Teisės terminai 1936 m. ir 2013 m. lietuviškuose tarptautinių žodžių žodynuose: lyginamasis tyrimas

Terminologija / Terminology 2025, No. 32, p. 1–18 Contents link ISSN 2669-2198 (electronic / online) Copyright © 2025 Dalia Gedzevičienė. 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: 2025-04-30. Accepted: / Priimta: 2025-07-21. 1 Legal Terms in the 1936 and 2013 Lithuanian Dictionaries of International Words: A Comparative Study Legal Terms in the 1936 and 2013 Lithuanian Dictionaries of International Words: A Comparative Study A Comparative Study DALIA GEDZEVIČIENĖ Institute of Law of the Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences El. email: [email protected] ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8285-9692 Research areas: legal language, legal terminology, socially vulnerable persons, theory of conceptual metaphor. https://doi.org/10.35321/term32-06 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ANNOTATION The article examines and compares legal terms and their adjective elements recorded in Lithuanian dictionaries of international words published in 1936 and 2013 (TŽŽ 1936 and TŽŽ 2013). The aim of the study is to assess the significance of these dictionaries for the language of law of the respective independent Lithuanian period. Both dictionaries contain a similar number of legal terms and their adjective elements (TŽZ 1936 – 738, TŽZ 2013 – 748). The article concludes that TŽŽ 1936 was qualitatively prepared, useful and significant one of the sources of legal terminology of the time, and TŽŽ 2013 influence and significance for the legal language is much less, because, firstly, TŽŽ 2013, compared with TŽŽ 1936, the relative number of legal terms decreased, and secondly, in the later period, legal terminology was fixed and published in many other publicly available specialized sources. KEY WORDS: legal term, legal language, dictionary of international words, source of terminology. ABSTRACT The article analyses and compares the legal terms and their adjectival components recorded in the Lithuanian dictionaries of international words published in 1936 and 2013 (DIW 1936 and DIW 2013). The aim of studying the collected material is to evaluate the significance of these dictionaries for the legal language of the respective periods of independent Lithuania. A comparable number of legal terms and adjective components was recorded in both dictionaries (DIW 1936 – 738, DIW 2013 – 748). It may be concluded that 2 DIW 1936 was a meticulously prepared and valuable source of legal terminology for its time, whereas the impact and significance of DIW 2013 for legal language are considerably lesser, because, firstly, the relative frequency of legal terminology decreased in DIW 2013 compared to DIW 1936, and secondly, during the latter period, legal terminology had already been extensively recorded and disseminated across a wide-ranging publicly accessible specialised sources. KEYWORDS: legal term, legal language, dictionary of international words, source of terminology. INTRODUCTION The study and comparison of legal terms recorded in two Lithuanian dictionaries of international words, which are separated by almost eight decades, was prompted by one common circumstance of the publication of these dictionaries – both in the first period of independence, the so-called interwar period, when the 1936 Dictionary of International Words (hereinafter – TŽŽ 1936) appeared, and in the period of restored independence (from 1990 until now), when the 2013 Dictionary of International Words (hereinafter – TŽŽ 2013) appeared, no explanatory dictionary of legal terms was published. From the perspective of such a significant circumstance in terms of terminology, the aim of this article is to evaluate the significance of two Lithuanian dictionaries of international words as one of the sources of legal terminology at the time for the legal language and the history of legal concepts. To achieve this goal, the following tasks were set: 1) to compare the legal terms of both dictionaries and their presentation in the dictionaries (a) the number of legal terms and their elements and its ratio to the total number of heading words in the glossary; b) the number of legal terms and their elements according to expression (composition of terms, parts of language); (c) the number of legal terms and their elements according to the languages of origin and the differences in the indications of the languages of origin; 2) to distinguish between common and different legal terms and their elements in both dictionaries and to determine the essential changes