Terminologija „Lietuvių kalbos žodyne“

doi.org/10.35321/term26-08 Terminology in the Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language ALVYDAS UMBRASAS Institute of the Lithuanian Language A B S T R A C T The article examines data on the science and practice of terminology collected from the Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language (LKŽ). This is an attempt to read the dictionary somewhat differently. Treating the root termin- as signaling information of a terminological nature, the words containing this root, as well as definitions of meanings and illustrative examples containing such words, were collected from the LKŽ. The material gathered makes it possible to view the LKŽ not only as a dictionary of a general nature, but also as a source of subject-specific information. The illustrative examples are particularly useful in this regard. Through them, one can become acquainted with the theory and practice of terminology, the challenges of terminological work, the development of terms, and so on. KEYWORDS: Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language, terminological information, illustrative example, term, terminology. A B S T R A C T The article analyses terminological data collected from the Dictionary of the Lithuanian language (Lietuvių kalbos žodynas – LKŽ). It is an effort to read the dictionary in a slightly different way. Considering that the root termin- is conveying a certain form of terminological information, words with this root, as well as meaning interpretations, illustrative examples with such words were collected from the LKŽ. The gathered information allows to consider the LKŽ not only as a dictionary of general type but also as a source of expertise information. Illustrative examples are particularly helpful since they provide an insight into the theory and practice of terminology, challenges in terminological work, the development of terms, etc. KEYWORDS: Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language, The Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language, terminological information, illustrative sentence, term, terminology. The monumental Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language (LKŽ) is an exceptional work of Lithuanian lexicography. Its distinctiveness lies in its scope, nature, the length of time taken to compile it, and the collective of its creators. Over 100 years, several generations of people collected and compiled into 20 volumes more than several 162 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne words used over the past centuries—from the earliest writings to texts of the 20th century, from dialects to the standard language, from folk language to scientific terminology. A thesaurus-type dictionary encompasses both spoken and written language. According to Viktorija Daujotytė, it is a fundamental text of Lithuanian culture, whose author is the nation. Completed, yet never complete. “We are all (or will be) written in it, the dead and the living, and those who will yet come into this world as Lithuanians” (Daujotytė 2002: 35–36). As stated in the description of the electronic version of the dictionary, several thousand word collectors gathered words for it; 70 writers wrote the dictionary text, and 23 editors edited it. Approximately 0.5 million headwords and subheadwords, their variants, and phraseological units are described across some 22,000 pages, with about a million illustrative examples provided. In all, the text contains more than 11 million words. A text of this scale, with its abundance of examples, can be viewed not only traditionally as a dictionary, but also as a distinctive corpus in which diverse situations of word use are presented in concentrated form, revealing both the grammatical forms of words and their combinability and semantics. It is particularly interesting to assess the text in terms of its content, since the examples contain certain information about present or past realities and record the values, worldviews, and more of both the contributors of dictionary material and the dictionary’s writers. In other words, we can try to read the dictionary as a kind of cultural text through which we can come to know ourselves. The periods in which the dictionary was compiled (most of it was written during the Soviet era) left their mark on the text. Although examples intended to foster socialist consciousness were required at the time1, “for scholarship, the most important things were facts from dialects and old texts, living sentences that highlighted the nation’s life, thinking, creativity, resourcefulness and excellence, and condemned baseness” (Vitkauskas 2002: 11). For a long time the LKŽ served as a reference tool for other research, but now it is itself becoming an object of study; scholars have begun to speak of a different way of reading the dictionary (Zabarskaitė 2012: 241), and attempts are being made to view its lexicographic entry as a discourse in which actors, situations, and the like can be identified (Zabarskaitė 2010: 136; 2012: 249). Jolanta Zabarskaitė assumes that, owing to the distinctive way in which it was created, the LKŽ reflects the Lithuanian worldview and presents a model of the Lithuanian world up to the first half of the 20th century2. Linguistic, social, ideological, and psychological attitudes are reflected in the discourse of the lexicographic entry. 1 In preparing the electronic version of the LKŽ, “some of the Soviet-era evaluations in word definitions were removed” (Naktinienė 2012: 93). 2 Most of the LKŽ’s illustrative examples were collected roughly up to the middle of the 20th century (Zabarskaitė 2012: 247). Terminologija | 2019 | 26 163 Since the dictionary has a collective author, this lends objectivity to the data (Zabarskaitė 2010: 128; 2012: 247). Several studies have already been conducted on the basis of examples in the LKŽ, focusing on the systems of values and images recorded in it. Our political worldview has been examined using the lexicographic entries for the state, government and law (Zabarskaitė 2010); the sea, the coastal region, and its inhabitants have been described using material by Adalbert Bezzenberger included in the LKŽ (Zabarskaitė 2012); the image of the rowan has been explored in detail, encompassing practical and biological as well as folkloric and mythological aspects (Gritėnienė 2016); and the concept and image of the dictionary itself have been examined on the basis of the dictionary under discussion (Gritėnienė 2017). Aurelija Gritėnienė, who studied the image of the dictionary in the LKŽ, says that “the specific image of the dictionary presented in her study has taken shape in the minds of linguistics specialists—lexicographers, grammarians, dialectologists, and researchers in other fields of language studies—as well as culturally engaged people close to them and authors of literary works” (Gritėnienė 2017: 14). Understandably, this claim refers to the creators of the LKŽ and to the authors of the illustrative examples selected for the LKŽ in which a dictionary is mentioned. The multifaceted nature of the LKŽ as a lexicographic source reasonably raises expectations that the fundamental lexicographic concept of dictionary will be revealed. Reading the dictionary text vertically and horizontally can yield interesting material for various studies. A. Gritėnienė’s