Competition between Borrowed and Lithuanian Economic Terms

RASUOLĖ VLADARSKIENĖ

Vilnius Gediminas Technical University

KEYWORDS: competition, terminological synonymy, variation, economic terms

The Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian gives a fairly broad definition of the word competition—“striving to take the lead.” The Dictionary of International Words distinguishes three meanings, noting that one of them is specific to economics: “1 rivalry, competition in some field to achieve the same goal; 2 interaction between two or more species, populations, or organisms that need the same food, territory, or sexual partner; 3 econ. a market situation in which there are sufficiently many buyers and sellers, and it is possible to enter and leave the market freely” (TŽŽ 2013). Thus, competition is a widespread phenomenon in many fields. Competitive relations can arise in language, as in economics and other fields (e.g., in the natural world).

The aim of this article is to examine the specific features of competition between borrowed and Lithuanian economic terms, having clarified the concepts of competition (competitor), synonymy (synonym), and variation (variant) and the relationships among them.

THE CONCEPTS OF COMPETITION, SYNONYMY, AND VARIATION

Competition in language is ongoing, since language development is based precisely on it; however, in Lithuanian linguistics the theoretical basis for competition between linguistic devices began to be established relatively recently. The first to apply this principle systematically to stylistic linguistics, assessing it synchronically, and to give it theoretical form was Kazimieras Župerka in his habilitation thesis, Competition between Language Devices as an Object of Lithuanian Stylistics (1995), drawing on the work of Czech stylistics researchers, especially Milan Jelínek. Until then, competition had been discussed only from a diachronic perspective. Thus, two approaches to competition between linguistic devices are distinguished:

98 Rasuolė Vladarskienė | Skolintų ir lietuviškų ekonomikos terminų konkurencija

1) diachronic – competition is understood as a dynamic phenomenon in which one variant becomes established in usage, displacing another, sometimes even a nonstandard variant;

2) synchronic – when, during an act of speech, one has to choose among several linguistic means with the same (or a similar) meaning (Župerka 1995: 10).

In K. Župerka’s view, the idea of competition among linguistic means developed from the concept of synonyms, since the same object or action can be named by more than one word. Synonymy forms the core of competition among linguistic means (Župerka 1995: 13). However, when discussing competition among linguistic means in the standard language, the concept of variants and its relationship to synonyms is also very important.

Rita Miliūnaitė examines theoretical aspects of competition among linguistic means in general usage in her monograph Variants of Contemporary Lithuanian Usage (2009). She considers that “variants of contemporary Lithuanian usage are linguistic phenomena that have the same or a very similar meaning and recur regularly, between which relations of variation—the ability to replace one another—arise in usage” (Miliūnaitė 2009: 177). The most important feature of variants’ functioning in usage is the strength or weakness of their competition; this usually denotes the rivalry of several items and, over time, the establishment of one and the displacement of the others (Miliūnaitė 2009: 188). This conception of linguistic variants is fairly broad and includes synonyms.

Turning to terminology, it should be noted that, in order to determine how competitive relations between terms can be analyzed, it is very important to consider how the key concepts associated with the phenomenon of competition among linguistic means are understood. These concepts may be assigned different meanings: in general usage and in terminology, the concepts of synonym and variant differ.

In terminology, one usually speaks of terminological synonymy. In terminology, synonyms name the same object and associate it with a single concept, but do not describe different features of that object or serve a stylistic function (Danilenko 1977, cited in Zemlevičiūtė 2001). Although, in theory, terminological synonymy was considered a major flaw in terminology, something unnecessary and even harmful, it is nevertheless an unavoidable phenomenon in any one scientific field (Gaivenis 2002: 34; Keinys 2005: 25; Kaulakienė 2009: 167). Often, a standard term becomes established and entrenched in terminology from among several synonyms or variants (Kaulakienė 2009: 168). In terminologists’ view, synonymy is especially characteristic of the initial stages in the formation of terminological subsystems, when not only terms,

Terminologija | 2015 | 22

99

bet ir pačios sąvokos bei jų apimtis nėra pakankamai aiškūs (Kaulakienė 2009: 168; Gaivenis 2014: 176). Todėl sinoniminiai terminai kurį laiką konkuruoja, kol vienai sąvokai pavadinti įsigali vienas terminas.