in the expression and definitions of terms on their basis. Thus, the object of this article is one of the sources of legal terminology – two dictionaries of international words published in different periods, and the legal terminology recorded in these dictionaries is the research material that helps to determine the significance of the source of terminology for the legal language of the time, the development of legal concepts and its research. The legal terms from both dictionaries were collected manually, the article used calculating, comparative and descriptive analytical methods. It is important to note that dictionaries of international words are not the main sources of legal terminology for two reasons. First, the most reliable sources of legal terminology are legislation of various fields, dictionaries of legal terms, legal studies and specialized databases; secondly, dictionaries of international terms are not a source of all legal terminology, but only of a specific part of it – international legal terms. Nevertheless, the article raises the hypothetical assumption that in the first period of independence, in the absence of a published Lithuanian dictionary of legal terms, especially a textbook or database, TŽŽ 1936 could have been one of the main sources of legal terminology alongside Lithuanian legislation and legal science works for at least several years (before the occupation of the country). 3 Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas (TŽŽ 1936), published in 1936, is not the first Lithuanian dictionary of international words, but the first work of this size (1,064 pages) professionally prepared by a 1 team of specialists in their fields. This dictionary was compiled by the writer Kazys Boruta, the well-known historian and encyclopedist Pranas Čepėnas with his wife Albina Sirutyte-Čepėnienė, edited by the historian and Lithuanian scholar Juozas Žiugžda, reviewed and corrected by the lawyer, bibliophile Prof. Vaclovas Biržiška and the philosopher Prof. Pranas Dovydaitis. In total, the dictionary explains about 22,000 different words, terms and expressions. Thus, this dictionary, as the object of the first period of research, was chosen because of its volume, which exceeds its predecessors by ten times, and the intellectual composers of the time. During the period of the restored independence, several dictionary of international words were also published. The second object of this comparative study is the International Dictionary of Words 2 (TŽŽ 2013), prepared by the authors and published in 2013. It explains about 28,000 words in individual articles. This dictionary is based on the International Dictionary of Words published in 2004. So far, there is no detailed study of how terms are recorded in international dictionaries of words. Certain features of the presentation of legal terms in the TŽŽ 2013 have been discussed by Dalia Gedzevičienė (2023). Of the individual fields, the terminology of which was collected from international dictionaries of words and analyzed in one or another aspect, polygraphy (Petrėtienė, Mikalajūnaitė 2010) and medicine (Briaukienė 2004) should be mentioned. Changes in the semantics of international words used in administrative language (Vladarskienė 2004; Rudaitienė 2006; Vladarskienė 2014; Vladarskienė 2019) and the use of certain international words in the language of lawyers (Koženiauskienė 2004) are also examined. The situation of Lithuanian legal terminology in various periods is examined in detail in the publications of Alvydas Umbrasas (2001; 2008; 2010; 2021; 2024 and others). Although in Lithuanian terminology there is a tradition to consider only nouns and noun-like combinations of words as terms, in the language of science and practice, in which terms function, these forms are not sufficient, first of all it is impossible to translate without verbs of special meaning (Umbrasas 2010: 14), so in this article verbs are treated as independent terms. Adjectives are not considered independent terms in this publication and are studied as secondary elements of composite terms. Thus, the research material of this work consists of nouns, verbs and their combinations (composite terms) representing legal concepts recorded in TŽŽ 1936 and TŽŽ 2013 and adjectives used in the field of law with a special meaning, i.e. independent legal terms and their possible secondary elements, recorded in the dictionary as separate words. All this research material is hereinafter referred to collectively as legal terms. 