study provided an impetus to look at the LKŽ from the perspective of terminology. The object of this article is the terminological data in the LKŽ relating to the term term, its derivatives, and its synonyms (other meanings of term that denote a non-terminological concept are excluded). Words containing the root termin- were sought throughout the dictionary text—both the term term itself and words such as terminology, terminological vocabulary, that is, essentially, derivatives of the term, as well as other words denoting the concept of a term. It is assumed that wherever the root termin- is mentioned, some terminological information can be found. The aim of the study is to show what information on the theory and practice of terminology is recorded in the LKŽ by analysing LKŽ headwords containing the root termin-, together with their definitions and, especially, illustrative examples containing such words. Using mainly the analytical-descriptive method, the study seeks to investigate not only what is presented and how (a more lexicographic perspective), but also what information was selected for the dictionary and what the illustrative examples say about questions of terminology. The study draws on both the printed LKŽ and its electronic version. They are essentially treated as a single source, with occasional attention to differences. When necessary, the Digital Card Index of Additions to the Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language (hereafter LKŽPK) was also consulted. 164 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne KEYWORDS The LKŽ includes3 several nouns containing the root termin-, which name some of the most important concepts in the science of terminology: • terminas DŽ, DŽ1, KlK19,71; L, Š, Rtr etc. “1. KŽ, TŽŽ lingv. a word or phrase that precisely expresses a concept in a particular field of science, technology, or art”; • terminija DŽ, NdŽ, LTEXI273, TŽŽ lingv. “the body of terms”; • terminologija TrpŽ, KŽ, LTEXI274; LL254, L, Rtr “1. DŽ, NdŽ the science of terms,” “2. DŽ, NdŽ see terminija”; • terminologas NdŽ; KlbXVIII33 “a terminology specialist”; • terminologizacija TŽŽ “the process of becoming and rendering something a term”. The meanings are explained concisely, but this is sufficient for a general dictionary. These concepts are explained no more fully in specialized dictionaries either (cf. KTŽ 1990; MTŽ 20054). The LKŽ also includes several adjectives and verbs derived from the terms mentioned above: • termininis BŽ22, NdŽ, KŽ “1. belonging to terminology,” “2. characteristic of a term”; • terminologinis NdŽ “related to terminology”; • terminologiškas KŽ; L, Rtr “see terminologinis”; • termininti “see terminologizuoti”; • suterminti5 rš “to turn into a term”; • terminologizuoti “to use for terminology”. Considering that the LKŽ generally included few international words and their derivatives6, the list is relatively long (for example, into broader usage- 3 In the article, abbreviations for sources of words and examples correspond to those given in the LKŽ. 4 KTŽ 1990 includes only terminas, terminija, terminologija. These terms are also found in MTŽ 2005, but it gives not terminologizacija but terminizavimas. These are competing terms in our terminology; for example, over time K. Gavenis chose to use terminologizacija (Gavenis 2002: 18), while J. Klimavičius supports terminizaciją (Klimavičius: 2002: 131). The term terminologist is absent from terminology dictionaries, but could reasonably be included there (see Umbrasas 2018: 107–108). 5 LKŽPK also records suterminti: Something similar has happened with *pirmininkas* and *viršininkas*: they have been made into terms from the mower who leads the first swath (usually at the old manor) and the senior herdsman who oversees the village shepherds LEXXXI81 (the language has not been corrected). This form occasionally occurs in contemporary usage as well, for example, s u t e r m i n t i bendrieji žodžiai (Didžiurgienė, Grigonienė 2010: 31). Given the systematicity of terms with the same root, haplology should not be justified in this case, since the derivative is made from terminas, not termas. 6 Juozas Balčikonis, who became the editor of the LKŽ in preparation in 1930, planned to include in the dictionary only international words used in living speech, that is, in dialects (Vitkauskas 2002: 9). Terminologija | 2019 | 26 1 6 5 The more practically oriented DLKŽ₇ includes only terminas, terminija, terminologija, terminologas, without any derivatives). In contemporary terminology studies there are considerably more terms with the root termin-; many have been discussed by Regina Kvašytė in her comparison of Lithuanian and Latvian terminology systems. For example, determinizavimas, reterminizavimas, transterminavimas, terminografija, terminotyra, terminoidas, kvazterminas, termynas are also used (Kvašytė 2013: 130). Naturally, they are not found in the LKŽ. In contemporary usage, terminas has no established Lithuanian synonyms. Antanas Vireliūnas’s įvardas seemed to have a chance of competing with terminu, but it did not catch on. It seems that associations with vardas may have worked against it; unfounded accusations of improper word formation were heard, although, as Jonas Klimavičius rightly observed, its derivation—from įvardyti—is impeccable (Klimavičius 2002: 132), and its motivation is clear. The LKŽ records: įvardas Š, BŽ265, NdŽ “name, designation; term” (Ryžuasi privačiai išspausdinti tuos įvardus, kurie jau perėję per „Švietimo darbo“ lapus Vr.); įvardynas Ser “terminology dictionary” (Šiame įvardyne tėra tie įvardai, kurie yra išspausdinti „Švietimo darbe“ Vr.). Įvardotyra (Klimavičius 2003: 12) seems to have occurred only in the usage of Lithuanian émigrés⁸, and so did not make it into the LKŽ. Nevertheless, the LKŽ contains little-known synonyms for termino. Alongside a sentence by Antanas Baranauskas, it gives sakmuo (neol.) “2. term, word”: Norėdamas reiškiai saky pamokslus, tegul nededa pamokslan sakmenų, po mokslinyčias tesakomų A.Baran. It is true that it is not entirely clear here whether sakmuo is used simply in the sense of žodžio9. From the writings of Jurgis Pabrėža, the LKŽ records the unusual ženklinsena “terminology”: Stipresnioji ženklinsenoji ankštara vadinas, kad ilgybė jos keletą kartų praeit savo losną platybę P. The derivative’s motivation from ženklinti— 7 J. Klimavičius lists the international terms dubletas, profesionalizmas as synonyms of termino used in terminology (Klimavičius 2002: 132), but these terms are nevertheless not functionally quite identical to terminui. 8 The website of the Lithuanian Research and Studies Center in Chicago (Lithuanian Research and Studies Center) (http://www.lithuanianresearch.org) notes that its Adomas Varnas archive contains a paper by Prof. A. Varnas, “On the Matter of Practical Term Research” (c. 1961). 9 Terminas is also sometimes used in the sense of “word,” especially in other languages (Klimavičius 2002: 132). In the LKŽ, an example is given under lelioti “to scold, revile, harass, berate” as a nuance of meaning: Leliojamās terminas K.Būg, which probably points more toward the sense “word.” The LKŽPK contains index cards with sentences from Zigmas Zinkevičius’s writings in which even names for translated items are described using the word terminas (wording as in the source): Terminas Baltarusija yra naujas; Terminas Vilniaus kraštas, arba Vilnija (Wileńszczyzna), atsirado po I pas. karo, Lenkijai emus reikšti pretenzijas į rytinę Lietuvos dalį. Asta Mitkevičienė has also drawn attention to these LKŽPK examples—it is not entirely clear whether the meaning of termino has been broadened here, or whether it has been determinologized, that is, turned into an ordinary word (Mitkevičienė 2016: 76–77). 