TERMINOLOGY AND THE PRESENT

Jonas KLIMAVIČIUS

Institute of the Lithuanian Language

LITHUANIAN TERMINOGRAPHY: FEATURES OF THE PAST, CHALLENGES AND TASKS OF THE PRESENT

Lietuvių terminija prasideda su pirmąja lietuviška knyga (1547) – Martyno Mažvydo katekizmu (ir elementoriumi) – už Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštystės ribų, kai lietuvių kalba nebuvo – niekur! – oficialioji, valstybinė, net kanceliarinė. Universitetiniu laikotarpiu (1579–1832) nebuvo ir universitetinė. Buvo tik bažnytinė, nors nelengvai patekusi ir į Bažnyčią, vėliau ir iš jos stumta ir daug kur išstumta. Beveik tris šimtmečius lietuvių terminijos objektas daugiausia buvo bažnytinis arba teologinis ir filologinis. Dar didesnis lietuviškas paradoksas: mokslo terminijos sistemingesnis kūrimas ir tvarkymas prasidėjo tada, kai buvo prarastas valstybingumas (1795), uždarytas universitetas (1832) – XIX a. viduryje. Jis sutapo su trečiuoju bandymu sukurti bendrinę rašomąją kalbą – šiokiuokt žemaičių tarmės pagrindu, kuris nebuvo sėkmingas. Jurgis (vienuolis Ambraziejus) Pabrėža (1771–1849), dvejus metus studijavęs Vilniaus universitete ir jį palikęs 1794 m. dėl sukilimo represijų, savo mokslinę (greta apaštalavimo) veiklą plėtojo gimtajame žemaičių krašte: 1821 m. parašė Dictionarium Botanicum Latino Samogiticum (Lotyniškai žemaitiškas botanikos žodynas) – 860 vardų, II redakcija – 1400 vardų (rankraštis neišlikęs); 1834 m. – Wardau taislynee Augimuiu – 11 p., Sryje Balsenyny Billu Zemayt. Lomynnių (abėcėlinis lotyniškai lietuviškas augalų morfologijos terminų sąrašas) – 505 p.; pagrindinis – 1843 m. Tayslós augumynis – 980 p., rengtas spaudai, bet tik dalis, pavadinta Botanika, arba Taislius auguminis, paskelbta Amerikoje 1900 m., kai jau buvo pietų vakarų aukštaičių tarmės ir Mažosios Lietuvos gramatikų pagrindu susidariusi naujoji rašomoji kalba. Po 1863 m. sukilimo daug šviesuolių ištrėmus, Bažnyčią suvaržius, 1864 m. uždraudus spaudą, lietuvybė ir raštingumas laikėsi knygne-

9

šyste, mokslas – pavieniais šviesuoliais. Toks buvo Laurynas Ivinskis (1810–1881), universiteto jau neragavęs, bet pats – tarsi žmogus universitetas. Parengė 3 300 vnt. mineralogijos ir botanikos sisteminį vardyną Prigimtìmėnė: I – Žemėimìna, II – Žoliėmina, grybų atlasą – 226 vnt. (su piešiniais), o iš jo visų darbų susidaro apie 6 000 terminų. Šių žemaičių terminologinis palikimas nemažai nagrinėtas: Pabrėžos – botanikų J. Dagio, K. Jankevičiaus, A. Lekavičiaus ir kt., kalbininko K. Gaivenio ir kt.; Ivinskio – kalbininkės A. Auksoriūtės (daktaro disertacija). Labai glaustai galima apibendrinti, kad Pabrėža ir Ivinskis: 1) pagal sistematiką inventorizavo labai daug gyvosios kalbos augalų, grybų, mineralų ir kt. vardų; 2) nepaprastai daug sukūrė (to reikalavo jų rinkinių spragos, dar daugiau – sistematika, plačiai išeinanti už Lietuvos augalų arealo) pagal lietuvių kalbos žodžių darybos polinkius (taisyklių dar nebuvo) ir net visai individualių darinių (Ivinskis – apie 1 500); 3) skolinius vartojo saikingai, pirmenybę šiuo atveju teikė vertiniams ir sekiniams. Jų palikimo dalelė yra tapusi, iš dalies ir dabar tampa gyvuoju terminijos paveldu. Iš kitų to laiko mokslo ir kalbos veikėjų minėtinas A. Kašarausko (1821–1882), K. Drąsutavičiaus (apie 1850 – apie 1905) liaudies ir mokslo terminijos palikimas.

The emerging national liberation movement gave rise to the underground press (Aušra, Varpas, Žemaičių ir Lietuvos apžvalga, Tėvynės Sargas); in 1904 the press was regained. Terminology initially began to draw on tradition, accumulated work and inheritance: in 1906–1907 was published Žolynas. Lietuvos augalų žodynas ir augalų taislas (about 3,000 terms) by Povilas Matulionis (1860–1932), who had grown up with the national revival movement. As the title itself indicates, the works of Pabrėža and Ivinskis were used, as well as data from the living language. However, a consciously innovative approach to standardization had already taken shape—four principles intended to ensure that “the multitude of contradictions might diminish; in the living speech of the people, and even more often in written texts, one word frequently names 2–3 plants, wholly different ones, and conversely, one plant has several names. In such cases I have selected only those names which are either more widely known, or express the plant’s features more accurately, or are of older origin, or are more reliably confirmed by the languages of our neighboring peoples: Latvian, Polish, Russian” (3)—equivalents in those languages are given in the dictionary.

The Lithuanian Scientific Society was founded in 1907; by promoting Lithuanian scholarship, it naturally also raised the issue of Lithuanian terminology. At the Society’s 1913

10

At the meeting on June 12 (25), Kazys Grinius (1866–1950) delivered a paper titled Apie botanikos organografijos lietuviškąją terminologiją, which was printed in 1914 in Lietuvių tautoje (and also issued as a separate offprint). Here, even more explicitly than P. Matulionis had done, the most important requirement for a scientific term was stated: absence of synonyms (the other side of the coin being unambiguity). The Society also had the aim of publishing textbooks, for which there was an even greater and more urgent need to create and standardize terms. In July 1911, from the resort of Bad Elster, Jonas Jablonskis wrote to Jonas Basanavičius: “It seems to me that, among other things, the scientific society ought to work out a terminology for written works: it is needed for every branch of science. The society will not, of course, work out the terminology completely, but it ought to bring much clarity and uniformity to that mixture of terms which we now see in our literature” (Jablonskis 1985: 71)¹.