1 Previous known Lithuanian dictionaries of international words: Šlapelis Jurgis 1907: Dictionary of foreign and ununderstood words: facilitation for readers, Tilžė: Šviesa, 110 p.; M. and S. 1923: Dictionary of Foreign and International Words, Šiauliai: „Vilties“ dr-jos leidinys, 84 p.; Norkus Jonas 1924: Dictionary of Foreign and Ununderstandable Words, Kaunas: Vaivos b-vė, 95 p. 2 For example: : Mackevičienė Aldona 1999: Dictionary of International Words, Vilnius: Gimtinė; 2007: 2nd place International Dictionary of English and English-English Translations. and others. 4 In order to select legal terms from the dictionaries, it was necessary to establish the criteria for recognition and selection of legal terms. Since “a term is not a special word or a constant combination of words, but a named unit of language whose content is revealed by the definition of the term meaning” (Gaivenis 2002: 13), in this article the meaning of the word presented in TŽŽ 1936 and TŽŽ 2013 is conditionally equated with the definition of the term meaning. In accordance with this provision, the presentation of the definition or meaning of the legal term in the dictionary was chosen as the main criterion for recognizing the legal term and the characteristic of the legal term. By collecting legal terms from international dictionaries, the aim was to cover as much as possible of the lexicon related to the field of law: to collect various branches of law, used in the legal systems of other countries (e.g., bestas), as well as obsolete (e.g., abjudicacy) and ecclesiastical law (e.g., concordat) terms. THE NUMBER OF LEGAL TERMS IN THE 1936 AND 2013 INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARIES The term in this article is understood as the name of a concept in science, technology, art or other field. From the presentation of the meanings of international words, which are conditionally equated here with the definitions of terms, it has been established that 738 international words presented in TŽZ 1936 and 748 in TŽZ 2013 designate legal concepts or are used in the field of law with a special meaning. The 738 legal terms and their elements found in the TŽZ 1936 account for 3.35% of all the headings of this dictionary (22 000), while the 748 legal terms and their elements found in the TŽZ 2013 account for about 2.67% of all the headings of this dictionary (28 000). A comparison of the number of heading words in both dictionaries (22 000 in the OJ 1936 and 28 000 in the OJ 2013) shows that the second dictionary, published 77 years later, has increased by 6 000, or 27 %, while the absolute number of legal terms has remained essentially unchanged and the relative number has even decreased. This shows that the attention of the TŽZ 2013 editors to the field of law did not increase equally as to the concepts of other fields. In part, this situation can be viewed as a continuation of the situation that existed in the Soviet 3 era: in the international dictionaries of words prepared at that time, extremely little attention was paid to such social sciences as sociology, psychology, and other directions, e.g. economics, political science, were strongly ideologized. On the other hand, dictionaries of international words are prepared, among other sources, based on terminology dictionaries, so the extremely limited number of social sciences terms in TŽZ 2013 could also be due to the lack of terminology dictionaries in the relevant fields. 3 During the period of Soviet occupation, the original Lithuanian dictionary of international words was prepared only in the late Soviet period – in 1985 (Kvietkauskas Valdemaras 1985: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, Vilnius: Vyriausioji enciklopedijų redakcija), until then in practice Russian dictionaries of international words were used or translated from Russian and somewhat adapted to Lithuanian usage, e.g. : Lemchenas Chackelis 1951: Dictionary of International Words, Vilnius: State Political and Scientific Literature Publishing House; Lemchenas Chackelis 1969: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, Vilnius: Mintis. 