Valodniecības pamatterminu skaidrojošā vārdnīca. Sastādijis autoru kolektīvs V. Skujiņas vadībā.

242 REGINA KVAŠYTĖ University of Southampton VALODNIECĪBAS KAMATTERMINU SKAIDROJOŠĀ VĀRDNĪCA Compiled by a group of authors under the direction of V. Skujiņas, Riga, 2007, 624 p. In the beginning of 2008, a long-awaited publication on terminology appeared in Latvia, finally allowing linguists to feel themselves as specialists in a field with modern terminology. Valodniecības pamatterminu skaidrojošā vārdnīca is the first explanatory dictionary of linguistic terms prepared in Latvian language, which, as the name of the dictionary suggests, collects the main terms of this branch of science. Until now, colleagues used the almost 50-year-old Russian-Latvian translation dictionary of terms, which no longer met the needs of the changed scientific language (VTV 1963). But the new dictionary Regina Kvašytė | Terminology | 2008 | 15 243 authors used it to select terms and their equivalents in Russian. The dictionary was prepared under the supervision of the renowned Latvian terminologist Valentina Skujiņa, Ph.D., by the older and middle generation of linguists with broad scientific interests Ojārs Bušs, Daiga Joma, Andra Kalnača, Ilze Lokmane, Dace Markus and Iveta Pūtele. They were assisted by a number of other specialists in philological science. Funds for the dictionary were provided by the State Agency “Valsts valodas aģentūra” [State Language Agency], and the initiative for its preparation belongs to the University of Latvia Agency “Latvijas Universitātes Latviešu valodas institūts” [Latvian Language Institute of the University of Latvia]. Latvian Language Institute. During the discussion of the material of the Dictionary, individual opinions were discussed and harmonized. As in any other field, first it was necessary to select the concepts that would be included in the Dictionary, then to select from the already available terms those that would be used, to improve or create new ones, as well as to define them and search for their equivalents in foreign languages. As the authors of Pratarme themselves say, the main purpose of the dictionary is to collect and explain the most relevant linguistic terms and thus promote the development of Latvian linguistic terminology. Target audience – linguists, teachers of Latvian language, higher education teachers, students of language specialties, etc. First, I would like to describe the new terminology publication in more detail. Of the total volume, the main part, i.e. the interpretation of Latvian terms, occupies from 12 to 463 pages (by the way, this can be distinguished visually – the edges of the pages are colored gray). The dictionary contains about 2000 Latvian linguistic terms with equivalents in English, German and Russian. Terms are presented in alphabetical order. The glossary contains references to related terms that help to better understand a concept that has already been defined (they are added with a link, see arī [see also]). There are numerous illustrative examples of individual terms in articles, most often in terms naming various types of writing, such as antīkva, glagolica, hieroglyphs, pictogram. In addition, in individual articles of the Dictionary there are various schemes that help to better understand the concept named by the term (salikta vārdkopa1 [composite word combination], semantiskais trīsstūris [semantic triangle], vienkārša vārdkopa [singular word combination] and so on). The dictionary is quadrilingual, therefore for convenience 1 Latvian examples are translated into Lithuanian and written in square brackets, except in cases where both languages use international terms or the forms of terms are the same. If there is no usage tradition in Lithuanian linguistics, or if this more accurately reflects the structure of the Latvian term, the translation may be literal. This is marked with an asterisk (by the way, the authors of the Talking Dictionary do the same, for example, neologija* / a. neology / v. Neologie* / kr. неология*). 