Voronezh, behind the front lines during the World War, became a workshop for Lithuanian terminology: Pranas Mašiotas, Marcelinas Šikšnys, Zigmas Žemaitis and Konstantinas Šakenis would gather there at Jonas Jablonskis’s home and, together—subject specialists and a linguist—create, discuss and approve mathematical, physical and chemical terms. Jablonskis was by then a highly experienced terminologist, a productive coiner of new words with a successful method (to forge as people forge). The principle of purity was fundamental to Jablonskis’s understanding of terminology; unfortunately, later and still today it is either ignored or forgotten, or profaned by ill-conceived neologisms. The outcome of the Voronezh discussions was the creation of a school of terminology (and a procedure) and two dictionaries, published in Kaunas, the provisional capital of the re-established Lithuanian state: M. Šikšnys’s Aritmetikos ir algebros terminų žodynėlis (1919, 47 pp.) and Z. Žemaitis’s Geometrijos ir trigonometrijos terminų rinkinėlis (1920, 99 pp.). The Ministry of National Defence published in 1919 Kariškas lietuviškai-rusiškas ir rusiškai-lietuviškas žodynėlis (106 pp.), prepared, as far as is known, by Petras Ruseckas. In 1920 appeared

¹ At that time, the idea of an encyclopedia also arose on both Lithuanian shores of the Atlantic. Kazimieras Būga’s opinion is highly characteristic (in a letter to Kleopas Jurgelionis, dated April 9 (22), 1911): “In my view, we need a very different kind of encyclopedia: an encyclopedia of Lithuanian studies <...>. An encyclopedia of Lithuanian studies should include everything that concerns Lithuania in the broadest sense” (Būga 1961: 928).

11

Jurgis Elisonas’s Glossary of Zoological Systematics Terms (144 pp.) (in 1932 its author published An Attempt at a Dictionary of Lithuanian Peasant Technology as a separate offprint from Archivum Philologicum, 1932, vol. 3, pp. 126–167). In 1920 A. Maciejauskas’s Technical Glossary (141 pp.) was published, prepared with the assistance of the Terminology Commission of the Ministry of Transport; the Preface states that Jonas Jablonskis’s advice was also consulted. Jablonskis himself assessed the glossary very critically: “<…>: not everything that is easy to write is easy to correct” (Jablonskis 1935: 287), and, having unexpectedly learned of his role, explained it as follows: “This is how it happened: engineer A. Maciejauskas came to me once or twice two years ago and asked my opinion about a few words (terms) he needed; I gave him my opinion on a few of those words—and that was all; I heard nothing at the time about his saying in the glossary that he had used my ‘advice’; I did not know then either that he was writing some glossary for technicians” (Jablonskis 1935: 287). From my own unhappy experience, I can add that linguists are still subjected to similar tricks…

On 14 March 1921, a Terminology Commission was established under the Ministry of Education. Both Jablonskis and Būga participated in its work. However, the work proceeded with difficulty and unevenly, because there were no more qualified linguists, while the unqualified members of the Commission lacked at least an understanding of the principles of terminology and, more generally, of the theory and principles of standardizing the common language—and an awareness that they lacked this understanding. This was most evident in excessive, unprofessional purism and inept coinages (even Jablonskis, with all his authority and scholarship, was unable to restrain this tendency, and Būga did not adequately oppose it either; as his review of the Glossary of Zoological Systematics Terms shows, he generally disliked borrowings). It was precisely for this reason that Jablonskis wrote in 1925: “The Commission must have worn itself out or strayed somewhat from its course” (Rygiškių Jonas 1935: 308). He also assessed critically the carelessly prepared booklet by the Terminology Commission’s secretary, Antanas Vireliūnas, Names or Terms Adopted by the Terminology Commission (1924, 144 pp.)—on excise, law, roads, and so on (Rygiškių Jonas 1935: 322–324). Throughout that ugly episode, which is still remembered today, even A. Vireliūnas’s (?) good term įvardas (:įvardyti) was almost lost (though it was used by Lithuanian terminographers abroad B. Stundžia and P. Mažeika; V. Vintartas even used įvardotyra); of its derivatives, perhaps only kraštotyra is now mentioned. After Jablonskis re-

12

tired, the Commission was reorganized on 25 March 1925, with J. Balčikonis, J. Talmantas, K. Alminauskis, A. Salys, and P. Skardžius added to it; however, after Jablonskis resigned as chair, it was disbanded in June 1926.

The work of the Terminology Commission (section) of the Lithuanian Language Society was more successful in the 1930s: in 1938, General Philosophical Terminology was published (reviewed, supplemented, and approved by the LLS Terminology Section. Prepared by Prof. St. Šalkauskis, it contains 1,660 terms in Lithuanian, French, German, and Russian, as well as a section of explanations with examples); Šalkauskis also prepared General Pedagogical Terminology (a third of which was reviewed; 1,600 terms, 600 of them from General Philosophical Terminology), but there was not enough time to complete and publish it. The Botanical Dictionary Commission, chaired by L. Vailionis, compiled and reviewed the work (P. Matulionis also took part in the meetings at first); with P. Skardžius as consultant and J. Balčikonis as adviser, it prepared and published in 1938 Lithuanian Botanical Dictionary. Part I. Plant Names, Botanical Pharmacognostic Nomenclature, and Plant Systematics, ed. J. Dagys (589 pp.). The dictionary contains about 3,300 standardized terms in Latin, Lithuanian, German, Russian, Polish, and Latvian, with Lithuanian synonyms and variants drawn from spoken language and written sources, a Lithuanian–Latin nomenclature, and a glossary of Latin adjectival species names. Thus, LBŽ is a monumental dictionary—a thesaurus—not only of scientific but also of folk terminology. The systematic assessment of all the plant names collected at the time provided considerable support (though the material, even with further accumulation, was insufficient) to the compilers of the academic Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language.

During this period, the need for terminology grew rapidly, and many collections and small compilations of terms appeared in journals and newspapers (Švietimo darbas, Lietuvos mokykla, Kosmos, Logos, Ateitis, Teisė, Lietuva, Lietuvis, and others); more dictionaries and glossaries of terms were prepared or planned (on law, railways, and other subjects), but there was not enough time before statehood was lost again (1940). Nevertheless, the inertia of ministerial commissions is striking, while university commissions had yet to emerge, even though terminology work was being carried out at Vytautas Magnus University. The organized and productive work of the Lithuanian Language Society’s Terminology Commission deserves mention. The most positive achievement was the establishment of the procedure for the organized preparation, review, and approval of terms, initiated by Jablonskis; it was even institutionalized, although without Jablonskis (or other linguists) at its helm, institutionalization turned into a machine without an engine.

13

From the productive year 1938 until 1954, when the Dictionary of Legal Terms (240 pp., 2,072 main terms + 3,870 subordinate terms) was published, compiled by A. Žiurlys (drawing also on work from the interwar period) and approved by the Terminology Commission of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature of the Lithuanian SSR Academy of Sciences, there was a vast gap in terminography, with only A. Novodvorskis’s small 1949 Brief Russian–Lithuanian Technical Dictionary (127 pp.) to be seen. Since 1952, the aforementioned Terminology Commission had carried out linguistic consultation and a degree of approval of terminology dictionaries (it began operating in 1945 under the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences and was transferred to the Institute of the Lithuanian Language in 1951). At various times and with varying workloads, under the direction of J. Kruopas, N. Grigas, A. Kučinskaitė, J. Paulauskas, V. Bartusevičius, and V. Labutis worked there—all later left this work; K. Gaivenis worked almost alone for about ten years, until he overworked himself and fell ill.