5 Of the 738 legal terms and their derivatives found in the TŽŽ 1936 and 748 TŽŽ 2013, 562 words are terms recorded in both dictionaries that designate the same legal concept and have at least some formal differences in expression. This is a list of legal terms common to both dictionaries. It should be noted that there are much more lexicons of the same expression, but those that did not have the meaning of the concept of law in 1936 or in 2013 are not included in the general terms. It has been established that over eight decades, the basis of at least 77% of Lithuanian international law terminology has remained stable, while the remaining 178, or 23%, of legal terms consist of: 1) terms recorded in only one of the dictionaries: a) TŽŽ 2013 contains such legal terms that were not yet in TŽŽ 1936, this situation was determined by the emergence of both new social phenomena as objects of legal regulation and new legal concepts, e.g.: maintenance, discriminate, genocide, lobbying, preamble, resocialization, etc. ; b) In the 1936 TŽŽ there were such legal terms that are no longer in the 2013 TŽŽ, this situation was determined by changes in legal regulation, change of legal concepts and terms for naming them, non-relevance of concepts, etc., e.g.: incrimination, arrestant, asylum, execution, illegal, impunity, conspiracy, observance, peripheration, etc. ; 2) words recorded in both dictionaries, but in terms of meaning – only in one of them: a) the 2013 dictionary extended the meaning of the concept of law to words that already existed in the 1936 dictionary, but did not name the concept of law, for example, collision in the TŽZ 2013 has the second meaning of “contradiction of laws regulating the same or close social relations”, while the TŽZ 1936 records the only meaning of collision – “fight, clash of opposing forces, matters, conditions, opinions, feelings”; also one of the meanings of national in TŽŽ 2013 is “belonging to the whole state, all states”, while in TŽŽ 1936 national meant only “national”; b) words or combinations of words in the 1936 dictionary that designate the concept of right, which in the 2013 dictionary no longer have this meaning, for example, degradation in the 1936 TŽZ meant “degradation, deprivation of a degree or other rights”, while degradation in the 2013 TŽZ is defined only as the gradual deterioration of some good qualities; one of the meanings of retraction in the TJZ 1936 was “change of the judgment due to its error”, whereas in the TJZ 2013 retraction merely means a contraction, a reduction; 3) The list of headings of TŽŽ 1936 contains 53 composite legal terms, e.g. administrative law, civil law, natural person, legal person, cassation appeal, notarial contracts, etc. Most of these compound terms in the TŽŽ 1936 have become an integral part of the modern Lithuanian legal terminology. Before discussing the expression of the terms found in the dictionaries of international words, it should be noted that the elements or possible elements of legal terms in this article are adjectives used in the field of law with a special meaning, recorded in the heading lists of international dictionaries of words not as elements of a combination of words (composite term), but as separate lexical units, the terminological meaning of which emerges from the interpretation or interpretation of their meanings. 6 examples of instructions for use provided. According to the formal expression (composition of the term) in the following article such adjectives are assigned to the elements of terms, their precise designation would be adjective elements of compound terms. Of the total of 738 legal terms and their elements recorded in TŽZ 1936, 53 are compound terms and 685 are single-word terms and their elements. 52 of the 53 compound terms are two-word terms, 1 term is a three-word term (active suffrage). The main element of all these compound terms is the noun, and the secondary elements are twofold − most of them are (a) a combination of adjectives (35), e.g. administrative acts, commercial court, easements, verbal notes, or participle (1), e.g. indictment, or (b) management certificates, expressed by the noun prefix (17), e.g. letter of credit, exile law, guarantee agreement, police supervision. This group of composite legal terms recorded in the TŽŽ 1936 cannot be compared with the corresponding group of terms in the TŽŽ 2013, since the latter dictionary does not include combinations of words designating legal concepts – composite terms – among the headings. 4 It should be noted that in addition to the already mentioned 738 international legal terms and their components, the TŽŽ 1936 also presents 10 Lithuanian legal terms: 3 of them are single words (akistata, bailiff, innocence) and 7 are compound terms (personal immunity, special laws, military court, probation, forfeiture tax, international law, court of third parties). Although at first glance this appears to be an inconsistency in the work of the dictionary editors, it is clear from the “Talks” written by the dictionary editor J. Žiugžda (1936: 6) (“In the Greta dictionary of international words <...