166 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne The definition is fairly clear, and the nature of the term, according to Kazimieras Gaivenis, is sign-like (Gaivenis 2002: 10). J. Pabrėža’s sentence R e i š k i a i (terms) apei įvairingą padalyseną P. also illustrates the word padalysena ‘division’. The explanatory comment inserted into the illustration10 shows that the meaning ‘terms’ is used reiškiai. The singular would presumably be reiškis (a derivative of reištti). For some reason, the word is not included in LKŽ as a headword; perhaps there were doubts about its interpretation, or it was simply overlooked. Nevertheless, it is clear that the well-known neologism-maker J. Pabrėža (many of his neologisms have survived in the biological nomenclature11) also tried to contribute to the expression of a fundamental term in terminology. It is worth mentioning that LKŽ also includes the word nomenklatūra ‘1. TrpŽ “the set of terms in a particular field of science or activity”.’ The example given is Geografijos nomenklatūra DŽ. The definition provided does not reveal any distinction between nomenklatūros and terminijos. In fact, nomenklatūra is generally used only in reference to the names of objects and realia in a particular field (KTŽ 1990: 134; MTŽ 2005: 41), for example, the biological nomenclature most often studied by our terminologists (plant and animal names), anatomical nomenclature (names of organs), and so on. For more on the relationship between nomenclature and terminology, and differing conceptions of nomenclature, see Шеллов 2006. EXPLANATIONS OF MEANINGS It is understandable that, when defining words, LKŽ draws on logically related words with the same root; that is, terminija, terminininis, suterminti are defined using the word terminas, while the person-denoting word terminologas is associated in its definition with terminologija, and so forth (see the previous subsection). It is likewise understandable that, for example, įvardas, įvardynas are defined by synonyms, that is, using the words terminas, terminologija. Words belonging to the same microsystem define one another. In definitions of words outside this microsystem, LKŽ does not mention words with the root termin-, except for the term terminas. There are only a few other word definitions that mention terminas, for example, transkripcija – ‘2. LTEXI379 lingv. rendering the proper names of other languages and scientific t e r m s in the letters of one’s own language’. The terminological use of the word is explained: lie lis – ‘3. in compound t e r m s, of a plant with tongue-shaped leaves’: Vėdrynas lie lis (Ranunculus lingua) LBŽ. Švatykas lie lis P.; nykštukas – ‘|| used as part of a compound t e r m to denote something very small’: Šikšnosparnis nykštukas – 10 In LKŽe, the element called an “explanatory comment in an illustration” is printed in italics (the illustration itself is in roman type). 11 Kartais jo naujadarai atgaivinami dabar norminant biologijos vardyną (Auksoriūtė 2015: 64). Terminologija | 2019 | 26 167 one of our smallest bats rš. In the woodland clearing, dwarf birches curl J.Marc. Spectra of dwarf stars EncV1243. For a few other word definitions, a comment is added in parentheses12 indicating the field to which the term belongs: įlaiškis ‘the beginning, opening of a letter (a term in commercial correspondence13)’; kargen(is) ‘a person who pushes a pole forward underwater (a fishing t e r m)’; kulninė ‘a certain14 iron tool; a ploughshare (a term used by clog-makers)’; nugimdyti ‘to remove a fetus (an archaic legal t e r m)’. The word grūdukas is not explained at all; it is only stated to be ‘1. a weaving t e r m’: Austa aštuoniom nyt im, verta po porą grūdukų suvartai KzR. Essentially, this is the same kind of metacomment as those mentioned just above (in parentheses). ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES Illustrative examples (usually developed sentences, though they may also be noun phrases presented in sentence form) are arguably the most interesting part of LKŽ. They provide not only linguistic and grammatical15 information, but also a certain amount of subject-matter content. LKŽ contains more than 10016 examples featuring words with the root termin-. They contain a variety of terminological information. Characteristics and typology of terms As already mentioned, a term is defined in the LKŽ as “a word or combination of words that precisely denotes a concept in a particular field of science, technology, or art.” More information about terms can be gleaned from examples provided in various entries (the headwords of those entries may have no connection with terminology at all). Some examples vividly reveal the essence of a term – Terms are the core of special-purpose, subject-field language rš17 (core18). From 12The LKŽe indicates that parentheses contain “an explanatory comment in the definition of a meaning.” In the printed dictionary, this is set in smaller roman type (alongside the italic explanation of the meaning). 13With the comment removed in the LKŽe, the entry reads “the beginning, introduction of a business letter.” 14In the LKŽ, this was changed to “a type of iron tool, a ploughshare (a term used by clog makers).” 15From the illustrative examples used in the LKŽe and LKŽPK to explain the term, A. Mitkevičienė has distinguished attributive, objective, and subjective phrases containing the word term (Mitkevičienė 2016: 75–77). 16There are slightly fewer than 100 lexical entries containing these examples, since sometimes a single entry has more than one relevant example. 17The abbreviations trš (Soviet-era writings) and rš (writings) have been standardized in the electronic version of the dictionary (LKŽe): rš is used throughout; accordingly, this and a couple of other examples have also been changed in the article. 18Here and below, parentheses following a source abbreviation indicate the entry in which the example appears. 