In 1954, the first dictionary of the standard language (though not entirely) was published—Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian. During its preparation, a dozen or so specialists from various fields provided terminological consultation. More than one of them—probably encouraged by the DLKŽ’s editor-in-chief, Jonas Kruopas—went on to compile terminology dictionaries. The decade of harvest for Lithuanian terminography had arrived, during which the following were published: V. Gudelis’s Dictionary of Geological and Physical-Geographical Terms (1956, 220 pp., about 5,000 terms); Library and Bibliographical Terminology, issue 1, compiled by I. Kisinas (1956, 48 pp.); Dictionary of Physics Terms, ed. P. Brazdžiūnas (1958, 123 pp.); Dictionary of Sports Terms, responsible compiler V. Steponaitis (1959, 340 pp.); Russian–Lithuanian Polytechnical Dictionary, editorial board chair A. Novodvorskis (1959, 518 pp.); J. Čeitys’s Dictionary of Land-Reclamation Terms (1960, 283 pp.); A. Krutulys’s Brief Dictionary of Music (1960, 208 pp., about 1,500 terms); K. Daukšas’s Dictionary of Chemistry (1960, 449 pp.); Dictionary of Literary Terms, compiled by J. Petronis, V. Vanagas, and A. Zalatorius (1962, 80 pp., about 3,000 terms);²; A. Jurevičius and A. Čižas’s Explanatory Dictionary of Textile Terms (1962, 99 pp.); Dictionary of Botanical Terms, compiled by Bo-

² In 1961, a translated school-level explanatory glossary by L. Timoficev and N. Vengrov, Glossary of Literary Studies Terms (208 pp.; Lithuanian examples selected by J. Vildžiūnas), was also published.

14

tanikos žodyno komisija, vyr. red. prof. J. Dagys (1965, 663 p.); Rusiškai lietuviškas ekonomikos terminų žodynas, ats. red. akad. K. Meškauskas (1966, 291 p.); M. Mikalajūno Trumpas rusų–lietuvių kalbų sinoptinės meteorologijos terminų žodynas (1966, 39 p., rotaprintu). Kiek vėliau išleisti A. Trečiokaitės Informatikos terminų žodynas (1969, 96 p.), V. Anskačio ir M. Kilo Rusų–lietuvių kalbų žemės ūkio terminų žodynas (1971, 364 p.) ir lietuvių–rusų–vokiečių kalbų Aiškinamasis medienos apdirbimo terminų žodynas (1971, 119 p.). Minėtinas ir B. Augustino, P. Danisevičiaus ir K. Miecevičiaus (ats. red. P. Pošiūnas) Trumpas kriminalisto žinynas (1970, 184 p.), prie kurio terminijos norminimo daug prisidėjo J. Kruopas ir K. Gaivenis.

Terminological dictionaries were most often compiled by the foremost subject specialists themselves and/or by research institution teams. Although generations of scholars and linguists, institutions, ideologies, and other fundamental elements changed amid the upheavals in the life of the state and nation, the structure for compiling and approving terminological dictionaries endured. Almost all the dictionaries listed were reviewed by the Terminology Commission, although important works remained unapproved: Politechninis žodynas and Žemės ūkio terminų žodynas. Of course, these dictionaries had many subject-related, lexicographic, and linguistic shortcomings. The fundamental shortcomings were the Russian–Lithuanian bilingualism imposed by the occupation and its inevitable consequence—the abundance of Russian calques, propagandistically praised, incidentally, as an enrichment of the Lithuanian language—as well as frequent literal translations from Russian and, to a lesser extent but noticeably, foreign borrowings. The dictionaries were almost all of a single type—bilingual, Russian–Lithuanian—while the polytechnical and agricultural dictionaries did not even have Lithuanian indexes. Only the literary dictionary (Lithuanian–Russian) and the botanical one stood apart, the latter because the subject itself also required Latin; a few other dictionaries—those of music, land reclamation, chemistry, botany, and timber—were explanatory. Only in 1958 did one work stand out: A. Novodvorskis’s Anglų–lietuvių kalbų politechninis žodynas (172 pp., about 10,000 terms, no Lithuanian index, unapproved). Only 13 years later, in 1971, two works again stood out: Rusų–lietuvių–anglų kalbų skaičiavimo technikos terminų žodynas (600 pp., about 17,000 terms, Lithuanian and English indexes, reviewed by the Terminology Commission) and R. Kelbauskienė and J. Kazėnas’s small Anglų–lietuvių kalbų melioracijos ir žemėtvarkos terminų žodynas – minimumas (1971, 31 pp.). Also worth mentioning here are in-house publications: J. Vosylius’s Latin–Lithuanian–English–German–Russian Trumpas farmaci-

15

nis poliglotinis žodynas (1970, 350 p.) ir J. Starkaus ir A. Šuopio parengtas Klinikinių diagnozių žodynėlis (1971, 182 p.). Mokomųjų vidaus leidybos terminų žodynėlių (studentams, paprastai rotaprintiniu) būta ir daugiau (anglų–lietuvių, vokiečių–lietuvių, prancūzų–lietuvių), vienas pirmųjų ir didesnių – V. Nečiūno English-Lithuanian Medical Dictionary (1962), minėtinas taip pat V. Nečiūno Basic Affixes and Word Roots for Medical Terminology (1967, 128 p.).

This is not the place to discuss in detail the theoretical and methodological foundations of terminography in that period. In essence, they had remained clear since earlier times, although conditions for strengthening them were unfavorable. As practice moved further away from a good beginning, tradition, and even a fairly sound continuation, these issues sometimes arose among the compilers themselves—not merely as problems but, regrettably, as crises. This happened with Medicinos terminų žodynas: the compilers themselves held diametrically opposed views on linguistic purity; work on the dictionary stalled, the problems broke into the press, even the party press—the single-party Tie-soje. The manuscript underwent many reviews, was halted, taken off the agenda, specially edited—and was published (in a print run of 20,000!) only in 1980 (996 pp.). It appeared as a mocking response to the then increasingly forceful, and sometimes reckless or unserious, manifestations of purism (dismissed as bourgeois): Latinized and over-Latinized. Most importantly, the choice of its norms was left entirely unclear: “Where Lithuanianized Latin and Lithuanian equivalents are given side by side, they are to be considered equivalent and may be used at the user’s discretion” (3). Such unclear norm-setting had never occurred before or since: always—whether explained or not—the first term was the primary normative variant. Now, users could choose: abazija – inability to walk, ablaktacija: 1. weaning of an infant, 2. cessation of lactation, abplepsija – blindness, abrozija – 1. fasting, 2. exhaustion, acne – pimples, adiposis – obesity, katarasis – 1. purging of the bowels, cogitation – thinking, gargalism – tickling, insomnia – sleeplessness, instillation – instilling, and so on without end! Moreover, before the aforementioned statement of the dictionary’s principles, it says: “Because certain terms have differing characteristics, the elements mentioned above (that is, ‘Lithuanianized Latin term, purely Lithuanian term’—J. K.) are not applied uniformly to all terms. For many terms in clinical medicine, pharmacy, microbiology, and cytology, only the Lithuanianized Latin form is used (=used – J. K.)” (3), followed by: “In compound terms, for reasons of saving space, only the Li-