Variants are considered part of synonymy in the broad sense. In Alvydas Umbrasas’s view, term variants should be understood as terms made up of the same words that have only minor differences (e.g., in spelling, phonetics, morphology, inflection, or Lithuanianization) (Umbrasas 2004: 101). This is the traditional understanding of variants, but it is acknowledged that the boundary between terminological synonyms and variants is not clearly defined. Therefore, when distinguishing them precisely is not crucial—and given also that synonymy can be of very different kinds—it is “convenient in terminology to use the concept of competitor, introduced into Lithuanian linguistics by K. Župerka, which would encompass both narrowly understood variants and systematic synonyms, as well as other terminological linguistic units competing in a text” (Mitkevičienė 2015: 47).

COMPETITIVE RELATIONS BETWEEN TERMS

When the concepts are understood in the way customary in the theory of the standard language, synonymous terms are also variants characterized by competitive relations. In this article, competitors (competing terms) are defined as synonymous terms (words or combinations of words with the same or very similar meanings that can replace one another in a field of science), of which, over time, one becomes established in usage, displacing the others.

Terms can compete within the same dictionary or text (a scholarly text or legal act): when a series of synonyms is given in a dictionary, their order is also indicated, with the first listed as the primary standard variant; in a text, the author uses the competitor they prefer, but may also indicate other competing terms as secondary variants, either descriptively (using auxiliary expressions or, also called, in other words, and so on) or graphically (with the secondary variant in parentheses). Competition between terms may also take place across different dictionaries or texts in the same field: after evaluating the competitors in use for naming the same concept, the author chooses one of them.

Four methods of terminology management are distinguished: terminography, term standardization, computer-assisted terminology management, and text-based terminology management (Gaivenis 2002: 63–87). All these methods of terminology management are important in establishing one competitor in usage. Certain language policy measures also play a considerable role in competition between terms-

100 Rasuolė Vladarskienė | Skolintų ir lietuviškų ekonomikos terminų konkurencija

…ities and the drafting of legal acts. For example, in 1991 the Government of the Republic of Lithuania approved the resolution “On the Registration of Company Names” (VŽ 1991, No. 35–967). This legal act stipulated that enterprises, institutions and organizations were referred to by the single word firma. A Register of Company Names was established, and in 1999 the Law on Company Names was adopted (VŽ 1999, No. 63–2060); in it, the concept firma was defined as “an enterprise of any kind, a public institution, a credit union or another credit institution”. The term came into widespread use and was included in terminology dictionaries BBBŽ 1994 and AĮTVŽ 2000. The latter dictionary also contains compound terms in which firma is the head element, e.g. konsultacinė firma, and also functions as a dependent element, i.e. characterizes the head element, e.g. firmos vardas, firmos tikslai; it is also indicated that firmos may be synonymous with įmonė. However, after the Law on Company Names was repealed in 2003 (VŽ 2003, No. 116–5252) and the Register of Company Names data were transferred to the Register of Legal Entities, the term firma gradually began to be displaced from usage by its competitors, įmonė, bendrovė, juridinis asmuo, and others. A search of the database of legal acts of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania (hereafter LRSB) found that in the period 1994 01 01–2004 01 01, 813 documents published in VŽ used the nominative form of the word firma, whereas in the period 2004 01 01–2014 01 01, this nominative form appeared in only 83 documents in VŽ. Currently, in Lithuanian legal acts the term firma is used only to name foreign legal entities or in translations of documents adopted by European Union institutions, for example, “Directive 2002/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the supplementary supervision of credit institutions, insurance undertakings and investment f i r m s belonging to a financial conglomerate”. In later dictionaries (ETŽ 2005; AETŽ 2006), firmos no longer appears.