168 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne Specialized terms differ in meaning and in how precisely that meaning is defined, while the scope of the concepts designated by the same term may vary: Terminine reikšmė rš (termininis); Deminutyvų terminas čia suprantamas plačiąja prasme KlK12,47 (prasmė). Science is an important sphere in which terms are used; the need for terms becomes especially apparent when new realities emerge: Moksliški terminai ir naujų išradinių vardai rš (išradinys). In science, systems of abstract terms are often created, and understanding them requires appropriate subject knowledge: Elements of art are very difficult to conceptualize using abstract terms rš (sąvokoti “to understand, comprehend”); An abstract term is sometimes difficult to understand FT (atsajus “detached, separated, abstract”). In Lithuanian terminology, nouns and noun phrases included in terminological dictionaries are generally regarded as terms: Nouns and their constructions perform the nominative function best and are most readily amenable to standardization and terminologization KlK25,9 (terminologizacija); Not only words of scientific style but also word combinations are specialized, terminologized, and abstracted KlK25,5 (terminologizuoti). The characteristics of a term and the requirements it must meet can be seen in the following examples: Terms differ from ordinary words or their combinations in being unambiguous, systematic, and stylistically neutral MLTEIII542 (sistemiškumas); Systematic, precise, unified, and correct terminology rš (suvienodinti); When forming terms, one cannot adhere solely to the criterion of brevity KlK21,10 (trumpumas). From the perspectives of both language and logic, precision is one of the most important criteria for the quality of a term: Precision of terms rš (tikslumas); A term is considered precise if it expresses the essential characteristics of the concept it designates KlK42,37 (tikslus); The greatest precision is required of nomenclatural and terminological designations19 K.Daukš (termininis). Precision is generally associated with unambiguity, definiteness of meaning, and motivation; however, as K. Gaivenis rightly observes, in practice these qualities are not easily attained and are not necessarily 19 Typographical error in the dictionary; it should read precision. Terminologija | 2019 | 26 169 understood in the same way. In general, universal, uniform understanding of terms is probably impossible, as it would hinder scientific progress. If univocality is sometimes achieved, it is only “through a constant struggle of opinions” (Gaivenis 2002: 38–39). These examples from the LKŽ essentially show only a theoretical ideal, which should be treated not as a requirement but as a preference, limited to a single field or terminological microsystem (Keinys 2013: 50): An unambiguous term rš (unambiguous); One of the most important required characteristics of a term is univocality rš (univocality); Having more than one meaning is generally considered a defect of a term rš (having); In a perfectly organized terminology, there should be a separate term for every concept rš (organize). Terms can be classified according to various criteria. In linguistic terminology, the basis for classification is often the structure of the term—Single-word terms and compound terms can be distinguished rš (single-word). Some hold that, as the opposite of a compound term, the more systematic term is simple term (MTŽ 2005: 74), but by tradition Lithuanian terminologists predominantly use the term single-word term, mentioned in the LKŽ. The basis for classification is the number of words20. Structure is also considered at the level of a single word: A compound-word term rš (compound-word), Abbreviated terms rš (abbreviated). From a subject-field perspective, the first need is to classify terms by fields (this is the principal basis for selecting terms for dictionaries). The diversity of terminological fields is also evident in LKŽ examples: A technical term DŽ (term); The Minister of the Interior had the right to set hunting seasons rš (set); The homeland of the Lithuanians, Latvians and Prussians, as hunting terms show, is to be sought in a forested region K.Būg (forested); Kinship terms related to the wife's family line are more varied in Indo-European languages and are of later origin rš (term); Thematic groups of words whose etymologies are discussed (names of fish, birds, kinship terms, etc.) BIV 145 (thematic); 20 Terms can be classified by the number of roots rather than the number of words. The Lithuanian standard (a translation of the ISO standard), Terminology work, gives the terms single-root term (English simple term) and multiple-root term (English complex term) (LST ISO 1087-1:2005). However, this classification is not characteristic of Lithuanian terminology, as is also noted in a comment in the Lithuanian standard. 170 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne How, then, will pharmacists be able to do without botany if they wish to put together a terminology of their own? LTII432 (sutaisyti); Most often, the term epistemology denotes the science that studies the necessary conditions for the possibility of cognition EncIX207 (žymėti); People inherited from the spirit of the language a legacy of very beautiful, vivid, entirely suitable geographical terms LTII160 (vaizdus). Lithuanian terminologists often draw attention to the origin of terms, distinguishing Lithuanian terms from borrowed ones: Every language has both its own and international terms in every branch of terminology K1K25,14 (terminija); Most terms borrowed from other languages are so-called international, or internationalized, terms rš (terminas). In the context of borrowing, people often speak generally of having terminology of one’s own, a distinctive terminology: Every language has its own terminology rš (nuosavus); National historiography could not develop successfully without its own Lithuanian terminology rš (terminija). The principle of avoiding loanwords was already advocated in Lithuanian terminology by our first theorist of terminology, Stasys Šalkauskis: “<...> borrowing foreign words for terminological purposes is justified above all when the required term cannot be obtained either by adapting ordinary language or by coining a new term through compounding or derivation” (Šalkauskis 1991: 39). Adding a Lithuanian ending to a non-Lithuanian term, even an international one, is not necessarily a solution – With some international terms, Lithuanian endings will seem to have been attached needlessly K1K25,21 (prisegioti). Alongside borrowings, calques are also often mentioned. They bear signs of foreignness and are therefore sometimes called covert borrowings (Gaivenis 2002: 58; Kaulakienė 2014 [1981]: 233). Lithuanian terminology most often discusses structural and semantic calques, studied chiefly by Angelė Kaulakienė (for definitions, see Kaulakienė 2014 [1979]: 194; 2014 [1981]: 234). The LKŽ also records these phenomena: Calques most often first appear in translated scholarly literature and translated dictionaries of terms, and are coinages by translators K1K27,32 (verstinis); There are many semantic calques in every branch of terminology KlbXXV(1)41 (ver tinys). Terminologija | 2019 | 26 171 Term Creation and Management In the field of terminology, several activities are relevant – Term formation, their management, systematisation and use rš (management); Terminology management rš (management). The person who carries out this activity is the terminology manager rš (manager). It is important to use terms properly – It is not enough to have the right term; one must also know how to use it KlbXVIII22 (to use), but, nevertheless, terms must first of all be available. Their creation and management is difficult work; there have always been and still are fields whose terminology is not systematised, and a shortage of terms is felt – Our terminology in this field has not yet been fully developed A,Janul (to develop). Jonas Jablonskis, the father of Standard Lithuanian, had clearly made up his mind about the sources of the standard language and followed the living language of the people (Piročkinas 1986: 7). He applied the same principles to terminology, and J. Jablonskis’s followers were guided by them: Terms, too, should be fashioned in the same way as ordinary