16

thuanianized Latin forms are more often given” (3). Thus the dictionary’s distorted, excessively Latinizing principle is perfectly clear. Yet it is entirely incomprehensible and unjustifiable. Latin is the foundational language of medicine (and anatomy, physiology, as well as botany and zoology); a dictionary primarily provides the international standard—the Latin (or Latinized) term. So why Lithuanianize it when a genuinely Lithuanian term exists, a legitimate national variant essential to the vitality of Lithuanian usage? Of course, in cases such as ablepsija, katar(s)io, kogitacija, gargalizmas and the like, the dictionary may not have greatly influenced usage; it did shift the norms somewhat toward Lithuanian forms (but only after a good decade) in Medicinos enciklopedija (vol. 1, 1991; vol. 2, 1993). But in those cases—also well-known and important—where both an international word and its Lithuanian equivalent were already in use, often along with a replacement term, the dictionary turned—and redirected—usage back toward international forms. Some terms that had been successfully named in Lithuanian through collective effort and had taken root, already becoming well established in broader public usage—for example, šunvotė, piktvotė, pūlinys, pūlynas—were cast by the dictionary for a long time into a Latin mire (the first terms being furunkulas, karbunkulas, abscesas, flegmona!), until they were at least partly reclaimed by Medicinos enciklopedija. The dictionary bears an approval note—Žodyną peržiūrėjo Lietuvos TSR Mokslų Akademijos Lietuvių kalbos ir literatūros instituto Terminologijos grupė—but the full extent of that approval is clearly stated in the Pratarmėje: “Part of the manuscript prepared for publication was read by research associates K. Gaivenis and J. Klimavičius of the Terminology Group of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature” (3). The portion was small and focused on certain issues of difficult word formation and term forms. A regrettable story, because the efforts of some of the dictionary’s authors and contributors represent a genuine contribution to Lithuanian medical terminology. But the tar stains the whole pot.

On December 7, 1971, an organizational and coordinating Terminology Council was established under the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences (4 sections, 22 members; chair: Academician Vytautas Mažiulis; deputy chair: Dr. Stasys Keinys; secretary: Dr. Kazimieras Gaivenis). A Terminology Group was formed at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature (within the Dictionary Division); later, in 1991, it grew into the Terminology Department of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language (since April 2003, the Terminology Centre). The Council did not give much impetus to terminographic work, although there had been ambitions and hopes. In 1973, a translated reference work was published, compiled

17

based on the works of D. Lotė and the USSR Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Scientific and Technical Terminology—Terminologinis darbas (Pagrindai ir metodai) [Terminological Work (Foundations and Methods)], with a bibliography and bibliographic indexes of the Committee’s works (translated by A. Kaulakienė). In 1972, the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature published the Terminų žodynų kartotekos sudarymo instrukciją [Instructions for Compiling a Card File of Terminological Dictionaries], prepared by the Terminology Group, with sample cards and a bibliography of Lithuanian terminography from 1949 to 1971 (32+2 entries). An academician who undertook to prepare a dictionary of agricultural terms (but never organized it—the gap remains) disliked the Instructions, which were shoved onto a bottom shelf. Rather late, on December 13, 1979, the Terminology Council adopted a resolution, Dėl lietuviškų žodynų rengimo ir leidybos (Mūsų kalba 3 1980 26–28) [On the Preparation and Publication of Lithuanian Dictionaries (Mūsų kalba 3 1980 26–28)]. Following a fairly positive introductory statement, it discusses recently prepared physics and polytechnic dictionaries and multilingual dictionaries of agricultural, mathematical, and zoological terms in preparation (of these, only the mathematics dictionary and a partial zoology dictionary—on mammals—have appeared to date). The major shortcomings in the preparation and publication of terminological dictionaries are identified: lack of planning, slow progress, inadequate quality, failure to standardize terms, failure to update outdated dictionaries, and so on. Some shortcomings remain unremedied even today, and the dictionaries deemed necessary have still not been published. Four points of the resolution urge publishers to take action, discuss the formation of author teams and the need to “At the next meeting of the Terminology Council, consider plans for publishing terminological dictionaries over the coming decade (1981–1990), <…>”.

Terminographic work nevertheless continued along the old lines, with one essential innovation. Also significant was the idea, embodied in Mažulis’s terminographic work and expressed cautiously but publicly, that there was not only a second language (i.e., the Russian language of compulsory bilingualism), but also a third—English—and other languages (of course, Western ones).

Thus, several substantial trilingual, four-language, and five-language terminological dictionaries were published. Thanks to the efforts of P. Brazdžiūnas, editor of the 1958 bilingual Fizikos terminų žodyno [Dictionary of Physics Terms], a two-volume, rotaprint edition of Fizikos terminų žodynas. [Dictionary of Physics Terms] was published in 1971–1973 in a print run of 500 copies. P. Brazdžiūnas, academic secretary of the Division of Physical, Technical, and Mathematical Sciences of the Academy of Sciences, organized a major review of the dictionary (an 18-member panel; usually “12 irate men” and Eglė Makariūnie-

18

nė). The result of several years’ work was the four-language Lithuanian–Russian–English–German Fizikos terminų žodynas [Dictionary of Physics Terms], published in 1979 in a print run of 10,000 copies. It contains about 20,000 terms and Russian, English, and German indexes. The dictionary was approved in the usual manner: Terminologijos grupė peržiūrėjo. [The Terminology Group reviewed it.] Work on physics terminology continued: Lazerijų fizikos terminų žodynas [Dictionary of Laser Physics Terms] (170 pp., reviewed by the Terminology Group) was published for discussion in 1984, followed by a new version in 1990 (374 pp.).

The work of standardizing mathematical terminology also took a long time. J. Kubilius conceived the idea of preparing a dictionary as early as 1957, but it was not published for review until 1982, in an edition of 50 copies. Meetings were held at the Rector’s Office of Vilnius University on Fridays from 6 to 9 p.m., with up to 8 of the 12 preparers attending. The Lithuanian–Russian–English Matematikos terminų žodynas [Dictionary of Mathematical Terms], arranged by headword (with an alphabetical index of compound Lithuanian terms and indexes of Russian and English terms), had essentially been completed and then sat for several years; it was approved by the Terminology Council in 1989 but appeared only in 1994, in a print run of 3,000 copies.

In 1985–1986, the two-volume Lithuanian–Russian–English–German–French Elektrotechnikos, galvanotechnikos ir korozijos terminų žodynas [Dictionary of Terms in Electrical Engineering, Electroplating, and Corrosion] was published (editor-in-chief J. Matulis, 208 and 170 pp.)—a prospectus for discussion.

