Some Lexicological Aspects of Terminology and Terminography

Terminologija | 2008 | 15 1 7 Some lexicological aspects of terminology and terminography VALENTĪNA SKUJIŅA InstituteoftheLatvianLanguage,Riga In 2006 a meeting commemorating the hundredth of the birth anniversary of the Latvian linguist and terminologist Rudolfs Grabis was organized in the Latvian Academy of Sciences. In April 2008 terminologists from Lithuania, Latvia and other countries were invited to participate at the international conference to mark the hundredth anniversary of Lithuanian lexicographer and the well-known terminologist and terminographer Jonas Kruopas. From the 1950s to the 1970s both scholars were the heads of Terminology Commissions: Jonas Kruopas — in Lithuania, Rudolfs Grabis — in Latvia. The middle of the 1960s was the time when Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia began to develop closer contacts on language culture and terminology. On Moscow’s initiative in 1969 the regional conference on terminology development and preparation of term dictionaries was organized in Riga. Since then regular conferences have been held in Vilnius, Tallinn and Riga discussing both theoretical and practical aspects of terminology. Jonas Kruopas took part at these conferences. He was a member of the editorial board of the book of conference materials, published in 1973 (BPHTT 1973). The article written by Jonas Kruopas and his colleague Kazimieras Gaivenis (Kruopas, Gaivenis 1973) on terminology work and compilation of term dictionaries in Lithuania shows us a number of similar problems in national terminology development both in Lithuania and Latvia: • about the first written sources in 16th century – religious texts; • about loan translations (calques) as a productive pattern for term formation (in Lithuanian — especially from Latin, Polish, German and Russian origin, in Latvian — especially from Latin, German and Russian origin); 1 8 • about “travelling” of lexical units • from LGP (language for general purposes) to LSP (language for spe-from LGP (language for general purposes) to LSP (language for special purposes), and viceversa; • from active vocabulary to passive vocabulary, and viceversa; • about seeking balance between terms from native sources and borrowings; • etc. The title of this paper – Somelexicologicalaspectsofterminologyand terminography – is chosen not only taking into account the main topic of this commemoration conference but at the same time in order to define more precisely (and update) some principles for terminology work in the Terminology Commission of Latvian Academy of Sciences. From the linguistic point of view, first of all terminology traditionally was treated as a part of lexicology. Before the 1960s in the Latvian State University in the course of lexicology only about 15 minutes were devoted to terminology as a layer of the Latvian word-stock (Laua 1981: 138–141). Beginning with the 1960s, under the guidance of Rudolfs Grabis, scientific studies on the theoretical terminology issues were started at the Institute of Latvian Language and Literature of the Latvian Academy of Sciences. Before that, we can speak about the scientific approach to selecting and forming of terms, beginning with the second half of the 19th century when different textbooks and manuals of various branches of science and technology as well as terminological dictionaries were published in Latvian and when essential problems of formation of terminology (the role of native derivatives and borrowings, the brevity of a term, etc.) were discussed in separate articles written by J. Alunāns, K. Valdemārs and others, so-called the New Latvians (in Latvian – jaunlatvieši). Beginning with the late 1960s, terminology was proclaimed to be a self-contained, interdisciplinary branch of sciences with a term as a specific object for scientific investigation, and the term terminology in this sense had obtained a preferred synonym terminologyscience (in Latvian – terminzinātne, in Russian – терминоведение). Since that time a number of terminology conferences, seminars and workshops have been organized in different countries and hundreds of books and articles published exactly on terminological issues. Terminology has become a multi-aspectual, large-scaled branch of science with Valentīna Skujiņa | Somelexicologicalaspectsofterminology... Terminologija | 2008 | 15 1 9 interlingual significance. Terms are compiled not only in dictionaries but in databases too, including multilingual collections (e. g. ETB database). Though nowadays terminology is recognized as an independent (interdisciplinary) branch of science, its close links with linguistics determine the significant role of lingual (intra-lingual) principles in term-formation. The lexical aspect of linguistic principles supposes to respect the specific character of the terminological stratum in the general lexical system of language, the interrelations of terms and non-terms, terminological and general vocabulary, the connections between terminology and professionally, socially, territorially, historically and stylistically limited lexical layers, etc. Lexical inventory of a language is collected in dictionaries. Lexicography is a sub-branch of linguistics where the theory and practice of term dictionary preparation are developed and principles and methods for compiling, systematization, analysis and description of words are developed. Let us try to answer the question: is there any difference between a dictionary of common language and a term dictionary? For this purpose, let us compare some entries of ‘processual’ and ‘attributive’ content from two explanatory dictionaries: the LatvianLanguageDictionary (LVV 2006) and Dictionaryof BasicLinguisticTerms (VPTSV 2007). ENTRIES FOR EXPRESSING THE ‘PROCESSUAL’ CONTENT (I) LVV (common language dictionary): tulkot (in English: totranslate) -oju, -o, -o, pag. -oju, pārej. 1. Izteikt(ko) citāvalodā(in English: toexpress(something)inanotherlanguage). T. no oriģināla. Tulkotā literatūra. T. grāmatu krieviski. T. runu. latviskot (in English: toLatvianize) -oju, -o, -o, pag. -oju, pārej. 1. Pārveidot atbilstošilatviešuvalodai,tāsīpatnībām;(pa)darītlatvisku(in English: totransformaccordingtotheLatvianlanguage,itspeculiarities;tomake Latvian). L. uzvārdu. VPTSV (term dictionary): tulkošana a. translation v. Translation f, Übersetzung f, Übertragung f kr. перевод Vienā valodā (oriģinālvalodā vai avotvalodā) rakstītā vai runātā vārda, 2 0 teksta satura, jēgas, domas (ieskaitot zemtekstus u. c.) izteikšana ar citas valodas (mērķvalodas jeb tulkojumvalodas) līdzekļiem (in English: expressing(theword,text,idea,etc.)fromasourcelanguageintotarget language). ◊ brīvātulkošana;burtiskātulkošana. Sk. arī oriģinālvaloda;avotvaloda;mērķvaloda. latviskošana a. Latvianization,Lettonization v.Einlettischungf kr. латышизация,летонизация Pielāgošana,padarotatbilstošulatviešuvalodai,tāsīpatnībām,struktūrai. (In English: transformationaccordingtotheLatvianlanguage,inconfor-conformitywiththeLatvianlanguage) ENTRIES FOR EXPRESSING THE ‘PROCESSUAL’ CONTENT (II) LVV (common language dictionary): deklinēt (todecline) -ēju, -ē, -ē, pag. -ēju, pārej. 1. Valodniecībā–locīt(nomenus)(in English: Inlinguistics–toinflectnomina). D. īpašības vārdu ar noteikto galotni. Šis vārds nav deklinējams. konjugēt (toconjugate) -ēju, -ē, -ē, pag. -ēju, pārej. Locīt (darbības vārdus) (in English: toinflectverbs). locīt (toinflect) loku, loki, loka, pag. locīju, pārej... 4.Gramatikā–mainīt vārduformaslocījumosvaipersonās(in English: Ingrammar–tochange theformsofwordsincases,persons). L. lietvārdu. L. darbības vārdu. VPTSV (term dictionary): deklinēšana a. declension,declining v. Deklinierenf kr. склонение Nomenu (lietvārdu, īpašības vārdu, skaitļa vārdu) un to nozīmē lietotu vārdu (vietniekvārdu, lokāmo divdabju) locīšana, t. i., gramatisko formu mainīšana dzimtē, skaitlī un locījumā. (In English: changingofthegrammarformsofnominaingender,number, case) Valentīna Skujiņa | Somelexicologicalaspectsofterminology... Terminologija | 2008 | 15 2 1 Sk. arī konjugēšana. konjugēšana a. conjugation v. Konjugierenf kr. спряжение Darbības vārda locīšana, t. i., gramatisko formu maiņa personās, skait-skaitļos, laikos, kārtās un izteiksmēs. (In English: changingofthegrammarformsofverbsinpersons,tense, voice,mood) Sk. arī deklinēšana. locīšanask. deklinēšana;konjugēšana ENTRIES FOR EXPRESSING THE ‘ATTRIBUTIVE’ CONTENT LVV (common language dictionary): vienkāršs(simple) īp.;vienkārši(simply) apst. 1. Tāds,kassastāvnoviena elementa,vienasdaļas ... (in English: suchwhichconsistsofoneelement, onepart ...) V. teikums. 2. Tāds,kasnavgrūts,navsarežģīts ... (in Eng-English: suchwhichisnotcomplicated ...) V. uzdevums ... 3. Parasts,pieticīgs ... (in English: ordinary,modest ...) V. ēdiens ... 