words of the language are fashioned by the people J.Jabl (to fashion); Among Jaunius’s terms there are quite a few that are difficult, at least for me, to justify by the laws of the people’s language J.Jabl (to justify); They mint terms not in accordance with the particular features of the Lithuanian language Mt (in accordance with). S. Šalkauskis also devoted much attention to “adapting words from the people’s language for terminological purposes” (Šalkauskis 1991: 24). One of the old rules he formulated states that “one need neither coin a new term nor borrow a foreign one if it is possible to adapt an ordinary word from the people’s language quite satisfactorily to the needs of the science in question” (Šalkauskis 1991: 55). Sources of ordinary language can be varied, including folklore – “You will come across ‘ready-made terms’ in fairy tales as you leaf through them LTII160 (to leaf through). Ordinary people’s language is also called folk language; many words from it entered terminological dictionaries (see Fig. 1 from LKŽPK). Although we sometimes hear in the public sphere today that native speakers do not need to be taught their language, the standard language—and especially its terminology—is not something that comes naturally; its store of knowledge is accumulated gradually from early childhood – All adolescents and youngsters learned our terms rš (youngster). J. Jablonskis considered teaching the language itself even more important than teaching terms about language: We should teach not so much grammatical terminology as the living features of the language J.Jabl (living); At school, we should teach not so much grammatical terminology and various linguistic complexities as the living features of the language J.Jabl (complexity). 172 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne Fig. 1. An example from LKŽPK of rendering words of the vernacular into terms Terminologists recognize J. Jablonskis’s contribution: he “laid the foundations of the terminology of our present-day standard language, both by establishing an understanding that has remained essentially unchanged to this day of what terminology should be, how it should be developed, where terms should be drawn from, and how they should be formed, and by developing and organizing terms in various fields, coining them himself when necessary, and helping others do so” (Keinys 2010: 83). J. Jablonskis’s merits in terminology are evident from various examples in LKŽ, for instance: J. Jablonskis... undertook to meet that great need—the need for terminology that had been put in order and standardized KlbV18 (standardize); [J. Jablonskis] helped establish terms in more than one field of science KlbV62(J.Balč) (establish); J. Jablonskis also raised the issue of standardizing terminology KlbXVIII24 (standardization); Jablonskis was not an advocate of the strict, indiscriminate Lithuanianization of all terms Z.Žem (Lithuanianization); Here he (J. Jablonskis)... contributed to the formation of terms in mathematics and other branches of science KlbV60(J.Balč) (branch); We agreed that we, the mathematicians and physicists, would devise the terms for our specialties, after which Jablonskis would put them through the sieve of language (edit them linguistically) Z.Žem (put through); His (J. Jablonskis’s) terms coined for the theory of proportion—the rule of three, the rule of many, proportional division KlK29,8 (rule of three). Before J. Jablonskis, our terminology was scarcely systematized, as these sentences written by Vincas Kudirka in the 19th century also attest (similar or shortened versions of the same Terminologija | 2019 | 26 173 The repeated presentation of sentences in the LKŽ evidently indicates the importance of the information they contain: [Lithuanian] terminology is still almost unpolished V.Kudir (apsklambyti); Lithuanian terminology has barely managed to emerge from the orbit of everyday speech before it becomes apparent that it is still almost unpolished V.Kudir (skridulys); It takes a great deal more time and work for [Lithuanian terminology] to be rounded off and refined V.Kudir (apdailinti); It takes a great deal more time and work for [terminology] to be rounded off and refined, and to acquire a coherent shape V.Kudir (aptąstyti). Terminology management is slow and difficult work that essentially never ceases: Terms under consideration, especially revisions and newly coined ones, are a very time-consuming business Vr (byla); Established terminology continues to be managed, refined and improved rš (tvarkyti). The work must be carried out consistently and thoughtfully – When undertaking terminology management, one must first determine what is worthwhile and necessary to term K1K37,45–46 (terminti). It is better when the terms in use are customary J.Jabl (įprastinis). The principle of stability21 is important in terminology, although adherence to tradition, like a certain obstinacy, may be viewed in different ways: They cling so blindly to terms already worked out Mt (žabalas); Yet this is a narrow aim, and if we pursued only it, we would go on tinkering with [the terms] endlessly K1K47,14 (taisalioti). Stability is associated with the maturity of terminology, but the development and progress of terms are natural processes, driven both by changes in concepts and by the aim of reducing competing term forms: Over time, one or another of those terms may perhaps fall away (fall out of use) J.Jabl (atkristi); The current terminology of Lithuanian linguistics is very diverse and unstable LTII302 (kalbomokslis); The progress of sports language... cannot be limited to finding attractive Lithuanian terms GK1938,99 (pažangėjimas); During the Great Patriotic War, many terms in the old military terminology were reinterpreted rš (perprasminti). There are several times more derived words in Lithuanian than simple, underived words (Urbutis 1978: 62). This is also characteristic of terminology, but a derived form 21“Long-used and good language units cannot be replaced by even better ones” (Gaivenis 2002: 90); “terms must be stable and not be changed every few or dozen years. Sometimes established and widely used terms, even if not entirely precise, are better than precise new ones, because it is not easy to change terms in the minds of users” (TV 2006: 2). 