The Main Editorial Board of Encyclopedias joined the terminographic work: in 1984 it published G. Daugėla’s compiled, and consulted on by the Terminology Commission of Kaunas Polytechnic Institute, but unapproved Russian–Lithuanian Polytechnic Dictionary (448 pp., 47,000 terms, with a somewhat incomplete Lithuanian–Russian index), and A. Juška’s compiled Encyclopedic Dictionary of Astronomy (136 pp.). Numerous terminological dictionaries and glossaries were prepared at research institutes and higher education institutions: in 1980, A. Buračas’s English–Lithuanian Dictionary of Economic Terms with a Lithuanian Index (489 pp.), reviewed by the Terminology Commission (so the entry states…); in 1989, the Russian–Lithuanian and Lithuanian–Russian Glossary of Agricultural Economic Terms by A. Andrijauskienė and R. Karalienė (220 pp.); in 1977, the English–Lithuanian Dictionary of Agricultural Terms, compiled by D. Čeponienė, R. Gelūnienė, J. Kazėnas and R. Kelbauskienė (responsible editor), containing 8,000 terms (165 pp.); in 1978, the Handbook of Agricultural Economic Concepts, compiled by M. Treinys (106 pp.); in 1979, R. Šatinskienė and D. Kondratas’s Glossary of Organic Chemistry (120 pp.); in 1976, 1979 and 1980, the three-part English–Lithuanian Dictionary of Motor Transport Terms, prepared by E. Adomėnienė (96, 94 and 63 pp.); in 1980

19

English–Lithuanian Glossary of Materials Resistance, compiled by J. Stonis (54 pp.); in 1977, Nomina embryologica internationalia in Latin and Lithuanian (117 pp.); in 1979, D. Gudaitis, R. Karazija and B. Strakšienė’s explanatory Glossary of General Pathology Terms (72 pp.); in 1979, V. Vaičiuvėnas and V. Sudintas’s Brief Glossary of Concepts Used in Virology (50 pp.); in 1976, the Latin–Lithuanian–Russian Dental Dictionary (prepared by S. Čepulis, 187 pp.). Also related to terminography was a teaching aid approved by the ministry—S. Gecevičiūtė’s Explanations of Zoological Terms (1974, 180 pp.), as well as Terminological Lexicon of Fine Arts (1988, 144 pp.), compiled by V. Steponavičienė and S. Vizgirdienė. Terminographic work was also carried out at other research and technical institutions, ministries and agencies. In 1983, VER published the explanatory Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Information Terms in Lithuanian, Russian and English, prepared at the Lithuanian Scientific and Technical Information and Technical-Economic Analysis Research Institute (LIMTI) and compiled by A. Trečiokaitė (228 pp., about 1,320 terms). Also worth mentioning is the Dictionary of Invention Terms compiled in 1977 by LIMTI employee A. Trečiokaitė—an explanatory Lithuanian–Russian dictionary with a Russian–Lithuanian index (50 pp.); in 1988, a Lithuanian–Russian–English–French–German edition with indexes (248 pp.). In 1980 (the cover says 1982), the Publishing Editorial Board of the Ministry of Higher and Specialized Secondary Education published a teaching aid for LVKKI students—K. Miškinis’s Explanations of Pedagogical Terms (edited by G. Irtmonienė, 50 pp., about 800 terms—including the word term!). In 1983, the Agricultural Ministry’s Teaching Methods Office published the Russian–Lithuanian Dictionary of Agricultural Mechanization Terms (160 pp., about 9,000 terms), prepared by V. Gerulaitis and S. Lukėnas, with a Lithuanian–Russian index and reviewed by the Terminology Group. In 1975, the Board of the Hydrometeorological Service published M. Mikala jūnas’s Russian–Lithuanian Dictionary of Meteorological Terms (220 pp., about 10,000 terms), with a Lithuanian index and reviewed by the Terminology Group. In 1981, the Main Archives Board published the Brief Explanatory Russian–Lithuanian Dictionary of Records Management Terms (19th century–early 20th century) (76 pp.), compiled by V. Girininkienė and A. Tumarison. In 1989, GS Autoservisas published the Russian–Lithuanian Dictionary of Auto Service Terms (116 pp., about 3,000 terms), compiled by R. Lapinskas. In 1989, there appeared

20

At the Urban Construction Design Institute, V. Šulga and E. Povilaitis compiled the Lithuanian–Russian Dictionary of Water Management Terms (94 pp., 2,400 terms).

In 1975, the Dictionary of Musical Terms by pensioner A. Krutulis was published (258 pp.).

In 1975, M. Rosenthal’s Dictionary of Philosophy was published as a mandatory translation (the Lithuanian edition was edited by R. Plečkaitis) (488 pp.).

Two were published for schools, both, incidentally, in the same field: in 1972, S. Agapov, S. Sokolov, and D. Tikhomirov’s Geography Dictionary (translated by V. Kvietkauskas, with the translation edited by V. Gudelis, 272 pp.); in 1987, A. Solovyov and S. Karpov’s Physical Geography Dictionary-Reference Book (translated by F. Ylevičienė and J. Žukauskienė, with the translation edited by A. Basalykas and reviewed by A. Laigonaitė) (216 pp.).

With Lithuania independent once again, a genuine breakthrough in terminography began. One of the first works was the Dictionary of Linguistic Terms by Kazimieras Gaivenis and Stasys Keinys, published in 1990 in a print run of 10,000 copies (280 pp.)—a Lithuanian–Russian–English explanatory dictionary, intended for schools but of a sufficiently high scholarly standard³. The standard of the Republic of Lithuania Principles and Methods of Terminology [Lithuanian Standard RST 1115–90 (ISO 704–87)] stands almost on the boundary between two eras—the period of Soviet subordination and the regained independence. It was prepared by K. Gaivenis, N. Dudlauskienė, L. Laužikas, E. Paukštienė, and J. Storpirštienė; coordinated with the Terminology Council of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences by Vilnius University; and approved by the Department of Standardization and Quality under the Government of the Republic of Lithuania by Resolution No. 3 of 1990 09 28. This may be the last mention of the Terminology Council—its activity (or inactivity?) simply came to an end.

However, the preparation and publication of terminology dictionaries, which began in a veritable torrent, continues unabated to this day. In response to linguist V. Vitkauskas’s call, in an article titled Dictionary prepara-

³ In 1971, W. C. Schmalstieg[o] and A. Klim’s Lithuanian–English Glossary of Linguistic Terminology was published in the United States (115 pp.). A broad, encyclopedic dictionary begun in 1971 (Mūsų kalba 3 1971 31–35), though modestly titled at first Popular Glossary of Linguistics, was prepared with great care over a very long period, but work on it stopped in 1986 (Mūsų kalba 5 1986 32–43)—a terminological implosion.

