4-oji tarptautinė mokslinė konferencija „Moksliniai, administraciniai ir edukaciniai terminologijos lygmenys“

267Terminology | 2021 | 28 doi.org/10.35321/term28-14 4th International Scientific Conference “Scientific, Administrative and Educational Terminology Components” RAMUNĖ VASKELAITĖ Lietuvių kalbos institutas ORCID id: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6063-9699 The scientific conference “Scientific, administrative and educational aspects of terminology”, which brings together terminologists from all over the world at the Institute of Lithuanian Language, could only bring them together this year... at computer screens. As Covid-19 restrictions continued, this traditional conference had to be held in an untraditional format. However, there have been a lot of reports. Almost all of Europe was represented – Western (France, Belgium), Central and Eastern (Hungary, Poland, Switzerland, Croatia, Romania, Georgia, Russia), Southern (Spain and the autonomous region of Catalonia, Portugal), Southeast (Greece, North Macedonia). Two reports were read by neighbouring Latvians, ten by speakers from Lithuania. Thus, the non-traditional format was not an obstacle to feeling what the European terminology breathes and where it is heading. During the event’s particularly intensive schedule (October 21–22), there was an abundance of projects highlighting both the scientific research and the direction and forms of terminology work. From the latter, the need and aim for harmonization and coordination would appear as the most prominent direction of current terminological work. True, coordination of different dimensions. Perhaps the most comprehensive dimension was opened by the project Terminology without borders, which was presented by the representative of the European Parliament, Rodolf Maslias. According to the rapporteur, it covers not only Europe, but also Asia and North America. The project is expanding. It already has more than 20 partners, covering 10 key areas of usage: education, finance, medicine, law, etc. The focus is on universities: here texts are created, terms are selected from them, equivalents in other languages are found, and this is published in the form of multilingual dictionaries (https:// 268 Ramunė Vaskelaitė 4th International Scientific Conference “Scientific, administraciniai ir edukaciniai terminologijos lygmenys“ yourterm.org). The terms evaluated by the European Parliament’s terminologues are entered into the EU terminology database IATE with their equivalents. However, coordination efforts are also made across other boundaries, such as country and language. Guest speaker Frieda Steurs (Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium) presented the Dutch language and terminology coordination efforts. As you know, this language is spoken in the Netherlands, in the Belgian region of Flanders (the so-called Flemish language), in two Caribbean island groups, as well as in the former Dutch colony of Suriname. After pointing out that efforts to concentrate it have always been made (the Dutch Language Union was founded in 1980), the speaker told about the Dutch Language Institute in Leiden, which has become such a center, where all material for learning Dutch is collected, and about the result of the efforts in the field of terminology – the Centre of Expertise for Dutch Terminology, which has been operating since 2019. Of course, also about the harmonization, development and research of Dutch terminology. The report prepared by the Hungarian representatives, read by Dóra Mária Tamás, who teaches at two Hungarian universities and works at the Hungarian Office for Translation and Attestation Ltd (OFFI), pointed in the same direction. The speaker presented the three-volume terminology manual published by this office of the Hungarian Ministry of Justice, whose purpose is already stated in the title of the report – to teach, harmonize terminology, contribute to the implementation of the goals of Hungarian terminology policy. The publication focuses on the most important legal concepts, i.e. it provides their equivalents in other languages, definitions, sources, but also publishes articles on terminology and language strategy, language planning topics. After reviewing the first volume (2017), which was focused on teaching, and the second volume (2019), which was focused on terminology harmonization, and which provided equivalents in English, German, French and Italian, the speaker also presented the latest volume, which provided equivalents in six nearby countries (Slovenia, Slovakia, Serbia, Romania, Croatia and Ukraine) where Hungarian is a minority language. The theme of harmonization was also touched on in the report of the director of the Lithuanian Language Institute Albina Auksoriūte, but she turned to the past – the Terminology Commission established by the government at the beginning of the independence period (1921), which in the report was named as the beginning of organized terminology management. The purpose of the commission, established under the Ministry of Education, was to harmonize the language and terms used in state institutions. As summarized, it created- 269Terminology | 2021 | 28 rė necessary terms for the functioning of the state. However, it was also mentioned that the work was interrupted due to internal disagreements, unequal attitude to