174 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne A word is not necessarily coined specifically for terminological purposes; it can be taken ready-made from the general language and terminologized. When necessary, special meanings are assigned to word-formation formants – The terminologized use of the aforementioned suffixes does not hinder but rather facilitates scholarly communication KlK7,29 (terminologizuoti). Not every newly formed word is suitable for terminology; it must comply both with word-formation rules and with the system of other terms: Term formation has its own laws FT (daryba); Artificial words of this kind are unsuitable as terms J,Jabl (dirbtinis). In terms of expression, compound terms are also coordinated with one another; one of their most characteristic linguistic features is the pronominal form: To express not the quality of an object but its distinguishing, i.e. terminological, meaning, pronominal forms should also be used in the text KlK25,31 (terminologinis). For convenience, short forms of terms may be used – Several methods of shortening terms are permitted in scientific and technical terminology KlK26,32 (trumpinimas). Terminography is a traditional method of term management. Since the beginning of the 20th century, well over 600 Lithuanian terminological dictionaries have been published. Indeed, the surge in terminological dictionaries that lasted for a couple of decades after independence was restored has recently somewhat subsided (Gaivenytė-Butler 2016: 251). Although sentences containing the word žodynas are used in the Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language (LKŽ) to illustrate more than 200 headwords (Gritenienė 2017: 3), a terminological dictionary is mentioned only a few times. We learn about both dictionary types and the specific ways in which terms are presented in them: Terminological dictionary NdŽ (terminas); Explanatory dictionary of specialized terms SkŽ279 (žodynas); Dictionary-style presentation of terms DŽ1¹ (žodyniškas); Besides a nomenclature of plants, J. Pabrėža wrote a dictionary of morphological botanical terms KlbXVIII11 (vardynas); A thesaurus reflects as comprehensively as possible the vocabulary of a language or the terms of a particular field of science or technology LTEXI291 (tezauras). Many people contribute to the management of terms and their ordering (or even disorder)—authors of textbooks and monographs, compilers or translators of dictionaries, standards, and legal acts, among others. Linguistic aspects of term management are now coordinated by the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language; during the Soviet period, this work was carried out at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and also at the Academy of Sciences. Examples illustrating the institutionalization of terminological work were not included in the LKŽ, although they were recorded, as can be seen from the LKŽPK (see Fig. 2). Terminologija | 2019 | 26 175 Fig. 2. An LKŽPK example about instances of terminology Terminological specifics The illustrative examples in LKŽ provide not only general information on the theory and practice of terminology, but also knowledge about specific terms, their history, and terminological problems that have been addressed. Although it seemed to have become established, the term standard language has once again raised questions in recent years; its conception is being examined, particularly in the context of language policy (Vaišnienė 2017), as is its relationship with other related terms. Proposals have emerged to use the term standard language (Smetonienė, Smetona, Valotka 2016), while others have argued against this on well-founded grounds (Pupkis 2017). LKŽ records certain facts about the development of this particularly important term in linguistics22: The term written language appeared at the beginning of this century, was officially established by J. Jablonskis, defended by K. Būga, and was in general use until the end of the 1920s KIK49,33 (universal); There were also other modifications of the term for the language of written texts – raštiška kalba and raštkalbė, used by K. Būga and his follower R. Bytautas KIK19,26 (raštkalbė); Proponents of literary language were more passive, refrained from entering the disputes for a time, and expressed their position by continuing to use the customary term KIK49,35 (become involved). LKŽ also includes sentences about grammatical terminology, its creation, and its creators: The Romans borrowed the science of Greek grammar, with all its views and all its terms EncIX514 (to borrow); 22 For more, see the articles from which the LKŽ examples were taken, namely Kniūkšta 1985; Piročkinas 1970. 176 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne Many of his (J. Jablonskis’s) coined terms in linguistics are still in use today K.Kors (terminas); Among other things, we owe him the entire terminology of grammar KlbV62(J.Balč) (turėti; sentence from an article about J. Jablonskis); Jaunius had to... coin grammatical terms LTII321 (J.Jabl) (nukalti); Jaunius’s kentėtinis (passivum) is not entirely suitable for the purposes of grammatical terminology J.Jabl (kentėtinis); Here Jaunius needlessly introduced it into the terminology of elementary textbooks LTII320 (J.Jabl) (įleisti; sentence from a review of Kazimieras Jaunius’s Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos (1911)); Such words should not be given a place (should not be used) even for coining grammatical terms J.Jabl (gauti). There are statements drawn from texts in various fields concerning the authorship, conception, or spread of one term or another: Aristotle was the first to use the term ethics and give it the meaning of the science of morality from (terminas); Today the term Baltic is already in universal use among scholars in various countries from (visuotinas); Folklore researchers have introduced the term dvasiagerys EncVII292 (dvasiagerys); By the terms “jauja” or “reja,” Samogitians understand the following buildings situated under one roof: a threshing barn, a hay barn, a drying bathhouse, a chaff room, and others from (reja). Some sentences record changes in the terminology of particular fields, including not necessarily successful attempts to distinguish or change terms: During the period in question, the word vienata had become established to express the concept of a unit, replacing the term vienatis previously used KlbXXXI(1)72 (vienatis); When it becomes necessary to distinguish the concepts of giesmė and daina, in future we will use both terms side by side B.Sruog (pagrečiu); Jablonskis argued for a long time with P. Vileišis over that term, but could not convince the publisher that “price” was a better word than “commodity” J.Balč (leidėjas). In “Aritmetikos teorijoje,” when a concept was first introduced by name, the old term for denoting that concept was also given in parentheses beside the new (“Voronezh”) term: division (dividing), divisor (divider), quotient (dividend), multiple (saikojas) KlK29,11 (saikojas); But after hearing in Palanga that the sea waves are called rulings, I then devised the terms vilnėtas, vilnelėtas, somewhat suggestive of wool, a little wool, and changed them to the terms rulinguotas, rulingeliuotas P (rulinguotas). Terminologija | 2019 | 26 177 Examples of sentences in a normative context can be found in which authors identify terms to be corrected and propose their own alternatives: We would think that the one-word term šratinukas would be more convenient for everyday use, while, if we wanted to describe that writing instrument more precisely, we could call it a ballpoint pencil KIK15,66 (šratinis); Given the two terms inert gases and inactive gases, the terms noble gases and precious gases should be abandoned KIK23,57 (taurus); We suggest calling this type of footwear short boots, although the term low boots is also applied to it KIK35,34 (trumpaauliai); The term green spirit is more suitable for raw spirit KIK34,38 (žalias). There are also simply vivid sentences in which metaphors are used to show the abundance, complexity, and intricacy of terms: The brain withered in the inescapable labyrinth of all kinds of terms rš (išeiti); More than one literature teacher is put off by the criticism’s cold academicism and clusters of specialized terms sp (sangrūda); Poetry grasps at the glittering baubles of its (technical) terminology, trying to keep