21

…like water (Mokslas ir gyvenimas 6 1983 26–27), as though answered by terminographer A. Smilgevičius’s article “The Time for Preparing Dictionaries” (Gimtoji kalba 5 1997 1–4). This intense, productive, and relatively brief period, during which around 200 terminology dictionaries and glossaries were published, is clearly divided into two subperiods. The dividing line is marked by two nearly simultaneous events—the launch of the 1996–2005 State Language Use and Development Programme and Resolution No. 59 of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language under the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, dated January 30, 1997, On the Approval of Terminology Dictionaries (prepared by the Terminology Subcommittee). The Programme, implemented by the Language Commission, supports the preparation and/or publication of terminology dictionaries, and the Commission is required to approve—or reject—all terminology dictionaries, whether or not they receive support. Until then, approval had been a matter of the authors’ goodwill; the Terminology Department of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language granted approval using varying formulas. The VLKK expanded the basis for reviewing and approving terminology dictionaries. Under the Commission’s resolution, an approval (or rejection) procedure was established: reviews and conclusions by two experts are considered by the Programme’s Council of Experts terminology group, with the dictionary’s publishers and/or compilers participating; if “the dictionary meets the requirements of linguistic correctness and its terminology as a whole meets the fundamental principles of terminology,” it is submitted to the Commission for approval at one of two quality levels: “2.1. The terms are satisfactorily systematized and standardized; the following is entered after the dictionary’s foreword: ‘The State Commission of the Lithuanian Language under the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania has no objections.’ 2.2. The terms are very well systematized and standardized, the value of most terms having been verified through longer usage, and the balance between Lithuanian and borrowed terms being acceptable; the following is entered on the dictionary’s title page: ‘The State Commission of the Lithuanian Language under the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania approves’ (LKK nutarimai. 1977–1998, Vilnius, 1998, p. 53).

First to be mentioned are the major multilingual dictionaries: the Lithuanian–Russian–English Explanatory Dictionary of Chemical Terms (responsible editor Z. Mačionis, special editor R. Mudėnienė, 1997, 576 pp., 15,200 terms; reviewed by the Terminology Department of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language; 2nd revised and expanded edition, 2003, 659 pp., about 14,600 terms, no objections from the VLKK) [also worth mentioning is V. Talačka’s unapproved 1994 English–Lithuanian Dictionary of Chemistry and Chemical Technology, 294 pp., 15,000 terms; smaller works include V. Skučas’s Chemical Kinetics and Catalysis (1998, 132 pp.), P. Ka-

22

dziausko Stereochemijos sąvokos (1999, 139 p.); lietuvių–vokiečių–anglų–prancūzų–rusų kalbų Elektrotechnikos terminų žodynas (rengimo grupės vadovas R. J. Mukulys, moksl. red. A. Smilgevičius ir S. Žebrauskas, 1999, 872 p., 11 530 terminų, VLKK neprieštarauja); lietuvių–anglų–prancūzų–vokiečių–rusų kalbų Radioelektronikos terminų žodynas (vyr. red. V. Palenskis, 1 340 p., 19 000 terminų VLKK neprieštarauja) [minėtinas taip pat 1994 m. Ryšių technikos terminų penkiakalbis žodynas, sudarytas V. Palenskio ir V. Valiukėno, peržiūrėtas Lietuvių kalbos instituto Terminologijos skyriaus vadovo K. Gaivenio]; lietuvių–vokiečių–anglų–prancūzų–rusų kalbų Aiškinamasis tekstilės terminų žodynas (grupės vadovas R. Čiukas, moksl. red. A. Vitkauskas, 2001, 638 p., 4 482 terminai, VLKK neprieštarauja); lietuvių–anglų–vokiečių–prancūzų–rusų kalbų Statybos terminų žodynas (moksl. red. A. Kudzys, parengė A. Kudzys, A. Rosinas, B. Kudzienė, 2002, 880 p., 23 000 terminų, VLKK neprieštarauja) [minėtinas ir J. Kivilšos, A. Kudzio (spec. red.), A. Rosino Rusų–lietuvių kalbų statybos terminų žodynas (1992, 560 p.), peržiūrėtas Terminologijos skyriaus; Anglų–lietuvių kalbų statybos terminų žodynas (sudarė A. Kudzys, A. Rosinas, B. Kudzienė, spec. red. A. Kudzys, 1993, 437 p.), aprobuotas VLKK]; lietuvių–anglų–vokiečių–rusų kalbų aiškinamasis Sporto terminų žodynas (parengė S. Stonkus, t. 1, 1996, 680 p., apie 5 700 terminų, LKI Terminologijos skyriaus rekomenduota; II pat. ir pap. leid., 2002, 740 p., apie 6500 terminų, VLKK neprieštarauja).

Among the physical and technological sciences, the following should also be mentioned: Five-Language Dictionary of Automotive Terms (1995, 452 pp., not approved); the Lithuanian–Russian–English–German systematic Dictionary of Road Terms (compiled by E. Palšaitis, 1995, 459 pp., 2,554 terms, not approved); the Russian–Lithuanian and Lithuanian–Russian Railway Worker’s Glossary (compiled by N. Juškaitė and St. Keinys, 1992, 176 pp., reviewed by the Terminology Department of LKI) and the Russian–Lithuanian Dictionary of Railway Transport (compiled by N. Juškaitė and St. Keinys, 1997, 256 pp., approved by the Terminology Department of LKI); K. Baškys and V. Šulgė’s English–Lithuanian Dictionary of Hydrotechnical Terms (2000, 372 pp., 28,000 terms, not opposed by VLKK); J. Naruškevičius and L. Kumpikas’s Russian–Lithuanian Dictionary of Mechanical Engineering Technology and Welding Terms (1996, 246 pp., about

23

14,500 terms, not approved); the Lithuanian–Russian–German–English Explanatory Dictionary of Wood Terms (executive editor B. Papreckis, 1998, 212 pp., not opposed by VLKK). Also noteworthy are J. Velička’s Concise Encyclopedic Dictionary of Seafaring Terms, with Russian and English equivalents (1991, 441 pp.), and the Russian–Lithuanian and Lithuanian–Russian Dictionary of Seafaring, Fishing and Polytechnic Terms (vol. 1, 1992, 398 pp.; vol. 2, 1992, 446 pp.—about 17,500 terms), J. Banatis’s Lithuanian–Russian–English Dictionary of Marine Technology, Navigation and Fishing (1994, 1,024 pp., about 17,000 terms, reviewed by the Terminology Department) and the English–Lithuanian Dictionary of Marine Technology, Navigation and Fishing (2001, 728 pp., 40,000 terms, not approved).

Dictionaries of terms in the entirely new field of computing are being published in abundance: K. V. Paulauskas (executive editor) and R. Jasinėvičius’s Lithuanian–English–Russian Explanatory Dictionary of Computing (1995, 376 pp., about 4,200 terms, reviewed by the Terminology Department of LKI); Lithuanian–English–Russian–German Dictionary of Terms. Informatics (eds. R. Valatkaitė and Z. Kudirka, 1997, 943 pp., 18,000 terms, not opposed by VLKK); K. V. Paulauskas’s Explanatory Dictionary of Abbreviations in Computing Terms (2000, 352 pp., 4,000 abbreviations, about 6,000 terms, not opposed by VLKK), and others. Also worth mentioning is the Lithuanian–Russian–English explanatory Dictionary of Information Terms (compiled by A. Trečiokaitė, 1993, 140 pp., reviewed by the Terminology Department).