the purity of terminology, novelties, and after five years it was interrupted altogether (it became possible only after the war). At the same time, the works of Stasys Šalkauskas, a person who studied terminology at a similar time, are taškas, taip pat jo formuluoti terminologijos principai, įskaitant keltą minpresented, thus the philosophical view that it is not necessary to borrow or create new ones – words used in one’s own language can be adapted to terminology. The presentation by Regina Kvašytė, representing the Šiauliai Academy and the University of Latvia, could be considered a continuation of the topic. It reviews the Terminology Commission established after the war, in 1945, as well as the commission established at a similar time in Latvia, and compares the circumstances of their establishment and activities. In Lithuania, the Terminology Commission was established at the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences, and in Latvia, since 1946, at the Latvian Academy of Sciences, both of which later became part of the language-researching scientific institutes. The commissions, in one form or another, have survived to this day, and this seems to indicate that links with science were a more constant factor in their activities. However, an excerpt from the minutes of the meeting of the Lithuanian Commission held in 1951, in which the aims and tasks were formulated, is also presented, showing that among the aims was formulated “the fight against foreign bourgeois legacy in the field of terminology”, among the directions of activity – “to become acquainted with bourgeois legacy in the field of terminology”. The latter wording is viewed as an attempt to continue the activities of the pre-war Commission, but it also shows that it had to be continued under quite different circumstances, when the ideological poveikio sritimi laikytas net ir mokslas, net terminija. Turbūt manyta, kad tikrovę galima keisti keičiant terminiją. The conference also presented works showing coordination efforts at the level of a particular field. Francesc Galera, from the University of Catalonia (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona), spoke about a project that has been running for more than a decade and has resulted in the harmonization of terms in the academic environment. According to the speaker, the starting point of the project was internationality: the English terms of the documentation governing the activity of this university were translated so differently that it was difficult to communicate. In response to this problem, the Catalan-speaking universities (19 in the Catalan-speaking part of Spain and one in Andorra, France and Italy) have launched a project to harmonize them at the university level, resulting in 2,000 harmonized terms in Catalan, Spanish and English (the latter being the official language of the university). 270 Ramunė Vaskelaitė 4th International Scientific Conference “Scientific, administraciniai ir edukaciniai terminologijos lygmenys“ social and cultural issues of the Lithuanian language”. As an advantage, the speaker mentioned the contribution to the standardization of the English language, and as a difficulty, which emerged during the implementation of the project, the great differences in language systems, as well as realities. Other speakers also mentioned the inconsistencies of language systems, for example, the Croatian representative Diana Stolac (University of Rijeka), who discussed terms in marine engineering, or the representatives of the Latvian National Library Inta Virbule and Maira Kreislere. The latter presentation focused on library terms and highlighted the problems of translation and implementation of the international Resource Description and Access (RDA) standard, which M. Kreisler described as a new philosophy. Standards are supposed to be a tool for standardising terminology, but the presentation by the Spanish representative Ricardo Eita-Bruno (University Carlos III of Madrid), which focused on safety terms, showed that instead of playing this role, they only promote diversity, which in areas such as safety is a threat. The report revealed the differences in terms used in different engineering fields and proposed that such terms be concentrated in one place so that any discrepancies are immediately visible. In another section, a group of researchers from Hungary, represented by Márk Jámboras, drew attention to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Classification of Diseases and Other Health Problems – they presented a study that revealed that it does not include some soft tissue and bone injuries, which are found in Hungarian doctors’ diagnoses. However, the presentation of Violeta Černiauskaitė (Lithuanian National Library Martynas Mažvydas), who is participating in the activities of the International Organization for Standardization’s Committee on Information and Documentation, revealed that standards are constantly updated, so they are a changing thing. Furthermore, standards are being developed at a rapid pace and countries do not have time to translate all standards into their national languages. The speaker also mentioned the standard-dictionary LST ISO 5127. Information and documentation. References and a glossary covering the terms of previously issued standards. This would already be a confirmation of the idea