> some Lithuanian scientific terms are also explained”) that this was a conscious and at the time, in the absence of terminology dictionaries, extremely necessary decision of the dictionary editors – to present and explain some Lithuanian (non-international) terms in the published dictionary of international words. All 748 legal terms and their possible elements in the TŽZ 2013 are monosyllables. In terms of pronunciation, they belong to three classes of words: nouns, verbs and adjectives. It has been estimated that out of 738 legal terms and their elements found in the TŽZ 1936, 566, or 76.7% of all legal terms in the dictionary, are monosyllabic terms expressed by nouns; verb – 69, or 9.8 per cent. ; 45, or 6.4 per cent, of the term elements expressed by an adjective. ; compound terms – 53, or 7.1 per cent. Of the 748 legal terms and their derivatives found in TŽZ 2013, noun terms comprise 573, or 76.6% of all terms in the dictionary; verb terms – 92, or 12.1%. ; 83, or 11.3 per cent, of the term elements expressed by an adjective. ; in the list of headings for compound terms – 0 (Figure 1). 4 It is necessary to add that the examples of compound legal terms as usage are presented in the TŽŽ 2013 for 21 of the 83 adjectives used in the field of law, e.g.: for legal – legal address, legal person, for criminal – criminal offence, for operational – operational information, etc. In total, 27 examples of such compound terms are given. Since only the legal terms recorded in the headings and their possible adjective elements were collected from both dictionaries, these examples of composite terms are not included in the total sum of legal terms in TŽZ 2013 – only adjectives recorded as heading words are counted. 7 Figure 1. INTERNATIONAL LAW TERMS – THE DILEMA OF DEBT AND ACCOUNTABLE Before presenting the statistics of references to the language of origin of the legal terms and their elements found in both dictionaries, it is necessary to define the criteria according to which these references are calculated, since in both dictionaries the language of origin of some words (in TŽŽ 1936 – part of single-word noun and verb terms, adjective elements and compound terms, and in TŽŽ 2013 – part of verb terms and adjective elements) is not indicated, and in addition, in the index of some words in TŽŽ 2013 there is a reference to another article, whose title word or its etymology should help to understand the origin of the explanatory word. Although the editors of no dictionaries have explained why the origin language is not indicated for some words, it can be assumed that those words that have a Lithuanian suffix and which are not indicated for the origin of the language are probably not treated as borrowed words, but as derivatives, the basis of the formation of which is another international word. It is also likely that the editors of TŽZ 1936 did not have sufficient data to determine the origin of some words in certain cases, and some words could have been left without the indication of origin by mistake. The least difficulty in calculating terms according to their origin languages is the group of single-word noun terms, since in both dictionaries the origin language is indicated for most of such terms (in TŽZ 2013 it is indicated for all 573 nouns, while in TŽZ 1936 it is not indicated for only 12 of 566 nouns, e.g.: falsifikatas, rasizmas). It is believed that the authors of the dictionary were the same persons. All of the morpheme of these nouns, except the ending, are of foreign origin. It is likely that these nouns entered into the Lithuanian language ready-made, only here, adapting to the grammatical system of the Lithuanian language, endings were added to them. Considering such words as borrowed, there is no 5 5 In Lithuanian linguistics, some scholars consider such nouns as borrowed, yet other researchers consider non-Lithuanian nouns with endings, alongside which in Lithuanian there is a corresponding semantic 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Substantives Verbs Adjectives Compound terms make sense to divide them into verbs and Definition of terms and their elements TŽŽ 1936 TŽŽ 2013 8 analyze them according to the categories of verbs. From the perspective of morphological analysis, it is clear that most of these nouns came into Lithuanian language with international suffixes. Most of the noun-only international law terms recorded in both dictionaries have the international suffix -acija (about 20% of all noun terms) and -ija (about 19% of all noun terms), while about 40% of noun terms have one of the following foreign suffixes: -alas, -(i)antas, -aras, -(i)atas, -ažas, -ektas, -enas, -entas, -eris, -ė, -esas, -etas, -ikas, -istas, -ė, -istika, -itas, -izmas, -yva, -yvas, -(t)orius, -ė, -(i)umas, -utas, -ūra; one or two terms were found with the following suffixes: -ada, -anas, -antas, -endas, -eris, -eta, -ezė, -ėja, -idas, -ierė, -ierius, -iktas, -ina, -inas, -ingas, -ionas, -isas, -izė, -yras, -olas, -onas, -oras, -ulas, -usas. About 20% of the remaining international noun law terms consist of terms a) with a foreign prefix and suffix, e.g. koalīcija; (b) only with a prefix of foreign origin, e.g. preamble; or c) having neither prefix nor suffix, e.g.: aktas, cenzas, faktas, nota, pasas, renta, stigma. In summary, it should be emphasized that the noun terms discussed in the article are considered borrowed and their classification and calculation according to the languages of origin was not problematic. A slightly different situation emerges when looking at the morphological composition of verb-based legal terms and adjectives used in the field of law with a special meaning – a much larger part of these lexicons, unlike the noun terms discussed earlier, are composed of one international component (pamata) and one Lithuanian component (adjective), excluding the ending, so some of such terms and their elements can reasonably be considered derivatives rather than borrowed. The fact that the authors of both dictionaries looked at the group of verb terms and adjectives precisely from this perspective, i.e. trying to determine which of them arrived in the Lithuanian language ready-made, and which of them were made in the Lithuanian language, is evident from the fact that a significant number of verbs and adjectives do not have any indication of language origin at all, and a further number of verbs and adjectives in the TŽŽ 2013 index are provided with a reference to another word. All 69 verb terms found in TŽZ 1936 have the suffix -uoti, e.g. apeliuoti, pateisinti, proroguoti. 91 of the 92 verb-related legal terms found in TŽZ 2013 have the Lithuanian suffix -uoti, e.g.: amnestuoti, inkriminuoti, reglamentuoti, suspenduoti, and 1 verb has the suffix -auti: advokatauti. In Lithuanian, such suffixes, added to a foreign root, primarily perform the function of morphological adaptation, by means of which the word is included in the morphological system, as well as in certain cases, when “more than one word with the same root can be borrowed into the language, and then, when one of them is morphologically more complex, it is already possible to see a synchronous constructive relationship” (Pakerys 2013– 2014: 2). Thus, when a lexicon cannot be divided into verbs, because it has no base word in Lithuanian, and the suffix only performs the function of morphological adaptation of the borrowed word, and the formally related word, it is considered correlative derivatives. The dual treatment of such nouns is discussed more extensively by Jolanta Vaskelienė in Practical General Lithuanian Grammar (Balčiūnienė et al. 2024: 366–371). 9 and when consonant nouns or adjectives are found in Lithuanian, it can be assumed that such a suffix performs not only the function of adaptation of the word in the grammatical system of Lithuanian language, but also the function of construction, and such a verb can already be considered as a construct. The article assumes that it is precisely to the verbs treated as derivatives by the dictionary editors that the references to the origin are not given, and to those treated as borrowings – they are given. In the TŽZ 1936, the origin of 69 verb terms of law is indicated for 60 words, e.g. approve, notify, and for 9 words it is not indicated, e.g. bankrupt, codify, control, legalize. Although it would be difficult to guess at the moment which words the editors of TŽŽ 1936 considered as reference words in the case of verbs such as kodifikuoti and kompensuoti, in the future, when calculating terms according to their origin languages, this decision of the editors of the dictionary will not be questioned and these words will be classified among those where the origin language is not indicated. Of the 92 verb-related legal terms in the TŽZ 2013, 36 words also do not indicate the original language, e.g.: advokauti, konfiskuoti, licencuoti, patentuoti. This group of words is included in the article among those whose language of origin is not indicated. It is likely that the dictionary editors consider these verbs as derivatives. It is emphasized that “the operative status of the so-called international verbs in Lithuanian linguistics is more often looked at with caution, because historically they and consonant nouns can be borrowed independently, so