terminological Dictionaries]. – Problems of the History and Present-Day Terminology: A Collection of Articles in Memory of Kazimieras Gaivenis, ed., Vilnius, 2006, p. A. Auksoriūtė, red. S. Keinys, Vilnius: Lietuvos kalbos instituto leidykla, 85–117. Gaivenis Kazimieras, Keinys Stasys 1990: Dictionary of English-Polish Terms [Dictionary of English-Polish Terms] Linguistic Terms], Kaunas: Šviesa. ISO 704 2022: ISO 704: 2022 (E) Terminology work – Principles and methods, Geneva / Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization. Kvašytė Regina 2005: Educational Glossary of Terminology, Šiauliai: Šiaulių universiteto leidykla. Löckinger Georg, Kockaert Hendrik J., Budin Gerhard 2015: Intensional definitions. – H. J. Kockaert, F. Steurs, Handbook of Terminology 1, Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 60–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/hot.1. Nilsson Henrik 2015: Enumerations count: Extensional and partitive definitions. – H. J. Kockaert and F. Steurs. Handbook of Terminology 1, Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 82–100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/hot.1. 1960: Definition by Proximate Genus and Specific Difference [Definition by Proximate Genus and Specific Difference]. – Problems 1, 149–164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/Problemos.1960.0.7259. Rimkutė-Ganusauskienė Aušra 2021: Subordination between Components and Definition of a Combinative Term: A Case Study [Subordination between Components and Definition of a Combinative Term: A Case Study]. – Terminologija 28, 175–191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35321/term28-08. Sager Juan C. 1990: A Practical Course in Terminology Processing, Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. San Martín Antonio 2022: A Flexible Approach to Terminological Definitions: Representing Thematic Variation. – International Journal of Lexicography 35(1), 53– 74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/ecab013. San Martín Antonio 2025: Optimizing Contextonym Analysis for Terminological Definition Writing. – Information 16(4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/info16040257. Šalkauskis Stasys 1991: Raštai 2: Filosofijos ir pedagogikos terminija [Writings, Vol. 2: Philosophy and Pedagogy Terminology], Vilnius: Mintis. Temmerman Rita 2000: Towards New Ways of Terminology Description: The Sociocognitive Approach, Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Umbrasas Alvydas 2022: On the requirements for the terms of legal acts and their definitions [On the requirements for the terms of legal acts and their definitions]. – Terminologija 29, 120–138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35321/term29-07. VLKKe: Protocol Decision No. PN-6 of 11 December 2014 “On supplementing the Protocol Decision No. PN-6 of 28 October 2010 of the State Lithuanian Language Commission “On 19 the list of foreign word equivalents” [Protocol Decision No. PN-6 of 11 December 2014 “On the Supplementation of the Protocol Decision No. PN-6 of 28 October 2010 of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language ‘On the List of Equivalents of Loanwords”]. Online access: https://www.vlkk.lt/vlkknutarimai/protokoliniai-nutarimai/del-svetimzodziu-atitikmenu-saraso-papildymo-3. AUŠRA RIMKUTĖ-GANUSAUSKIENĖ STRUCTURAL MODELS OF DEFINITIONS OF ANIMATION TERMS Summary This article examines the definitions of animation terms that have not previously been analysed from a terminological perspective. The empirical analysis draws on three glossaries of animation terms included in Ilja Bereznickas’s monograph Animacija: nuo idėjos iki ekrano (2017) and in the textbooks by Tomas Mitkus and Vaida Nedzinskaitė-Mitkė, Animacijos industrija Lietuvoje: analizė ir galimybės (2018) and Animacijos pagrindai (2020). In total, 145 definitions were analysed. The study employed descriptive, comparative, and other methods. It has been established that, with respect to their relation to the concept system, the definitions of animation terms can be classified into three types: systemic, semi-systemic, and non-systemic. Systemic definitions were the most frequent (56% of all cases); within this group, intensional definitions predominated. Overall, intensional definitions accounted for 55% of all definitions, whereas extensional definitions were extremely rare (1%). Semisystemic definitions (24%) can be further subdivided into encyclopaedic, mixed, and incomplete types; these definitions only partially conform to the structure and requirements of a logical (intensional) definition. Non-systemic definitions were the least common (14%) and comprise descriptive, synonymous, referential, and definitions that do not conform to terminological requirements. By their nature, non-systemic definitions do not locate the defined concept within the system of concepts. Based on the analysis of the definitions of animation terms, intensional definitions can be regarded as the typical model that best accords with the notion of definition and with the requirements for terminological definition. Their structural model can be expressed as: defined concept = nearest superordinate (genus) + differentiating characteristic(s) (differentiae) that distinguish the defined concept from co-ordinate concepts. This yields a single-sentence definition. The structural model of extensional definitions is useful far less often and only in cases where it is possible to provide an exhaustive enumeration of all parts that constitute the terminological concept. Encyclopaedic and mixed definitions are applicable primarily in educational discourse. The types identified as descriptive, synonymous, and referential do not exhibit the binary logical structure characteristic of classical definitions; the same holds for definitions that do not conform to terminological requirements. Definitions of animation terms display variation, and their suitability for terminological purposes depends on compliance with the general requirements for drafting definitions.