COMPETITION BETWEEN ECONOMIC TERMS OF FOREIGN AND LITHUANIAN ORIGIN

Competition between terms of foreign and native origin occurs in every language. Angelė Kaulakienė (2009: 182) considers the synonymy of international and Lithuanian terms justified and inevitable. Comparative studies of synonymous terms in different languages are also conducted. For example, having compared synonyms and variants of electrostatics terms in Lithuanian and German, Sigita Stankevičienė found that the expression of terms in the compared languages differs both quantitatively and qualitatively, but tendencies in the use of synonyms are similar (Stankevičienė 2012). In her dissertation, Asta Mitkevičienė examines in depth

Terminologija | 2015 | 22

101

Having examined various types of synonymous terms, she identifies the synonymy of borrowed and Lithuanian terms as a typical case of lexical term synonymy understood more broadly (Mitkevičienė 2015: 42–43).

To find out how competition between borrowed and Lithuanian terms operates in economic terminology, a study was conducted. Four dictionaries of economic terms published between 1994 and 2006 were examined; the study checked how instances of competition between borrowed and Lithuanian terms found in them are reflected in texts of documents in the field of economics. It should be noted that, when assessing competition between terms, it is the prevalence of terms in scholarly and administrative texts, rather than their inclusion in dictionaries, that indicates the end of the competition. The field of economics was chosen for the study because, at the end of the 20th century, Lithuania underwent a fundamental transformation of its economic system, and new concepts and various competing means of expressing them emerged.

Focusing on competitive relations between terms of different origins, the structure of terms was not very important to the study; therefore, not only simplex terms were investigated, but also cases in which those terms are components of compound terms. Hybrids with a foreign-origin root but a Lithuanian suffix (e.g. konvertuojamumas, rezervinis, konsolidavimas) are also provisionally treated as borrowings in the article. In counting competitor groups, simplex and compound terms were placed in the same group if the compound terms consisted of words sharing the same root as the simplex term, e.g. trendo /nuonešio pašalinimas AETŽ 2006, ilgalaikis trendas / nuonešis AETŽ 2006; vienodas naudingumas, indiferentiškumas AETŽ 2006, vienodo naudingumo kreivė / indiferentiškumo kreivė AETŽ 2006, vienodo naudingumo atvaizdas / žemėlapis AETŽ 2006, indiferencijos kreivė / abejingumo kreivė ETŽ 2005.

In total, 213 groups of competing terms of foreign and native origin were found in the four dictionaries: the largest number was in BBBŽ 1994 – 129, fewer in AETŽ 2006 – 62, and the smallest numbers in ETŽ 2005 – 31 and AĮVTŽ 2000 – 16¹. As can be seen, the largest number of competing terms was presented in the earliest-published dictionary, BBBŽ 1994; their abundance was presumably due to the fact that, at that time, Lithuania was moving from a planned economy to a market economy, and the best ways of expressing new concepts were therefore being sought. Few competitors were found in AĮVTŽ 2000; its compilers, adhering to the requirement that terms be unambiguous, sought to avoid synonymy and thus included as few competing terms as possible. ETŽ 2005

¹ The total number of groups of competing terms is lower than the sum of the groups of competing terms found in the individual dictionaries, because some of these groups overlapped across dictionaries.

1 0 2 Rasuolė Vladarskienė | Skolintų ir lietuviškų ekonomikos terminų konkurencija

differs from other dictionaries in that some borrowed terms are explicitly assessed as not recommended for economic terminology, and their equivalents are provided in the dictionary, e.g.: biznis not recommended = verslas (business); harmonizavimas not recommended = derinimas (alignment); overdraftas not recommended = sąskaitos kreditas (overdraft). The data from AETŽ 2006 show that this dictionary provides Lithuanian equivalents for borrowed terms that appeared in previously published dictionaries, e.g.: amortizacija BBBŽ 1994, AĮVTŽ 2000, ETŽ 2005, nuvertėjimas / amortizacija AETŽ 2006; faktoringas BBBŽ 1994, AĮVTŽ 2000, ETŽ 2005, skolų pardavimas / faktoringas AETŽ 2006; multiplikatorius ETŽ 2005, AĮVTŽ 2000, daugiklis / multiplikatorius AETŽ 2006.