the actual operative action in Lithuanian may not have occurred, and only by looking synchronously we see that connection” (Pakerys 2013–2014: 9). TŽŽ 2013 at part of verbs, when looking synchronously it would also be possible to see the action of action, the arrow provides a reference to the implied base word, e.g. amnestuoti [↑ amnestija], konvojuoti [↑ konvojus]. In 2013, there are 13 such verbs. In this article, the origin language of these verbs will be determined by the origin language of the implied reference word given in parentheses. The fact that the analysis of origin and action of international verbs is a complex and controversial area is also proved by the often different approach of the editors of both dictionaries to the origin of the same word, for example, TŽŽ 1936 does not include any indication of origin for the word falsifikuoti, while TŽŽ 2013 indicates that it comes from the Latin word falsificare, and vice versa – TŽŽ 1936 writes that vizuoti is a loan from French, while TŽŽ 2013 does not provide any indication of origin for vizuoti at all, probably in the belief that it may be derived from visa. The group of adjective elements of legal terms is divided into two parts in terms of morphological composition. The first group includes adjectives with a foreign root and a Lithuanian ending. If we look at these stems more closely, we can distinguish two international suffixes -yvus, -i and -alus, -i. These suffixes are clearly visible in the etymology presented next to the term in TŽZ 2013, so it is obvious that the action with this suffix, if any, took place not in Lithuanian, but in the language of the source or mediator: preventyvus (French: preventif), imperatyvus (Latin: imperativus), legalus (Latin: legalis). In the TŽZ 1936 the first group of adjectives was recorded in 8 of 45, or 18% of all adjective elements: 3 of them with the international suffix -yvus, -i, e.g., objektyvus, and 5 – with the suffix -alus, -i, e.g., 16 eksteritorialas. TŽŽ 2013 words and phrases that functioned as foreign language quotations in Lithuanian at the time. There are also many different spelling terms recorded. TŽŽ 1936 was a qualitatively prepared, valuable and useful dictionary, which in the first period of independence, in the absence of a published Lithuanian dictionary of legal terms, especially a textbook or a term database, could have been one of the main sources of legal terminology next to Lithuanian legislation and legal science works for at least several years (before the occupation of the country), while the influence and significance of TŽŽ 2013 on the legal language is much less, because the relative number of legal terms here, calculated by comparing the total number of words in the dictionary, is lower than TŽŽ 1936, in addition, in the second period of independence, legal terminology was fixed, published, systematized in many other publicly available specialized sources (the Term Bank of the Republic of Lithuania, the IATE database, bilingual dictionaries of legal terms, etc.). ŠALTINIAI TŽŽ 1936: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, K. Boruta, P. Čepėnas, A. Sirutytė-Čepėnienė, [Kaunas]: Sakalas. TŽŽ 2013: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, A. Kaulakienė, S. Keinys, B. Kurkulis, V. Račiūnaitė, V. Žalkauskas, Vilnius: Alma littera. LITERATŪRA Balčiūnienė Asta, Drukteinis Albinas, Kazlauskaitė Rūta, Vaskelienė Jolanta 2024: Praktinė bendrinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika [Practical Grammar of Common Lithuanian Language], Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla. Bendorienė Aldona, Bogušienė Virginija, Dagytė Emilija, Daržinskaitė Toleina, Grigas Gintautas, Gudžinskas Zigmantas, Jukna Feliksas, Kinderys Algimantas, Kurkulis Bronislovas, Kvietkauskas Valdemaras, Morkūnas Vaidotas, Mudėnienė Regina, Skirmantas Petras 2004: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas [Dictionary of International Words], Vilnius: Alma littera. Briaukienė Birutė 2004: Medicinos terminai Tarptautinių žodžių žodyne [Medical Terms in the Dictionary of International Words]. – Žmogus kalbos erdvėje [elektroninis išteklius]: tarptautinės mokslinės konferencijos mokslinių straipsnių rinkinys, 2003 m. gegužės 8–9 d., Kaunas, 3(1), 559–565. Gaivenis Kazimieras 2002: Lietuvių terminologija: teorijos ir tvarkybos metmenys [Lithuanian Terminology: Outline of Theory and Regulating], Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla. Gedzevičienė Dalia 2023: Dėl teisės terminų pateikimo „Tarptautinių žodžių žodyne“ [On the Submission of Legal Terms in the Dictionary of