244 therefore, it contains indexes of terms in each foreign language. They are distinguished by the fact that each of them is accompanied by translations into Latvian. The indexes occupy about one third of the total volume of the Glossary – from 464 pages. This is a practical way of doing so, since you no longer have to search for the Latvian equivalent in the main part of the Dictionary. It should also be added that a lot of information facilitating the use of the Dictionary is contained in the description of the structure of the Dictionary – there are certain contractual matters that the user of the Dictionary will understand only after familiarizing himself with it in detail. The selection of terms shows that the Dictionary contains a large number of new linguistic terms of various structures: kods, diskurss, korpuss, makrosociolingvistika, konstitucija, kultūraizguvums [cultural borrowing*], viltusdraugs [false (translator’s) friend*], tekstveide [text creation], jauniešu slengs [youth slang], komunikatīvā kompetence [communicative competence] and others. Some of them are international borrowings, others of native origin or mixed forms (similar ones are also found in Lithuanian linguists’ works). It should be noted that the terminology of some branches of linguistics, including new ones, is quite extensively developed and reflected in the Dictionary. Especially distinguished are onomastics, sociolinguistics, translatology, or translation theory. Pavyzdžiui, į naująjį Žodyną pateko sociolingvistikai aktualūs, neretai sinonimų turintys terminai: alohtonāminoritāte[alochtodvikalbystė*, pakeičiantis bilingvizmas*], taip pat vertimo teorijai ir praktikai reikalingi terminai – tarp jų nemaža latvių kalbos darinių, dažniausiai dūrinių: assvaloda, galvenāstarpniekvaloda [ašies kalba*, pagrindinė attulkojums, pretvirzienatulkojums[atgalinis ninė mažuma], aizstājošādivvalodība, aizstājošaisbilingvisms[pakeičianti vertimas*, priešingos krypties vertimas*],čuksttulkošana[vertimas pašnibždomis*] ir kt. A great deal of attention is paid to terminology2. The term-language dictionary contains as many as 19 terms of this field with the root alone (for comparison, the Lithuanian Kalbotyros terminų dictionary mentions only 3 with this root – kalba tarpininkė*], avotvaloda[šaltinio kalba*], mērķvaloda[tikslo kalba*]; terminas, terminija and terminologija (Gaivenis, Keinys 1990)), for example: solid – terminēma, terminelements [component part of the term], terminogrāfija, terminzinātne [the science of terms*], terminoloģija and compound diphthongs – termina noteikšana, termina identificēšana [definition of the term, identification of the term], terminoloģiskā funkcija [terminological function], some compound polynomials – terminu pieņemamības vērtes 2 A separate dictionary has been published in Lithuanian, containing about 200 terms used in terminology (Kvašytė 2005). Regina Kvašytė | Terminology | 2008 | 15 245 skala [term acceptance value scale*]. Also, a number of terms in this branch of linguistics are found in alphabetical order (apakštermins [species term], virsjēdziens [generic term], etc.), and sometimes they may be terms of other branches of linguistics, which, based on their definitions, belong to terminology. Some of the terms included in the Speaking Dictionary show the activity of Latvian terminologists in terms creation in general, for example, the term dators was created and successfully introduced in the field of computer science instead of the English loanword kompjūters [computer], which is used mostly only in spoken language, and applied in linguistics. This was determined by the fact that this word (derived from the Latin root dati [data] and the international suffix -ors [-orius] as a suitable means of creation for naming a device) is generally characterized by constructive convenience. A number of Latvian terminological neologisms with the root datoror adjectives derived from it confirm this view, for example: datorklase [computer class], datorprogramma [computer program], datortīkls [computer network]. Terms such as datorizētā tulkošana [computer-aided translation] and datorlingvistika [computer linguistics] have been added to the recent terminology of linguistics. The root da has also formed a term, the form of which has been debated for some time – datubāze [data bank*] (it is interesting that Latvians and Lithuanians have chosen different international words as the basis for naming a similar concept – some base (< gr.), others bank (< it.)). Initially used as a composite two-word term datu bāze, it has been recorded in the Dictionary after applying a tendency particularly characteristic of Latvian language – the transformation of composite terms into solid ones, because puns as one of the productive term types allow to express meaning more abstractly than combinations of two (or more) words. There are more examples in the dictionary where the tendency is to use more extensively homogeneous terms formed according to certain patterns instead of composite terms: ethnosemantic, ethnolinguistic, ethnotoponimic; apakšjēdziens [species term], apakšnozare [branch], apakštermins [species term]3; defiskopa [hyphenated term*] (see also the three-element punch