A comparison of borrowed terms and their Lithuanian equivalents recorded in dictionaries of economic terminology published at different times reveals a tendency toward Lithuanianization of terminology: over the course of a decade, a Lithuanian term may displace a borrowed one and become established in dictionaries, e.g.:

aukcionas BBBŽ 1994, ETŽ 2005 “public sale of goods and services to the highest bidder”, aukcionas, varžytynės ETŽ 2005, varžytynės AETŽ 2006;

biznis, verslas BBBŽ 1994 “activity involving the production and sale of goods and the provision of services, with the aim of making a profit”, verslas AĮVTŽ 2000, ETŽ 2005, AETŽ 2006;

biznierius, verslininkas BBBŽ 1994 “a person who organizes a business enterprise (producing goods or providing services) using their own funds and seeking to make a profit”, verslininkas AĮVTŽ 2000, ETŽ 2005;

eksportas, išvežimas BBBŽ 1994, AETŽ 2006 “the sale of goods, services and fixed capital to foreign countries”, eksportas AĮVTŽ 2000, ETŽ 2005;

faktoringas BBBŽ 1994, ETŽ 2005 “a method of transferring trade debts whereby a company sells these debts to a financial institution”, skolų pardavimas / faktoringas AETŽ 2006;

importas, įvežimas BBBŽ 1994, AETŽ 2006 “the purchase of goods, services and fixed capital from foreign countries”, importas AĮVTŽ 2000, ETŽ 2005;

kontraktas, sutartis BBBŽ 1994 “a document setting out the rights and obligations of the parties to an agreement and the deadlines for fulfilling them”, sutartis AĮVTŽ 2000, ETŽ 2005, AETŽ 2006;

menedžmentas see vadyba BBBŽ 1994 “planning, organizing, motivating and controlling in order to achieve an organization's goals”, vadyba AĮVTŽ 2000, AETŽ 2006;

menedžeris, vadūnas BBBŽ 1994, vadybininkas AETŽ 2006;

Terminologija | 2015 | 22

1 0 3

transaction, deal BBBŽ 1994 “a legal contract between a buyer and a seller,” deal AĮVTŽ 2000, transaction method, balance of transactions AETŽ 2006. Regarding the structure of competing terms in the dictionaries examined, it should be noted that one-word equivalents were found for most (69.6%) of the one-word terms, since these have greater competitive strength, for example: leasing – rent BBBŽ 1994; deposit – deposit BBBŽ 1994; devaluation – depreciation AETŽ 2006; recession – downturn ETŽ 2005; chance – opportunity BBBŽ 1994; economic base – economic foundation AETŽ 2006; capital formation – capital creation AETŽ 2006; certificate of deposit – deposit certificate AETŽ 2006. Most often, there is one equivalent in a group of competing terms, but sometimes several terms compete: Lithuanian and borrowed, one-word and two-word terms, for example: preference – advantage, priority BBBŽ 1994; testing – trial, test, examination BBBŽ 1994; depository – depositary, custodian BBBŽ 1994; donation – gift, subsidy BBBŽ 1994; companion – accomplice, partner BBBŽ 1994; deficit AĮVTŽ 2000, AETŽ 2006, shortfall AĮVTŽ 2000, shortage of funds AETŽ 2006; annuity BBBŽ 1994, ETŽ 2005, AETŽ 2006, annual payment BBBŽ 1994, annual rent AETŽ 2006. Such cases show that the search for the most appropriate expression is still under way intensively.

The dictionaries examined contain 52 cases (24.4%) in which a borrowed one-word term competes with a two-word term, which may itself include other borrowed words, for example: denunciation – termination of a contract BBBŽ 1994; branch – subsidiary company AĮVTŽ 2000; moratorium – deferral of taxes BBBŽ 1994; prolongation – postponement, extension of deadlines BBBŽ 1994; rank – position held BBBŽ 1994; re-export – repeated export AETŽ 2006; vacancy – vacant post ETŽ 2005.