International Words]. – 17 Respectus Philologicus 43(48), 24–35. Prieiga internete: https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/respectus-philologicus/article/view/29669/30792. Koženiauskienė Regina 2004: Tarptautinių žodžių vartojimas teisininkų kalboje [International Words in the Language of Lawyers]. – Skoliniai ir bendrinė lietuvių kalba, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla, 189–196. Kvietkauskas Valdemaras 1985: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas [Dictionary of International Words], Vilnius: Vyriausioji enciklopedijų redakcija. Lemchenas Chackelis 1951: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas [Dictionary of International Words], Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla. Lemchenas Chackelis 1969: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas [Dictionary of International Words], Vilnius: Mintis. Mackevičienė Aldona 1999: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas [Dictionary of International Words], Vilnius: Gimtinė. M. ir S. 1923: Svetimų ir tarptautiškų žodžių žodynėlis [Dictionary of Foreign and International Words], Šiauliai: „Vilties“ dr-jos leidinys. Norkus Jonas 1924: Svetimų ir nesuprantamų žodžių žodynėlis [Dictionary of Foreign and Incomprehensible Words], Kaunas: „Vaivos“ b-vė. Pakerys Jurgis 2013–2014: Naujųjų skolinių duomenų bazės veiksmažodžių morfologija [Verbal Morphology in the Database of New Borrowings into Lithuanian]. – Taikomoji kalbotyra 3, 1–26. Prieiga internete: https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/taikomojikalbotyra/article/view/17480/16652. Petrėtienė Angelika, Mikalajūnaitė Živilė 2010: 1936 m. „Tarptautinių žodžių žodyno“ poligrafijos terminai [Printing Trade Terms in International Words’ Dictionary of 1936]. – Santalka. Filologija. Edukologija 18(4), 93–106. Prieiga internete: https://www.ceeol.com/search/articledetail?id=125445. Rudaitienė Vida 2006: Dėl tarptautinių žodžių semantinių pokyčių administracinėje kalboje [On the Semantic Variation of International Words in the Language of Management]. – Specialybės kalba: tyrimas ir dėstymas, Vilnius: Mykolo Romerio universiteto Leidybos centras, 123–133. Šlapelis Jurgis 1907: Svetimų ir nesuprantamų žodžių žodynėlis: skaitytojams palengvinimas [Dictionary of Foreign and Incomprehensible Words: Help for Readers], Tilžė: Šviesa. Umbrasas Alvydas 2001: Teisės terminijos padėtis Lietuvoje 1918–1940 metais [The State of the Terminology of Law in Lithuania in 1918–1940]. – Terminologija 8, 76–94. Prieiga internete: https://journals.lki.lt/terminologija/article/view/698/789. Umbrasas Alvydas 2008: Lietuvių teisės terminografija: nuo rankraščių iki duomenų bazių [Lithuanian Terminography of Law: from Manuscripts to Databases]. – Specialybės kalba: terminija ir studijos: mokslinių straipsnių rinkinys, Vilnius: Mykolo Romerio universitetas, 100–109. 18 Umbrasas Alvydas 2010: Lietuvių teisės terminija 1918–1940 metais: pagrindinių kodeksų terminai [Lithuanian Legal Terminology in 1918–1940: Terms of the Main Codes], Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Umbrasas Alvydas 2021: Teisės terminijos tvarkyba Terminologijos komisijoje (1921–1926): Terminologijos komisijos 100-mečiui [The Ordering of Legal Terminology in the Terminology Commission (1921–1926): on the Occasion of the 100th Anniversary of the Terminology Commission]. – Terminologija 28, 225–238. Prieiga internete: https://journals.lki.lt/terminologija/article/view/2102/2227. Umbrasas Alvydas 2024: Legal Terminology Management in Lithuania. – Glossa Iuridica XI, 11–28. Vaitkevičiūtė Valerija 2007: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas [Dictionary of International Words], Vilnius: Žodynas. Vladarskienė Rasuolė 2004: Dėl teisės aktų vertimo [On Translations of Legal Acts]. – Skoliniai ir bendrinė lietuvių kalba, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla, 177– 188. Vladarskienė Rasuolė 2014: Naujos tarptautinių žodžių reikšmės administracinėje lietuvių kalboje [New Meanings of the International Words of the Administrative Lithuanian Language]. – Taikomoji kalbotyra 3, 1–16. Prieiga internete: https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/taikomojikalbotyra/article/view/17482/16654. Vladarskienė Rasuolė 2019: Tarptautinių žodžių semantikos pokyčiai administracinėje kalboje [Changes in the Semantics of International Words in Administrative Language]. – Bendrinė kalba 92, 1–13. Prieiga internete: http://www.bendrinekalba.lt/?92. Žiugžda Juozas 1936: Prakalba [Preface]. – Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, [Kaunas]: Sakalas, 5–7.