International Conference Lexicology and Terminology: Theory, Practice, History. On the 100th Anniversary of the Birth of Jonas Kruopas

ROBERTAS STUNŽINAS

Institute of the Lithuanian Language

At the international conference Lexicology and Terminology: Theory, Practice, History. On the 100th Anniversary of the Birth of Jonas Kruopas, held at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language on 23–25 April 2008, considerable attention was devoted to terminology. Twenty-one speakers from Lithuania and abroad delivered papers on terminology. At the plenary session, Prof. Habil. Dr. V. Skujinia (Skujiņa) (Institute of the Latvian Language, University of Latvia) spoke about the commonalities and differences between lexicology and terminology and their branches—lexicography and terminography. This should help clarify problems related to the role of various elements of the language of terminology. Prof. Habil. Dr. S. Grinevas-Grinevičius (University of Białystok) delivered a paper on lexicography and terminology. Recently, views on general and specialized vocabulary have been changing, and the differences between these fields are disappearing. Comprehensive translation dictionaries can reveal the distinctive features of national terminologies. Working with translation dictionaries, one can determine formal criteria for semantic deviations in term translation, as well as the boundaries between polysemy and homonymy, and partial and absolute synonymy, without conducting experiments.

A. Fóris (University of West Hungary) discussed issues concerning Hungarian native and borrowed terminology. In the 18th–19th centuries, loanwords were used only in exceptional cases. The tendency to Hungarianize words persisted until the mid-20th century, when Hungary came under the considerable influence of the Soviet Union. After joining the European Union, difficulties arose because Hungarian has very few international terms. This makes things especially challenging for Hungarian translators.

The paper by A. Kaulakienė (Vilnius Gediminas Technical University) and E. Makariūnienė (Institute of Physics) presented the standardizing aspect of four printed works in physics terminography. The beginnings of standardization can already be found in P. Brazdžiūnas’s bilingual Dictionary of Physics Terms. The standardizing aspect is particularly evident in the 1979 four-language Dictionary of Physics Terms.

Terminologija | 2008 | 15

251

I. Druce (Druce) (National Terminology Centre of Moldova) spoke about factors behind the emergence of neologisms and aspects of their creation in Moldova. The paper by Latvian terminologists J. Borzovs (University of Latvia, Riga Institute of Information Technology) and I. Ilzinia (Riga Institute of Information Technology) outlined problems caused by English loanwords in Latvian information technology terminology.

R. Andžius (Institute of Mathematics and Informatics) presented the distinctive features of computer-based structuring of dictionary entries in terminology dictionaries. When transferring the text of a terminology dictionary into a computer database, the greatest difficulties arise from inconsistencies in the dictionary’s completeness, term symbols, headwords, entry punctuation, and references.

A. Mitkevičienė (Institute of the Lithuanian Language) discussed antonymic terms found in Lithuanian textbooks on literary theory from 1922 to 1942. The basis of terminological antonymy is the dichotomy and binary classification of concepts. Consequently, contradictory opposites are more common than contrary ones. The literary scholarship of the period under study was characterized not only by its own antonyms, but also by antonymy drawn from the general vocabulary.

S. Ovseičik (Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv) examined loanwords in Ukrainian ecological terminology. The independence of ecology as a discipline means that loanwords in Ukrainian ecological terminology may be direct or indirect. Terms derived from lexemes in other languages show that an important indicator of the lexical assimilation of a borrowed term is how actively it is used.

L. Pietė (Institute of the Latvian Language, University of Latvia) presented eponymous plant names in Latvian and Lithuanian formed from anthroponyms and toponyms, their word-formation patterns, differences, and similarities. There are several ways of forming eponymous plant names, although mixed formations are also frequent. Plant names may be coined within a language or borrowed as derivatives.

N. Jacenko (Institute of the Ukrainian Language, National Academy of Sciences) delivered a paper on the features of the formation of Ukrainian military terminology. From the 19th century onward, the Ukrainian language had many lexical and phraseological means of expressing military concepts. The systematic nature of these means makes it possible to speak of an ordered system of military terminology. Military terminology of the period under study was characterized by archaic vocabulary, borrowing of foreign-language elements, phonetic and derivational variation, and synonymy.

R. Stunžinas (Institute of the Lithuanian Language) introduced a paper on the period 1910–1937.

252

Robertas Stunžinas | Tarptautinė konferencija Leksikologija ir...

the Lithuanian construction terminology of scholarly publications. The terminology under study consists of ordinary lexical items that have become terms, semantic derivatives, and derived forms. Considerable parts of this terminology have survived to the present day, although many terms have also become obsolete.

A. Ščucka (Institute of the Latvian Language, University of Latvia) presented Lithuanian and Latvian terminologists’ views on lexical calques. The presentation also examined a dictionary of terms published in 1922. The collected data make it possible to speak of the positive influence of another language on one’s own terminology.

R. Kvašytė (Šiauliai University) raised issues concerning vocabulary that names national realia. Culture-specific elements that are not understood by members of another culture are called lacunae. Specific national realia are also termed non-equivalent vocabulary or exotic vocabulary. The most suitable term for this type of vocabulary is non-equivalent vocabulary.

V. Ščerbinas (J. Kolas Institute of Linguistics, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus) gave a presentation on the relationship between terminography and specialized conceptography. Terminography studies the theoretical and practical problems of terminology dictionaries, while specialized conceptography encompasses the theory and practice of creating concept inventories. The main difference between terminography and specialized conceptography is that terminography aims to cover as much specialized vocabulary as possible, whereas conceptography is characterized by the rigorous selection of core concepts.

Prof. V. Drotvinas (Vilnius Pedagogical University) spoke about the new, modified, and borrowed Lithuanian terms in A. Dambrauskas’s textbook. An analysis of the textbook’s terminology reveals the author’s efforts to present Lithuanian grammar terms. Because the textbook had limited circulation, these terms had little influence on Lithuanian linguistic terminology.

P. Zemlevičiūtė (Institute of the Lithuanian Language) discussed the medical terms coined by V. Kudirka. At the end of the 19th century, the publication of Lithuanian-language print accelerated. V. Kudirka was one of the most prominent public and press figures of the time and contributed greatly to the creation of Lithuanian medical terminology. Some of V. Kudirka’s terms are neologisms.

S. Sprindienė (Martynas Mažvydas National Library of Lithuania) introduced issues concerning restoration terminology. The language and documents of restorers abound in unsuitable terms, and gaps in terminology make it difficult for specialists to manage their work. Correct terms are sought in dictionaries of terms from other fields, standards, and other documents, but these do not fill the gaps in terminology.

Terminologija | 2008 | 15 253

J. Klimavičius (Institute of the Lithuanian Language) spoke about language use, survival, and globalization. The Lithuanian language is becoming polarized: although the standard-language stratum is broad, an aggressive slang stratum is expanding. Standardization lacks systematicity, the resources of linguist-terminologists are limited, and public engagement is insufficient.

Received 2008-12-16

Robertas Stunžinas Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT–10308 E. paštas: [email protected]

2 5 4 Robertas Stunžinas | Tarptautinė konferencija Leksikologija ir...