that has emerged from the discussion of safety terms that standards for terms are an area that in turn requires standardisation. The conference did not discuss whether dictionaries are a more reliable tool for uniformization of terms. However, a couple of presentations on the topic of dictionaries were read, and both showed that the prospect of this traditional tool is visible. Elīna Peina (supervisor Anita Helviga), who represented the University of Liepaja, mentioned that in the late 19th – early 20th centuries, Liepaja was the capital of Latvia. In Latvia, over 600 dictionaries have been published, presented a study aimed at finding out what is a good dictionary. True, 271Terminologija | 2021 | 28 presented only a part of it – the answers of the students and doctoral students interviewed to the question, what characteristics should characterize an ideal terminology dictionary. The answers showed that the most important characteristics of the dictionary were considered updating, simplicity and reliability. Correspondences in other languages were important for only a few respondents. The speaker from Poland – Tomasz Michta (University of Balstoge) presented a systematic dictionary based on the division of concepts into primary, secondary, tertiary, etc., as an alternative to the alphabetical dictionary. It would also show that the perspective of the dictionaries is visible, only looking for a new form. This conference paid little attention to modern tools for terminology management or research, artificial intelligence technologies. They are mentioned in only a couple of reports. Sigita Rackevičienė (Mykolas Romeris University), who represented the Lithuanian research group (S. Rackevičienė, A. Utka, A. Bielinskienė and A. Rokas), implementing the project Bilingual Automatic Term Recognition, discussed the current stage of the project – data annotation with the QuickTag tool, or more precisely, the problems that have emerged. Khatuna Beridze (Shota Rustaveli State University of Batumi), a representative of Georgia, which is still preparing to join the EU and therefore translating the Acquis Communautaire into Georgian, also mentioned the automatic tool. It is a terminological tool based on already translated documents, which reveals errors in translation and usage of terms. It is designed to prevent costly errors. In the already translated EU-Georgia Association Agreement, the rapporteur has divided them into eight groups. The importance of terminology in translation was highlighted in more presentations. In Romania, Maria Crina Herteg, who taught at the University of 18 December 1918 (Alba Iulia), based on both extensive literature and her own university experiment, highlighted the importance of terminology courses for future translators. She talked about an experiment that revealed how important it is to teach them to use texts. Milena Sazdovska Pigulovska, a representative of the University of St. Cyril and Methodius in North Macedonia, read a report showing that the terminology course for translators in this country is not only taught but also recently modernized. Students are oriented to the use of digital tools, independent learning. Ágota Fóris (Charles Gaspar University of the Hungarian Reformed Church) presented a project that highlighted the importance of terminology in the initial translation process: the result of the translation depends on the correct, accurate use of terms in the text submitted for translation. 272 Ramunė Vaskelaitė 4th International Scientific Conference “Scientific, administraciniai ir edukaciniai terminologijos lygmenys“ technical and administrative terminology in Lithuania”. However, a whole group of reports also focused on the scientific side. Profesorius iš Prancūzijos Cristophe Roche (Savojos Montblano universitetas) nagrinėjo pagrindinius konceptus: terminologiją, terminą, sąvoką, definition. Also, the question of their relationship, the term or concept of priority, the relationship with ontology. Aušra RimkutėGanusauskienė, representing the Lithuanian Language Institute, discussed the question of the relationship between the definition and the term (more precisely, the subordinate of the compound term), based on sports terms and their definitions. Mariusz Górniczius from the University of Warsaw proposed a new classification of terms, along with new terms for naming the units of classification (endoderived terms and exoderived terms). Whether endodary and exodary, or other equivalents, would represent them more accurately in Lithuanian, would become clear only when this classification was applied more widely in Lithuanian, and from the report it became clear that its starting point is the requirement of clarity of the term. Terms are tried to be classified according to whether they are understood without definition or explanation, or are more metaphorical, although the drawn line does not coincide with the line between metaphorical and non-metaphorical terms. A couple of studies are presented, in which new research directions are applied. Lina Rutkienė (Institute of Lithuanian Language), who studies construction terminology, examined the stitches in this area as unions of logically related concepts, or propositions, thus from the point of view of cognitive linguistics. Based on the 70-year-old collection, she had examined propositional models consisting of