defiskoptermins [hyphenated term*]), defisrakstījums [hyphenated writing*], defissavienojums [hyphenated term*]; hibrīdtermins [hybrid term], hibrīdvārds [hybrid word], hibrīdvaloda [hybrid language], as well as some other types of language: avotvaloda [source language*], cilmvaloda [origin language*], aizguvējvaloda [borrowing language*]. Although this method is not foreign to Lithuanian terminology (as evidenced by some of the aforementioned 3 All these terms in Latvian are made with the accent apakš-, whose basic meaning corresponds to the word apakšā meaning “below, below”; they are translated into Lithuanian in different ways. 246 of the corresponding examples), Latvian is particularly characterized by such structures – this can be considered as the influence of the German language (Keinys 1994: 89). There is also a number of multi-word composite terms in the dictionary, although they are not abundant. Four-word terms are rarely used: augsta mēles pacēluma patskanis [high tongue elevation vowel], salikta teikuma struktūras shēma [composed sentence structure scheme], salikts kombinēta saikņa teikums [composed combined conjunction sentence], slightly more common three-word terms: pārejošs darbības vārds [transitive verb], vārda formālais variants [formal variant of the word], indoeiropiešu valodu saime [Indo-European language family], latgaliešu rakstu valoda [Latvian written language], etc. A common way of fixing and using terms is synonymy. The new Latvian terminology publication is no exception, containing various types of synonyms, i.e. synonyms of solid terms or main or secondary elements of composite terms. These can be absolute or adjective synonyms of both Latvian and international origin, for example: galotne, fleksija [ending], divvalodība, bilingvisms [bilingualism], līdzartikulācija, koartikulācija [co-articulation], devējvaloda, donorvaloda [donor language*, donor language], diahroniskā valodniecība, diahroniskā lingvistika [diachronic linguistics]. It also occurs with Latin equivalents next to it: saliktā nākotne, futūrum II [composed future tense], darbības lietvārds, nomen actionis [*noun of action]. One other term has even three variants (it is usually a compound term, its shortened version and an international term): derived word, derivative, derivative, bahuvrihi, bahuvrihi compound, quoted compound [bahuvrihi dūrinys, dūrinys of another meaning*]. The dictionary also contains some still controversial terms that have been left synonymous, such as anglisms, anglicisms4. The main problem arises from the -ic-, which, as V. Skujinia has repeatedly stated, has no semantic load and is therefore unnecessary. In terms of ambiguity, it should be said that there are not many such linguistic terms, although some ambiguous terms do occur in the Dictionary. It is used both in different and in one branch of linguistics akomodācija – both in phonetics and sociolinguistics, anaphora – a figure used in stylistics that reveals the relationship between a word and the previously mentioned word, and a term, alonīms in onomastics – both as a variant of a real name and a pseudonym. An important part of the Glossary are the definitions. There are a variety of them: both concise and comprehensive. Some are even very concise, similar to synonyms or distinguishing one from another 4 Latvian does not have its own derivative language like Lithuanian – anglybė. Regina Kvašytė | Terminology | 2008 | 15 247 ses specialist; regional dialect – dialect specific to a territory as sąvoką nuo kitos: semasiologs–semasioloģijasspeciālists; sintaksists– sintakopposed to sociolect [regional dialect – dialects specific to a territory as opposed to sociolect]. Other definitions are supplemented with illustrative material, which from the perspective of the Dictionary user is to be evaluated positively, because sometimes one more example of the phenomenon discussed helps to understand the phenomenon better than a mere theoretical description. There are also more detailed definitions, in which you can find a lot of additional information about one or another phenomenon, for example, business writing language style, business writing style [dalykinių raštų stilius, dalykinis stilius] – Functional form of language or style used in official documents. Business writing style uses emotionally neutral means of expression, it is characterized by standardized, maximum unified expression, strict and slowly changing norms, the proportion of eco-verbs in the means of expression. [Functional language or style used in official writings. The style nomija,speciālāsterminoloģijasunstandartizētukonstrukcijulietojums,liels