4. Tāds,kamnavīpašu privilēģiju ... (in English: suchwhichhasnoprivileges ...) V. darba cilvēks. VPTSV (term dictionary): vienkāršāpagātne,imperfekts a. pastindefinite v. Imperfekt n kr. простоепрошедшее Darbības vārda laika forma, kas izsaka darbību, kas ir notikusi pirms runas momenta, piemēram, Estikkoatnācumājāsnoskolas ... (In English: the tenseformofaverbexpressinganactionthattookplace beforethemomentofspeaking) vienkāršsteikums a. simplesentence v. einfacherSatz n kr. простоепредложение 2 2 Teikums, kurā ir tikai viens gramatiskais centrs ... (In English: thesen-sentencewithonlyonesyntacticcentre) ◊ vienkāršs paplašināts teikums. Sk. arī teikums;saliktsteikums;gramatiskaiscentrs. As we can see from comparison of entries, the main differences are: In LVV (common language dictionary) there are: 1) only single words as headwords; 2) grammatical forms, references to a part of speech; 3) easy, comprehensive explanations; 4) all meanings in one entry; 5) absence of synonyms in the head of entries; 6) grammatical processual meaning represented by a verb. (There are no term equivalents in other languages.) In VPTSV (term dictionary) there are: 1) both single words and word combinations as headwords; 2) absence of grammar information; 3) definitions (explanations) with relevant characteristics of the concept; 4) only one concept explained in one entry; 5) synonyms in the head of entries; 6) grammatical processual meaning represented by a noun. (Term equivalents in other languages are given.) Conclusion: Taking into account above mentioned peculiarities of common language and term dictionaries, we can conclude that from the theoretical point of view there is a substantial motive to deal with the terminography as the specific interdisciplinary subject constituted of fundamentals from lexicology, lexicography and terminology. In this case, putting aside other peculiarities, let us pay some additional attention to the role of different parts of speech in terminology, in general, and in term dictionaries, in particular. It is well-known that terms are not specific words. Terms are words in a specific function: to denote by a word or word combination a unit of concept system of the respective branch of science or of the respective sphere of activity. In other words, we usually say that terms are not substantional items but functional ones. Valentīna Skujiņa | Somelexicologicalaspectsofterminology... Terminologija | 2008 | 15 2 3 This specific function of the term is twofold: to nominate and to designate the concept. Denominating linguistic units usually are nouns (e. g. in linguistics, the nouns sound,morpheme,word,sentence,transitivity are used in the function of linguistic terms), or word combinations with a noun as the basic component of these word combinations (e. g. the noun language is the basic component of word combinations naturallanguage,artificial language,signlanguage which are used in the function of the terms). Nouns are the class of words that have the possibility to [de]nominate all different kinds of realia – objects, processes, qualities, quantities, conditions, etc. Therefore exactly nouns fit well for the function of terms. Dominant role of nouns as representatives of appropriate concepts fixed in term dictionaries is undoubted and is emphasized by a number of linguists and terminologists. Different views are expressed about other parts of speech, in particular – verbs. In some cases both nouns and verbs we can find as headwords in ISO standards (e. g. in ISO/IEC 2382). Let us compare some examples of definitions given for nouns and verbs in these ISO standards, and pay attention to number of concepts and essential features mentioned for concepts in these definitions: display A visual presentation of data. to display To present data visually. storage The retention of data in a storage device. to store To retain data in a storage device. programming The designing, writing, modifying, and testing of programs. to program To design, write, modify, and test programs. If according to the semantic (and terminological) triangle the concept is mental presentation of the object and the term is lingual presentation of the concept, than how many concepts are presented in these examples? Three, or six? If we compare the “lingual presentation” of concepts in these definitions: “a visual presentation” and “to present visually”, or: “the retention ... in a storage device” and “to retain ... in a storage device”, or: 2 4 “the designing, writing ...” and “to design, write ...”, – we should conclude that concepts are expressed by words with the same conceptual content only differing in grammatical form pursuant to appropriate part of speech. Therefore, it seems that more convincing is the view of those linguists and terminologists who consider the nouns as the main representatives of the appropriate concepts in language but verbs assert as terminological units which in point of fact express the same concept, differ in grammar (morphological