two concepts of the object, and concluded that in construction terminology, these models had remained almost unchanged over 100 years. Elena Logunova (Kaliningrad State Technical University) proposed frames as a tool of terminological analysis, and at the same time described the concept of frame, frame theory related to cognitive and thought processes. Dmitry Schilovskiy, representing A. I. Evdokimovo Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry, discussed the phenomenon called clip thinking or mosaic thinking as a cognitive model. Its gimas kompiuteriniu būdu, technologijos priemonių naudojimo absoliumanifestations in the current medical training process and work (aging of doctors, inability to see the patient as a whole, etc.) and ethical and social problems caused by it, such as the dehumanization of medicine, are examined. A solution to the problem is proposed – terminology training based on structuring. 273Terminology | 2021 | 28 The Lithuanian authors’ reports focused on the usage environment of the term. Palmira Zemlevičiūtė (Lithuanian Language Institute), who studies medical terms, discussed Naoah Gordon’s novel The Doctor. Avicenna's pupil of terms, hence the use of the term in fine text. Based on this source, she was inclined to oppose some researchers’ idea that determinology is experienced in such an environment. The presented examples showed that the term also performs a nominative function, although, surrounded by other words, it can also perform an emotional-expressive, visual function. Asta Mitkevičienė, who examined the synonymy, also chose as a source not scientific works, but texts of an educational nature in the field of health, the data of which are presented in the Lithuanian language online textbook ltTenTen. Previously, the author had already drawn attention to the peculiarities of the use of synonyms in the text, designating not only systematic, but also contextual synonyms (see detailed article in the issue 22 of Terminologija), but this time she turned her attention to the nature of the text and distinguished functional synonyms. Jurgita Mikelionienė (Kaunas University of Technology) chose the final thesis of students for the analysis of synonyms, thus choosing an academic or close to it style. After examining the synonyms of compound terms used in them, she provided such reasons for synonymy that are usually not mentioned when examining works of scientific style: translation, retelling, quotation; efforts to demonstrate accountability and knowledge of the area under analysis; the need for brevity; attempt to present a more visual, unusual term, etc. Thus, it would be interesting to compare the differences in synonymous expression in student works and, say, in scientific monographs. The author of this review also touched on the issue of synonymy, more precisely, based on astrological texts, she drew attention to the relationship between synonymy and variantity and questioned the view that synonymy and variantity should be considered equally as a sign of terminology non-establishment. The variation of terminology based on texts of specialized and non-specialized language was also discussed by the Swiss representative Aurélie Picton (University of Geneva). As usual in foreign linguistics works, the concept of variantity here covers both differences in terms and expression of terms. However, variability was studied by a method more typical of dialectological studies: it was divided into diachronic (differences in terms of time), diatopic (differences in terms of geography) and diastratic (differences related to specialists, informants). Fátima Noronha (University of the Algarve) also studied the heritage of Mediterranean cuisine in terms of diastratic variability. Thus, the methods of examination and classifications differ, but in general it is clear that, although the administrative level discussions in the conference as perhaps the most prominent 274 Ramunė Vaskelaitė 4th International Scientific Conference “Scientific, the administraciniai ir edukaciniai terminologijos lygmenys“ special feature of the current stage showed the harmonization, coordination of terminology, the scientific level discussions highlighted diversity, diversification. Perhaps a little out of the bounds of terminology science was the presentation of the speaker from Greece, Panagiotis G. Krimpos (Democratic University of Thrace). It lists not only many terms, but also morphological (prefixes, roots, endings), syntactic or other similarities between Lithuanian and modern Greek. For example: the masculine and feminine noun endings are preserved, although they have been lost in many European languages; not too much interest in borrowing, and when borrowing, one tends to adapt to one’s own system of borrowing; neoclassical trunks, etc. The need for further careful investigation of these similarities is emphasized, and at the end a somewhat unexpected proposal is made, which is particularly appropriate to the context of terminology harmonization in various dialects highlighted by the conference: why should these two most conservative branches of the Indo-European protolanguage – Baltic and Greek – not try to restore the previous relationship by terminology? Retrieved 2021-11-03 Ramunė Vaskelaitė Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius, Lithuania E-mail ramune.v[email protected]