Only 7 cases (3.3%) were found in which a one-word term competes with a three-word term, for example: reinvestment – additional investment of capital BBBŽ 1994; revaluation – increase in the exchange rate AETŽ 2006. Five cases (2.7%) of competition between a one-word term and a four-word term were found, for example: re-import – bringing goods back into the country BBBŽ 1994; warrant – option to purchase shares AETŽ 2006. Thus, efforts are generally made to replace one-word terms with one-word competitors, since the principle of linguistic economy is quite important when several terms compete. However, longer terms can also outcompete little-known short borrowed terms if the meanings of the words that make them up reveal the concept they designate, for example: hedging – risk insurance AETŽ 2006; seigniorage – currency-issuance tax AETŽ 2006.

104 Rasuolė Vladarskienė │ Skolintų ir lietuviškų ekonomikos terminų konkurencija

The actual competition among terms is revealed quite well by their use in documents. These provide not only statistical data indicating usage tendencies², but also show how competition between terms unfolds: first a borrowing appears in usage, later one or more synonymous Lithuanian terms emerge, alongside which the borrowing is still given in parentheses as a secondary variant, and finally the use of only the Lithuanian term in texts indicates the outcome of the competitive relationship; cf. (emphasis added R. V.):

“A financial h o l d i n g company is a financial institution whose controlled companies, all or most of them, are credit institutions or financial companies, at least one of which is a credit institution.” (LRS 2002-06-11);

“When establishing a h o l d i n g European company under Article 2(2) of the Regulation, the draft terms for the formation of the h o l d i n g European company must be assessed by an audit firm with which each company initiating the formation of the h o l d i n g European company concludes a contract” (VŽ 2004-05-11, No. 78-2710);

“A financial c o n t r o l l i n g (h o l d i n g) company is a financial institution whose controlled companies, all or most of them, are credit institutions or financial companies, at least one of which is a credit institution” (VŽ 2002-09-18, No. 91-3891);

“A financial c o n t r o l l i n g company – as defined in Article 4(1)(20) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms <...>” (TAR 2015-03-31, No. 2015-04829).

An examination of the research material suggests that some borrowed terms and their Lithuanian equivalents continue to compete fiercely, even when dictionaries and terminology databases provide a Lithuanian equivalent. The clearest example may be the competition between the borrowing marketingas BBBŽ 1994 and its Lithuanian equivalent rinkodara “the organization and implementation of sales strategies” AĮVTŽ 2000, ETŽ 2005, AETŽ 2006. The LRSB search showed that the nominative, dative, accusative, and instrumental forms of the term marketingas

² Statistical data are not entirely precise, because the legislation search database of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania can automatically provide only the number of documents in which a word or phrase occurs, rather than the exact number of occurrences (a searched word or phrase may occur more than once in some documents). Another issue is that a searched word or phrase may be used not in its common meaning but as a proper name, i.e. it may constitute or form part of a legal entity’s name, for example: UAB “Marke-tingas,” “Baltijos regiono marketingas,” “Nemuno marketingas,” “Progresyvus marketingas”. Nevertheless, usage tendencies are reflected quite clearly in this database, and the dates on which documents were prepared also clearly mark certain stages in the competition between terms.

Terminologija | 2015 | 22

1 0 5

used in 191, while the genitive form occurs in 358 documents (the genitive most often functions as a dependent element in a compound term). One formal reason why this loanword is still actively used in official texts is that marketingas was included in the Classification of Education Subfields: 342 marketingas ir reklama (VŽ 2000-07-28, No. 62-1887); it is also included in the titles of study programmes accredited in recent years by order of the Director of the Centre for Quality Assessment in Higher Education, for example: verslo vadyba ir marketingas, marketingas ir prekybos vadyba (TAR 2015-05-20, No. 2015-07647); viešieji ryšiai ir marketingas (TAR 2014-10-21, No. 2014-14467); marketingas ir medijų menas (TAR 2014-07-08, No. 2014-09941); tarptautinis marketingas ir ženklodara (TAR 2014-06-02, No. 2014-0605); marketingas, marketingas ir tarptautinė komercija, marketingo vadyba, marketingas ir pardavimai, marketingo valdymas, tarptautinis marketingas ir prekyba (TAR 2014-03-28, No. 2014-03628). Another legal act that also contributes to the competitive strength of this term is the profit and loss statement template approved by a resolution of the National Control Commission for Prices and Energy, in which one column is entitled “Marketing expenses” (TAR 2015-04-03, No. 2015-05160).