In the fields of economics, trade, banking and finance, several substantial dictionaries are noteworthy: P. Auštrevičius, D. Pupkevičius and D. Treigienė’s Lithuanian–English–German–Russian Encyclopedic Dictionary of Contemporary Economic Terms (reviewer K. Gaivenis, 1991, 510 pp., about 2,500 terms); K. Pasas, B. Louzas and L. Deivys’s Dictionary of Economic Terms (ed. A. Pupkis, rev. K. Gaivenis, 1994, 310 pp.; 2nd ed., 1997, 583 pp.); A. Buračas and B. Svecevičius’s Lithuanian–English–Lithuanian Dictionary-Reference of Business, Banking and Stock Exchange Terms (1994, 718 pp., terms reviewed by K. Gaivenis); A. Buračas’s Lithuanian–English Explanatory Dictionary of Banking and Commerce Terms (1997, 456 pp., terms reviewed by K. Gaivenis); A. Buračas’s Lithuanian–English Reference Book of World Currencies and Coins (1999, 368 pp., terms reviewed by K. Gaivenis); German–Lithuanian Dictionary of Agricultural Business Science and Market Research Terms (compiled by A. Poviliūnas, 1996, 410 pp., not approved).

24

The field of law is not without dictionaries either, but here translations predominate (usually educational)—English–Lithuanian (3) and German–Lithuanian (1); some are not entirely dictionaries of terms, since they also include general vocabulary, and terms sometimes have no Lithuanian equivalents, only descriptions. Worth noting is the Dictionary of Concepts Used in the Laws of the Republic of Lithuania (compiled by R. Mockevičius, 2000, 607 pp.; 2nd ed., 2002, 767 pp.).

Among larger, more significant terminological dictionaries from various other fields, the following should be mentioned: the systematic Latin–Lithuanian–German–English–Russian Dictionary of Botanical Names (compiled by R. Jankevičienė, 1998, 524 pp., not opposed by VLKK); the systematic Latin–Lithuanian–English–French–Russian–German Dictionary of Mammal Names (executive editor P. Bluzma, 2002, 436 pp., nearly 3,500 names, not opposed by VLKK); Concise English–Lithuanian and Lithuanian–English Dictionary of Plant Biology Terms (prepared by O. Rupainienė, 1998, 432 pp., about 7,000 terms, not opposed by VLKK); the Lithuanian–English–Russian Dictionary of Environmental Protection Terms (2000, 518 pp., 2,261 terms, not opposed by VLKK); V. Štuikis, L. Tymukas and R. Vasiliauskytė’s Lithuanian–English–Russian Explanatory Dictionary of Animal Husbandry Terms (1993, 216 pp., reviewed and assessed by the Terminology Department of LKI); the systematic Latin–Lithuanian dictionary Terms of Veterinary Anatomy, Histology and Embryology (director L. Daugnora, 1998, 180 pp., not opposed by VLKK); L. Daugnora, R. R. Budrys and R. Trainienė’s systematic Latin–Lithuanian dictionary Terms of Avian Anatomy (2002, 216 pp., not opposed by VLKK); Nomenclature of Medical Histology and Embryology (2001, 256 pp., not opposed by VLKK); A. Lapytė and J. Surkus’s Concise Dictionary of Psychiatric Terms (1996, 88 pp., reviewed by the Terminology Department); the Latin–Lithuanian Spelling of Obstetric and Gynecological Diagnoses and Operation Names (compiled by A. Venckauskas, 1997, 98 pp., 2,000 names, not approved); English–Lithuanian Dictionary of Medical Terms (compiled by D. Ramanauskienė and E. Zagorskaitė, 1997, 429 pp., not approved); English–Lithuanian–Russian Dictionary of Pheromones (compiled by A. Skirkevičius, 1997, 154 pp., about 900 terms, not approved); V. Gudelis’s Lithuanian–Russian–German–English explanatory Dictionary of Marine Coastal Research Terms (1993, 408 pp., approved by the Terminology Council (!)); S. Vaitekūnas’s school Encyclopedic Dictionary of Geography (1994, 256 pp., not approved); Lithuanian–Russian Geodesy Terms

25

žodynas (sudarė S. Kazakevičius, 1993, 216 p., apie 7000 terminų, neaprobuotas); V. Straižio Astronomijos enciklopedinis žodynas (2002, 333 p., neaprobuotas); Istorijos žodynas (red. kol. p-kė V. Pukienė, 2003, 434 p.) (minėtini ir du nemaži mokykliniai šios srities žodynai); Psichologijos žodynas (spec. red. R. Augis, R. Kočiūnas, 1993, 368 p., neaprobuotas); L. Jovaišos lietuvių–anglų–vokiečių–rusų kalbų aiškinamasis žodynas Pedagogikos terminai (1993, 263 p., apie 1 000 terminų, tikrino ir rekomendavo Terminologijos skyrius); Anglų–lietuvių kalbų specialiojo ugdymo žodynas (sudarytojas ir ats. red. J. Petruševičius, 2002, 369 p., apie 3 500 terminų, neaprobuotas).

Among the larger terminological dictionaries, those covering military affairs, management, postal services, philosophy, sociology, social security, the labor market, art, fine arts, architecture, iconography, literary theory and literary studies, theology, religious studies, librarianship and bibliography, book studies, and other fields should also be noted; among the smaller ones are dictionaries of business, customs, accounting, medicinal plants, cultivated plants and weeds, conifers, dendrology, soil science, rhizology, hunting, and other fields. Two works certainly deserve separate mention: J. Pričinauskas’s Russian–Lithuanian Dictionary of Goods (1996, 734 pp., 40,000 terms, considered by VLKK, though not officially approved) and Logistics: Lithuanian–English Logistics Terms and Concepts (compiled by E. Palšaitis and R. Palšaitis, 2001, 350 pp., not approved).

In Lithuanian terminography, not only are Western languages spreading and becoming established (English above all, with the five-language standard being pursued), but in certain cases approved Western or particular US dictionaries are adopted, for example: the systematic dictionary (with a Lithuanian alphabetical index) of the Permanent International Association of Road Congresses, Technical International Dictionary of Road Terms (prepared by K. Skerys, 1994, 128 pp., not approved)—the Lithuanian version of Technical Dictionary of Road Terms (1990); Dictionary of Civil Aviation Terms (chief compilers R. Eriksonienė and J. Klimavičius, 1996, 352 pp., reviewed and approved by the Terminology Department)—based on ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) Doc. 9294; International Postal Service (reference work in Lithuanian, French, English, Esperanto, Russian and German, compiled by A. Piliponis, 1996, 352 pp., not approved)—based on the Universal Postal Union’s eight-language Vocabulaire Polyglotte du Service Postal International (Berne, 1992); International Dictionary of Basic and General Metrology Terms (pre-

26

rengė V. Valiukėnas, P. J. Žilinskas, 1997, 96 p., VLKK neprieštarauja) – pagal International Vocabulary of Basic and General Terms in Metrology (Geneva, 1993); anglų–lietuvių kalbų Kartografijos ir geodezijos terminų aiškinamasis žodynas (sudarė V. Vainauskas, 2000, 614 p., apie 5 000 terminų, VLKK neprieštarauja) – versta iš JAV Gynybos kartografavimo žinybos Glossary of Mapping, Charting and Geodetic Terms, 1981, Defence Mapping Agency Hydrographic / Topographic Center Washington, D. C. 20315; NATO terminų žodynas (ats. red. A. V. Garsys, plk. J. Norgėla, 2001. 310 p., neaprobuotas) – versta iš NATO Glossary of Terms and Definitions (English and French) AAP 6 (1998 m. rugsėjį patvirtintas Dok. 3680).