or syntactical) variation or modification and are used for context needs, in discourse. Of course, there are some peculiarities in different subject fields, e. g. in mathematics, technical terminology, or sport. The substantive nature of a term is based on the adequate nature of a concept. A conception of such terminological item as the termeme (Skujiņa 1996) gives to the words of different parts of speech (and/or word forms) a possibility to be allocated a definite place within the terminological vocabulary: the term (noun) as representative of the concept is the central member of the termeme (e. g. the term translation) but a verb and other words or word forms (participles, adverbs, adjectives) in point of fact express the same concept are secondary members (e. g. to translate, translating,translated). Every scientific activity is based upon principles. In Latvia, for a number of decades the main terminology tasks were carried out and principles were adopted according to E. Wüster’s (Wüster 1979) views and Austrian terminology school, in conformity with systemic approach in the framework of the so called “traditional theory” of terminology (Cabré Castellví 2000: 35). These tasks have sufficed to achieve certain goals in national terminology development according to scientific requirements and principles developed in classical interlingual terminology theory. These tasks in were not carried out only for the standardization of terminology but also for enrichment of national lexical system in particular. As a conclusion I would like to stress that during a number of decades (since about the 1960s) terminology science has become a multidisciplinary subject constituted on fundamentals of linguistics, and its sub-branches – lexicology, lexicography, derivatology, etc., as well as on fundamental elements of logics, philosophy, cognitivistics, ontology, communication science, etc. Besides (as it is stressed in terminology literature (Cabré Castellví 2000: 55)), while being interdisciplinary, terminology is also transdisciplinary, Valentīna Skujiņa | Somelexicologicalaspectsofterminology... Terminologija | 2008 | 15 2 5 since there is no structured discipline without a terminology and no way of expressing and transferring scientific knowledge without terminology. Although for terminology it is characteristic that the diversity of applications of the main scientific principles of term-formation play pivot role up till now. Now in terminology science we can indicate to a search for new approaches that would help account for the complexity of terminological units within the framework both of general and specialized communication, taking into account the syntactical and communicative nature of terms in texts. Nevertheless, it does not mean to deny the traditional approach. It means that the basis for a new theory of terminology would account for both the representational and the communicative function of terminology (Cabré Castellví 2000: 36, 46). The new approach means, first, to assert the main scientific principles, and, second, to focus on the diversity of term applications. The “new theory” is preferred to be not a solely “linguistic theory for terminology” but “terminology theory for terminology” which “would conceive terms as sets of denominative and conceptual units belonging to natural language” and “representing special knowledge within a particular domain, and serving professional communication” (Cabré Castellví 2000: 53). CONCLUSIONS 1. Since the first written sources during about five centuries Lithuanian and Latvian terminology step by step has become multidisciplinary and rather rich to fulfill all necessary state language functions which become urgent at the end of 20th century and are topical up till now. Closer contacts between Latvian and Lithuanian terminologists began since the middle of 60ies of 20th century when regular conferences on terminology and language culture were hold in Vilnius, Riga and Tallinn. This was the time when terminology was proclaimed as a self-contained interdisciplinary subject constituted on fundamentals from linguistics, as well as on fundamental elements from logics, philosophy, cognitivistics, ontology, communication science, etc. 2. From the linguistic point of view, first of all terminology traditionally was treated as a part of lexicology. The lexicological aspect of terminology supposes to respect the specific character of the terminological stratum in the general lexical system of a language, the interrelations of terms and non-terms, terminological and general vocabulary, the connections be-