Lithuanian names for financial instruments have become established successfully not only in dictionaries but also in usage, rather than variants borrowed from other languages, despite their fairly narrow and specific field of use, for example: ateities sandoris BBBŽ 1994; būsimųjų atsiskaitymų sandoris BBBŽ 1994, AETŽ 2006 and fjučerinis sandoris BBBŽ 1994; išankstinis sandoris BBBŽ 1994, AETŽ 2006 and forvardas; pasirinkimo sandoris AETŽ 2006 and opcionas BBBŽ 1994, AĮVTŽ 2000, euroopcionas BBBŽ 1994.

However, it is difficult for other specialized Lithuanian terms, used only by specialists in a narrow field, to compete with loanwords; cf. trendas ir nuonėšis AETŽ 2006 “1. the essential long-term component of a time-series dataset, often calculated to show the long-term trend in a variable’s change; 2. a measure of the average value of an economic variable (e.g. income) at a given point in time”. In the LRSB, only 11 documents were found containing various inflected forms of the term trendas, for example: “<...> the influence of time is determined using the methods of paired sales analysis, resale analysis, analysis of the sales price t r e n d coefficient, and multiple regression analysis” (LRSB, 2002). Nuonėšio was not found in a single document in this database.

106 Rasuoļė Vladarskienė | Skolintų ir lietuviškų ekonomikos terminų konkurencija

It is doubtful whether Lithuanian terms can outcompete loanwords in cases where the Lithuanian equivalent is already familiar in other fields, for example: akceleratorius / greitiklis AETŽ 2006, cf. “a substance that, in small quantities, accelerates a chemical reaction” LRTB; multiplikatorius ETŽ 2005, multiplikatorius / daugiklis AETŽ 2006 “the ratio of a change in income to the change in expenditure that caused it”, cf. “a quantity by which another quantity is multiplied” LRTB.

CONCLUSIONS

When assessing the development of terms in terminology, it is useful to employ terms customary in other branches of linguistics: competition, competitive relations, competitors. They help to reveal more clearly the characteristics of terms becoming established in terminological dictionaries and texts.

The main methods of term management are important in determining which competitor becomes established in usage; moreover, certain language-policy tendencies and the enactment of legislation also play a considerable role in term competition.

A comparison of borrowed terms recorded in dictionaries of economic terminology published in different periods with their Lithuanian equivalents reveals a tendency toward Lithuanianization: over a decade, a Lithuanian term may outcompete a loanword and become established in dictionaries. However, the true outcome of competitive relations between terms is indicated by their establishment in administrative and scholarly texts.

An examination of the structure of competing terms in the dictionaries studied showed that one-word equivalents were found for most (69.6 per cent) of the one-word terms. In 52 competitor groups (24.4 per cent), a borrowed one-word term competes with a two-word term. Only 7 cases (3.3 per cent) were found in which a one-word term competes with a three-word term. There were 5 cases (2.7 per cent) of competition between a one-word and a four-word term.

One-word terms are generally replaced with one-word terms, since the principle of linguistic economy plays a significant role in term competition. Longer terms can outcompete short, little-known loanwords if the meanings of the words making up the compound term convey the description of the concept it denotes.

Competition between synonymous terms is a persistent state of terminology, since new phenomena continually emerge and the most suitable terms to name them are sought.

Terminologija | 2015 | 22

107

ŠALTINIAI

AETŽ 2006: Aiškinamasis ekonomikos anglų–lietuvių kalbų žodynas. Sud. D. W. Pearce, Vilnius: TEV.

AĮVTŽ 2000: Martinkus B., Neverauskas B, Sakalas A., Venskus R., Žilinskas V. Aiškinamasis įmonės vadybos terminų žodynas, Kaunas: Technologija.

BBBŽ 1994: Buračas A., Svecevičius B. Biznio, bankų, biržos terminų žodynas–žinynas, Vilnius: Žodynas.

DLKŽ 2011: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas. Vyr. red. St. Keinys. Šeštas (trečias elektroninis) leidimas, Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Prieiga per internetą: http://dz.lki.lt.