of subject writing uses emotionally neutral means of expression, it is characterized by standardized, maximum unified expression, strict and slowly changing norms, economy of means of expression, use of special terminology and standardized constructions, high comparative weight of nouns. The style of Latvian subject writing is characterized by a strong influence of other languages]. Such a definition is equivalent to a description of the characteristics of style in an encyclopedic or educational publication. Of course, not all definitions in this Glossary are as extensive. True encyclopedic data can be found in the definition of the term ātrraksts, stenogrāfija [speed writing*, stenography], where it is said when this type of writing appeared, who invented it, etc. A wide-ranging examination of the Dictionary and the information related to its preparation reveals connections with Lithuania. In the preface to the dictionary it is mentioned that its expert was Axel Holvoet (by the way, his name and surname according to all the Latvian language is spelled – Akselis Holvutas) from the Lithuanian Language Institute. The content of the Dictionary itself sometimes mentions the Lithuanian language, for example, it includes such terms as lietuviešu filoloģija [Lithuanian philology], lietuviešu valoda [Lithuanian language] and synonymous terms lietuvisms, lituānisms [Lithuania, Lithuanianism], lietuvistika, lituānistika [Lithuanian studies], as well as terms that include the Lithuanian language in their meanings: baltisms [Balticism], baltistika, baltu filoloģija [Baltic philology], baltu valodas [Baltic languages]. Among the 113 positions in the literature list in various languages, several works of Lithuanian linguists are mentioned: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika (1996), Lietuvių kalbos enciklopedija (1999), Lithuanian Grammar (1997), A. Paulauskienė Lietuvių kalbos morfologija (1994), Vincas Urbutis Žodžių darybos teorija (1978), Adele Valeckienė Functional grammar of Lithuanian language (1998), Zigmas Zinkevičius Kalbotyros pradmenys (1980). It is true that an inaccuracy has been noted – the Lithuanian Kalbotyros terminų žodynas is mentioned without the authors (see position 27), therefore in the alphabetical list of 248 literature according to the title it came to the letter K, and not to G, as it should be according to the authors). It must be acknowledged that the Dictionary does not do without certain inaccuracies. The structure is not completely organized, for example, there are missing some terms that have references to related terms: sinekdoha – poētiskā sinekdoha [poetic sinekdoha], leksiskā sinekdoha [lexical sinekdoha], but neither of the latter is at the letter P nor at the letter L. The inclusion of a few other terms in the Dictionary would raise doubts – whether vārdabrālis [general noun], vārdamāsa [general noun], tēls [image], tauta [people] are suitable for the Dictionary of terms in this field. However, neither the fact that some equivalents are not found in the Dictionary compiled in alphabetical order (only in the related terms as an opportunity for comparison), nor the fact that something is not so written in the literature list, nor the fact that some terms are unnecessary or questionable, does not diminish its content and meaning and importance for the development of the Latvian language in science, for the Latvian linguistics science. The Latvian terminology publication is perfectly prepared both in terms of content, and visually and polygraphically. The publication of such a linguistic publication, which complies with the principles of terminology, is important, and it appeared at a time when there are many new phenomena in life in general, and in language, because the language of science is changing and improving. This could be a serious incentive for Lithuanian linguists, who have been using the existing Dictionary of Lithuanian Linguistic Terms (Gaivenis, Keinys 1990) for almost two decades, to follow the example of their neighbors and colleagues – to develop Lithuanian linguistic terminology and prepare a new edition. LITTERACY Gaivenis K., Keinys S. 1990: Dictionary of Linguistic Terms, Kaunas. Keinys S. 1994: Principles of Latvian Terminology Management. – Terminologijas vagos, 87–90. Kvašytė R. 2005: Educational terminology dictionary, Šiauliai. VTV 1963: Dictionary of Linguistic Terms. Sast. R. Grabis, Dz. Barbare, A. Bergmane, Riga: National Publishing House. Retrieved 2008-12-23. Regina Kvašytė University of Southampton P. Višinskio g. 38, LT–76352 Šiauliai, Lithuania E-mail: kv[email protected] Regina Kvašytė |