up with the times, with fashion J.Marcin (terminologija). It should be added that LKŽ examples show that the term is sometimes mentioned in parenthetical metalinguistic comments when it is necessary to indicate the source or the term’s author: A Lithuanian from each region pronounces the word differently, “nusūokia” (Daukantas’s term) in a different way K.Būg (nusūokti); To use his term, into a žodžūgis, from which the forms of the individual dialects have sprung LKXIX76 (žodžūgis). Sources of examples Looking at all the illustrative examples discussed from the LKŽ that mention the term, its synonyms or derivatives, we can see that a variety of sources were used in compiling the dictionary. Most often—28 examples were found—no specific source or author is identified; it is merely noted that the data come from the language of written texts (rš). The publication from which the largest number of sentences of a terminological nature was taken is Kalbos kultūra (K1K)—this source is cited for 22 sentences. Kalbotyra was also frequently used, with 9 sentences included. It is no surprise that J. Jablonskis’s texts were consulted extensively, since he was a source of learning: 11 examples were included. There is no doubt that this author’s texts were regarded as among the most important sources for the LKŽ. 178 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne A few sentences were included from some authors who mentioned the term or its derivatives in their works (e.g., J. Balčikonis, V. Kudirka, Kazimieras Būga); more often, a single sentence was taken (e.g., from Augustinas Janulaitis, Balys Sruoga, and Justinas Marcinkevičius). Statistics on illustrative examples from these and other authors and publications are provided in Table 1. Table 1. Sources of the illustrative examples from the LKŽ examined23 rš 28 B.Sruog 1 KlK 22 B 1 J.Jabl 11 DŽ 1 Klb 6(9) DŽ1 1 LT 4(6) GK 1 J.Balč 4 J.Marcin 1 V.Kudir 4 K.Daukš 1 Encl 3 K.Kors 1 K.Būg 3 LK 1 P 3 LTE 1 Vr 3 MLTE 1 FT 2 NdŽ 1 Mt 2 SkŽ 1 Z.Žem 2 sp 1 A.Janul 1 Total 112 CONCLUSIONS The Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language contains not only a wealth of words and their explanations. It is also a multifaceted text about us. It records not only the long-standing experience of the nation’s everyday life and realities, but also knowledge from various fields of scholarship. The study shows that one can learn quite a lot about the science of terminology from the LKŽ. The LKŽ does not record all the terms with the root termin- known in terminology today (understandably, since it is not a dictionary of terms), but it does record— 23 The number of examples is given next to the LKŽ abbreviation. If both a publication and an author were indicated, the examples were assigned to the author, while the number of examples attributed to the author is given in parentheses next to the publications. Here this refers to two sentences by J. Jablonskis from Lietuvių Tautos and three sentences by J. Balčikonis from Kalbotyros. Terminologija | 2019 | 26 179 These terms and their derivatives are sufficient to encompass the core of words related to the aforementioned root. It is also apparent that synonyms for terminui have been sought over the course of history. These include not only the forgotten but still familiar įvardas, but also much older, now unfamiliar sakmenys, reiškiai, ženklin­sena. In the explanations of meanings in the LKŽ, terminas is mentioned rarely; most often, the root termin- is used to explain words that contain the same root. Only a few words have comments stating that the word is a term in a particular field. The richest trove is the illustrative examples. More than 100 examples mentioning terminas, its derivatives, or synonyms were found in the LKŽ. Many were taken from unnamed written-language sources (presumably in a linguistics context); frequent use was made of the journal Kalbos kultūros, as well as texts by J. Jablonskis and others. These sentences provide a fairly broad picture of the theory and practice of terminology. In the LKŽ, terms emerge as the heart of language for special purposes. Here one can find information about what is considered a term, what requirements terms must meet, and how they are classified (in terms of origin, structure, and content). Considerable attention is paid to the creation and standardization of terms. From J. Jablonskis (many sentences show his contribution to terminology) comes an emphasis on the laws of žmonių language—principles for creating terms must not contradict them either. There are expressions of regret that the terminology of some fields has not yet been standardized and remains unsettled. It is understood that terminology standardization is difficult and time-consuming work, which must be carried out consistently, without needlessly netaisaliojant. Terminology is compiled in terminological dictionaries. Some sentences record the history and development of particular terms. One can learn about the authorship and spread of terms, and find not necessarily successful proposals for how one term or another should be replaced. In the LKŽ examples, terminological life is positively bustling. This shows that the LKŽ is more than a dictionary; closer reading of it in the future will yield material for many further studies. The dictionary’s compilers included a wealth of information in it which, once systematized, may surprise even the compilers themselves. PRIMARY SOURCE LKŽ – Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language I–XX. Resp. / chief eds. J. Balčikonis, J. Kruopas, K. Ulvydas, V. Vitkauskas, Vilnius, 1941–2002. LKŽe – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas (t. I–XX, 1941–2002), e. variantas. Redaktorių kolegija: G. Naktinienė (vyr. red.), J. Paulauskas, R. Petrokienė, V. Vitkauskas, J. Zabarskaitė. Programuotojai: E. Ožeraitis, V. Zinkevičius, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2005 (atnaujinta versija, 2017). Prieiga per internetą: http://www.lkz.lt. 180 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne ADDITIONAL SOURCES DLKŽ₇ – Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian. Chief ed. St. Keinys. 7th revised and expanded ed., Vilnius: Institute of the Lithuanian Language, 2012; electronic version, 2015 (updated version, 2017). Available online: http://lkiis.lki.lt. KTŽ 1990: Gaivenis K., Keinys St. Kalbotyros terminų žodynas, Kaunas: Šviesa. LKŽPK – Digital File of Additions to the Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language, Vilnius: Institute of the Lithuanian Language, 2015. Available online: http://lkiis.lki.lt. LST ISO 1087-1:2005 Terminology work. Vocabulary. Part 1: Theory and application (identical to ISO 1087-1:2000). MTŽ 2005: Kvašytė R. Mokomasis terminologijos žodynėlis, Šiauliai: VšĮ Šiaulių universiteto leidykla. LITERATŪRA Auksoriūtė A. 2015: Naujieji dekoratyvinių augalų genčių vardai. – Terminologija 22, 61–77. Daujotytė V. 2002: Pamatinis kultūros tekstas. – Dvidešimt Lietuvių kalbos žodyno tomų. Sudarė J. Zabarskaitė, Z. Šimėnaitė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 34–38. Didjurgenienė A., Grigonienė G. 2010: Inovatyvus požiūris į specialybės kalbos dėstymą aukštojoje mokykloje. – Mokslo taikomieji tyrimai Lietuvos kolegijose 7, 27–33. Gaivenis K. 2002: Lietuvių terminologija: teorijos ir tvarkybos metmenys, Vilnius: LKI leidykla. Gaivenytė-Butler J. 2016: Ilona Mickienė, Birutė Briaukienė. Lietuvių terminologijos aspektai. Metodinė mokomoji knyga [e. išteklius], Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas, 2016, 67 p. [recenzija] – Terminologija 23, 240–255. Gritėnienė A. 2016: Šermukšnio vaizdinys „Lietuvių kalbos žodyne“. – Tautosakos darbai 52, 85–104. Gritėnienė A. 2017: Žodyno vaizdinys Lietuvių kalbos žodyne. – Bendrinė kalba 90, 1–19. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.bendrinekalba.lt/?90. Kaulakienė A. 2014 [1979]: Priešdėliniai ir priesaginiai darybiniai vertiniai lietuviškoje politechnikos terminijoje. – Kaulakienė A. Terminologija. Terminografija. Terminija. Straipsnių rinkinys, Vilnius: Technika, 192–204. Kaulakienė A. 2014 [1981]: Semantiniai vertiniai lietuvių politechnikos terminijoje. – Kaulakienė A. Terminologija. Terminografija. Terminija. Straipsnių rinkinys, Vilnius: Technika, 233–243. Keinys St. 2010: Mintys apie didelį kalbininką ir terminologą Joną Jablonskį 150-tų gimimo metinių proga. – Terminologija 17, 80–92. Keinys St. 2013: Dėl mokslo terminų vienareikšmiškumo supratimo. – Terminologija 20, 47–55. Klimavičius J. 2002: Kazimieras Gaivenis. Lietuvių terminologija: teorijos ir tvarkybos metmenys, Vilnius: LKI leidykla, 2002, 148 p. [recenzija] – Terminologija 9, 129–147. Klimavičius J. 2003: Lietuvių terminografija: praeities bruožai, dabarties sunkumai ir uždaviniai. – Terminologija 10, 9–32. Kniūkšta P. 1985: Pirmiausia literatūrinė kalba, po to bendrinė. – Kalbos kultūra 49, 33–62. Kvašytė R. 2013: Lietuvių ir latvių kalbų terminų su šaknimi termin- mikrosistema. – Terminologija 20, 123–139. Mitkevičienė A. 2016: Terminas kontekste (žodžių junginio lygmuo). – Terminologija 23, 73–104. Naktinienė G. 2012: Elektroninio Lietuvių kalbos žodyno naujovės. – Kalbos kultūra 85, 92–102. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.bendrinekalba.lt/?85. Piročkinas A. 1970: Literatūrinės kalbos terminas ir jo analogai. – Kalbos kultūra 19, 25–32. Piročkinas A. 1986: Jono Jablonskio kalbos taisymai, Kaunas: Šviesa. Pupkis A. 2017: Standartinė kalba? – Bendrinė kalba 90, 1–16. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.bendrinekalba.lt/?90. Smetonienė I., Smetona A., Valotka A. 2016: Dėl standartinės kalbos termino. – Lietuvių kalba 10, 1–14. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.lietuviukalba.lt/index.php/lietuviu-kalba/article/view/217. Šalkauskis S. 1991: Raštai II: Filosofijos ir pedagogikos terminija, Vilnius: Mintis. TV 2006: Terminologijos vadovėlis: Europos Komisijos Vertimo raštu generalinio direktorato Lietuvių kalbos departamento vertėjams, Liuksemburgas. Prieiga per internetą: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/terminology_guidelines_lt.pdf. Umbrasas A. 2018: Asmenų pavadinimai kompiuterijos žodynuose. – Terminologija 25, 107–127. Terminologija | 2019 | 26 181 Urbutis V. 1978: Žodžių darybos teorija, Vilnius: Mokslas. Vaišnienė D. 2017: Bendrinės kalbos samprata Lietuvos Respublikos teisės aktuose ir kalbos politikos kontekste. – Bendrinė kalba 90, 1–19. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.bendrinekalba.lt/?90. Vitkauskas V. 2002: Didysis akademinis mūsų Žodynas. – Dvidešimt Lietuvių kalbos žodyno tomų. Sudarė J. Zabarskaitė, Z. Šimėnaitė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 8–14. Zabarskaitė J. 2010: Politinis pasaulėvaizdis didžiajame Lietuvių kalbos žodyne (valstybė, įstatymas, valdžia). – Parlamento studijos 9, Vilnius: Lietuvos nacionalinė Martyno Mažvydo biblioteka, 125–143. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.parlamentostudijos.lt/Nr9/9_kalba_1.htm. Zabarskaitė J. 2012: Kitoks didžiojo „Lietuvių kalbos žodyno“ skaitymas: Adalbertas Bezzenbergeris, marios, pamarys, pamariškis. – Mažoji Lietuva: paribio kultūros tyrimai. Sudarė G. Blažienė, N. Morozova, J. Zabarskaitė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 239–271. Шелов С. 2006: Номенклатура versus терминология (три подхода к выделению номенклатурных наименований). – Terminologija 13, 33–47. TERMINOLOGY IN THE DICTIONARY OF THE LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE (LIETUVIŲ KALBOS ŽODYNAS) S u m m a r y The Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language (Lietuvių kalbos žodynas – LKŽ) is an exclusive work of the Lithuanian lexicography. It is significant for its broad scope, long preparation time and the abundance of authors. This dictionary not only contains many words and their interpretations, but also it is a multifaceted text that can be analysed as a corpus. It includes a variety of scientific knowledge. The article investigates terminological data collected from the LKŽ. The data unfolds through the words with the root termin- that were used in different parts of the dictionary. The study shows that the LKŽ is an extensive source of terminological knowledge. Though the LKŽ does not contain all the terms with the root termin- that are known today in the field of terminology, the terms and their derivatives found in the dictionary are sufficient to cover the kernel of words related to the before mentioned root. The core term is terminas “term”, what is more, it was observed that Lithuanian synonyms for this word were searched for in the Lithuanian language. In the LKŽ, meaning interpretations include the word terminas very rarely. Usually, the root termin- is used to interpret words with the same root. The greatest treasure of the dictionary is illustrative examples. Over 100 examples were found in the LKŽ, including the term terminas, its derivatives or synonyms. Many of them were taken from unnamed written language sources (probably, linguistic contexts), as well as, from the linguistic journal Kalbos kultūra (“Language Culture”) and the texts of famous linguist Jonas Jablonskis and others. These sentences given as examples allow for a rather broad picture of the theory and practice of terminology. The terms in the sentences presented in the LKŽ unfold as the core of the expertise language. Here, the information on what a term is considered, what the requirements for the terms are, how they are classified (on the aspects of origin, structure and content) is found. A lot of focus is dedicated to the creation process and management of terms. Numerous sentences show Jonas Jablonskis’ merits to terminology, his attention to usual language laws – the principles of term-creation cannot contradict them. Regrettably, the terminology in some fields has not yet been settled. Naturally, the management of terms is a difficult, time-consuming work requiring a systematic approach. It is mentioned that the 1 8 2 Alvydas Umbrasas | Terminologija Lietuvių kalbos žodyne terminology is stored in the dictionaries of terms. Some sentences reflect the history and development of certain terms. The authorship and prevalence of the terms are presented. There are some proposals that should be changed. In the illustrative examples of the LKŽ, terminological life is boiling. This shows that the LKŽ is more than a dictionary, and its comprehensive analysis is going to result in more research in the future. If more systemized, the information put in the dictionary by the authors might make the latter unexpectedly surprised. Gauta 2019-08-26 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius E. paštas alvydas.umbr [email protected] Terminologija | 2019 | 26 183