ETŽ 2005: Vainienė R. Ekonomikos terminų žodynas, Vilnius: Tyto alba.

LRSB – Lietuvos Respublikos Seimo teisės aktų paieškos bazė. Prieiga per internetą: http://www3.lrs.lt/dokpaieska/forma_1.htm.

LRTB – Lietuvos Respublikos terminų bankas. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.vlkk.lt/lit/terminai.

TAR – Teisės aktų registras. Prieiga per internetą: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/index.

TŽŽ 2013: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas. Red. taryba: A. Kaulakienė, St. Keinys, B. Kurkulis, V. Račiūnaitė, V. Žalkauskas, Vilnius: Alma littera.

VŽ – Valstybės žinios, oficialus leidinys.

LITERATŪRA

Danilenko 1977: Даниленко В. П. Русская терминология: опыт лингвистического описания, Москва.

Gaivenis K. 2002: Lietuvių terminologija: tvarkybos ir teorijos metmenys, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

Gaivenis K. 2014: Rinktiniai raštai, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

Kaulakienė A. 2009: Lietuvių fizikos terminijos raida, Vilnius: Technika.

Keinys S. 2005: Dabartinė lietuvių terminologija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

Miliūnaitė R. 2009: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos vartosenos variantai, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

Mitkevičienė A. 2015: 1918–1940 metų lietuvių literatūros mokslo terminai. Daktaro disertacija, Vilnius.

Stankevičienė S. 2012: Variantinė ir sinoniminė lietuvių ir vokiečių kalbų elektrostatikos terminų raiška. – Kalbų studijos 21, 21–27.

Umbrasas A. 2004: Bendrašakniai dvižodžių teisės terminų sinonimai ir variantai 1918–1940 m. Lietuvos kodeksuose. – Terminologija 11, 100–118.

Zemlevičiūtė P. 2001: Sinoniminiai „Medicinos enciklopedijos“ terminai. – Terminologija 8, 34–49.

Župerka K. 1995: Kalbos priemonių konkurencija kaip lietuvių kalbos stilistikos objektas, Šiauliai: Šiaulių pedagoginis institutas.

COMPETITION OF BORROWED AND LITHUANIAN TERMS OF ECONOMICS

In Lithuanian linguistics the competition of language means is viewed as a dynamic phenomenon: one variant takes root in common usage replacing another, sometimes non-standard variant. Terminology usually deals with synonymy of terms. Synonymy is a particular feature of the initial stages of development of terminological sub-systems when the most suitable term for naming a concept of science has not been chosen yet and there are a few competing variants of one name in the language of science.

Synonymous terms are variants with competitive relations. In terminology ordering the usage is usually not the most important factor determining the establishment of a particular synonym. Terminography, terminology standardization and some tendencies of the language politics can also have a role in this process.

Some synonymous terms are obviously competing in Lithuanian terminology of economics. There is a persistent competition between some borrowed terms (e.g. marketingas (marketing)) and their Lithuanian equivalents (rinkodara). Lithuanian names of banking transactions (ateities sandoris (future), išankstinis sandoris (forward),

108 Rasuolė Vladarskienė | Skolintų ir lietuviškų ekonomikos terminų konkurencija

pasirinkimo sandoris (option)) but not variants from other languages (fjūčeris, forvardas, opcionas) were established not only in dictionaries but also in common usage despite of their quite narrow and specific field.

It is difficult to replace a borrowed term with a Lithuanian one when the Lithuanian term is already known in other fields: akceleratorius / greitiklis (accelerator), daugiklis / multiplikatorius (multiplier).

One of the reasons why some borrowed terms of economics and their Lithuanian equivalents are still competing after decades is the lack of both appropriate ordering and extensive original dictionary with definitions. Persistent competition between synonymous terms is a permanent state of terminology, because new concepts keep appearing and they need the most suitable terms for naming them.

Gauta 2015-08-21

Rasuolė Vladarskienė Vilniaus Gedimino technikos universitetas Saulėtekio al. 11, LT-03227 Vilnius E. paštas [email protected]

Terminologija | 2015 | 22

1 0 9