The quantity is large. But a considerable part of it consists of glossaries for students, schools, and institutions. The imbalance in quantity is also obvious: dictionaries of physics, polytechnics, medicine, geography, geology, and music terminology have not been updated for a long time. There have never been large dictionaries of biochemistry or genetics terminology. The forestry terminology dictionary promised long ago by the Terminology Council has still not appeared, whereas a reference book of foresters’ biographies (with photographs!) has been published!..

The lack of quality is evidenced by the approvals—as yet, all do not object, not one approves; quite a few dictionaries have none at all; some contain language errors (even major ones). A young (young once again!) state is in dire need of a comprehensive legal dictionary (and encyclopedia). Several dictionaries of economic terminology have been published, but the flaws and problems in this field’s terminology are substantial and obvious. There seems to be no shortage of dictionaries of computer terminology, yet neither these nor the numerous discussions (though not always professional) have helped settle the terms for the first hundred, or even ten, concepts, while English jargon proliferates in many areas (schools included!). In general, more than one terminology dictionary has been published that has not contributed a single new word to terminography.

Terminology dictionaries are not easy to compile. Having written about 500 pages of reviews and expert assessments, I can judge this fairly precisely. The provision in the Requirements for the Preparation of General Terminology Dictionaries, adopted by a resolution of the VLKK on 9 December 1999, that a “terminologist linguist (or another specialist in standard Lithuanian)” be included in the working group offers little help, because the workload of compiling, reviewing, and approving falls heavily on terminologist linguists

27

and is unbearable, while their ranks are thinning. On the other hand, terminographic work in Lithuania is not considered scientific—even when carried out by the very best specialists (professors, academics). The planning, organization, and coordination of terminography have not been institutionalized; responsibility belongs to no one—this important work is not being done. The White Paper on Lithuanian Science and Technology (2001), prepared by the Department of Science and Studies under the Ministry of Education and Science, contains none of the concepts terminology, terminological science, terminography, although terms are the red threads running through the fabric of every science. Where are we—on a straight road, at a crossroads, or in a dead end? No one even considers this. The necessary qualitative—and partly quantitative—leap remains out of sight. Still, a small star of hope has risen: the candidate whose program also includes terminology won the election for president of the Academy of Sciences. We shall see after the first hundred days.

Conclusions

1. Lithuanian terminography began in 1821. Early terminography was manuscript-based. The first printed terminology dictionary appeared in 1907. For almost a hundred years, terminographic work was carried out by individual, enthusiastic intellectuals, mostly botanists.

2. The Lithuanian Scientific Society (1907), inspired by the national liberation movement, provided at least some impetus toward organization, but did not have time to bring the fruits of terminography to maturity.

3. Organized terminography began with discussions of terminology neologisms among specialists who had gathered around Jonas Jablonskis in Voronezh, behind the front lines during the World War.

4. In the First Republic of Lithuania, even Jablonskis’s scholarship and authority could not restrain the unprofessional and irresponsible purism of the Terminology Commission, which was active from 1921 to 1926 and manifested itself in numerous unscientific neologisms. The later Terminology Commission of the Lithuanian Language Society consolidated the procedure for organized term creation, discussion, and approval initiated by Jablonskis, institutionalizing it—and doing so for good.

5. From the productive year 1938 to 1954 there is a huge gap in terminography. The preparation of the Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian (1954) ushered in a decade of terminographic harvest. However, almost all the terminology dictionaries were Russian–Lithuanian; they contained many Russian calques, wh-

28

… sometimes evaluated propagandistically as an enrichment of the Lithuanian language. In general, the theoretical and methodological foundations would occasionally waver.

6. At the end of 1971, the Terminology Council was established; although it did not greatly invigorate terminographic work, it prompted a significant innovation—the use of English (and, less often, other languages) in terminology dictionaries.

7. During the years of the Second Republic of Lithuania, a true surge in terminography began—about 200 dictionaries and glossaries were published. A major impetus was the Programme for the Use and Development of the State Language, 1996–2005. Documents on the preparation and approval of terminological dictionaries were adopted. Several major multilingual terminological dictionaries were published. However, both an imbalance in quantity and a lack of quality are evident. Terminographic work is not considered scholarly. Its planning, organization, and coordination have not been institutionalized. The rise in terminographic work remains beyond the horizon.

REFERENCES⁴

Aukšoriūtė A. The terminological legacy of Laurynas Ivinskis. – Questions of Lithuanian Linguistics 40, Vilnius, 1998, 32–40.

General requirements for the preparation of terminology dictionaries (Approved by a resolution recorded in the minutes of the meeting of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language under the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania on 9 December 1999 (minutes No. 7)). – Native Language 3, Vilnius, 2000, 22–24.

Библиографический указатель литературы по вопросам литовской терминологии (1945–1980). Составили К. Гайбянас и С. Кяйнис, Вильнюс, 1981.

Brazdžiūnas P. The creation of Lithuanian physics terminology. – Language Culture 44, Vilnius, 1983, 4–8.

Būga K. Letter (13) to K. Jurgelionis. – Selected Writings 3. Vilnius, 1961, 926–930.

Būga K. Glossary of zoological taxonomy terms [review]. – Selected Writings 3, Vilnius, 1961, 783–786.

Česnys G. An outline history of Lithuanian anatomical nomenclature. – Terminology 9, Vilnius, 2002, 55–65.

Dagys J. How Lithuanian botanical terminology dictionaries were prepared. – Questions of Lithuanian Linguistics 16, Vilnius, 1975, 244–248.

On Lithuanian educational terminology dictionaries (Resolution of the Terminology Council under the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences of the Lithuanian SSR, 20 December 1978). – Language Culture 37, Vilnius, 1979, 4–5.

⁴This list consists not only of cited or mentioned literature, but also relates to many matters discussed—implicitly as well—in the article. That is why its form is bibliographical.

29

On the preparation and publication of Lithuanian term dictionaries (resolution of the Terminology Council under the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences of the Lithuanian SSR, 13 December 1979). – Our Language 3, Vilnius, 1980, 26–28.

On the rules for approving terminology standards (resolution No. 69 of 29 January 1998). – Resolutions of the Lithuanian Language Commission. 1977–1998, Vilnius, 1998, 176–177.

On the approval of term dictionaries (resolution No. 59 of 30 January 1997). – Resolutions of the Lithuanian Language Commission. 1977–1998, Vilnius, 1998, 52–54.

On the partial amendment of the resolution No. 59 of 30 January 1997 of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language under the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania On the approval of term dictionaries (resolution No. 1 (77) of 29 March 2001 of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language under the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania). – Native Language 5, Vilnius, 2001, 27–28.

G a i v e n i s K. Lithuanian Terminology: Outlines of Theory and Management, Vilnius, 2002.

G a i v e n i s K., K e i n y s S. A review of Lithuanian educational term dictionaries, their shortcomings, and recommendations for improvement. – Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the Lithuanian SSR. Series A 2 (75), Vilnius, 1981, 127–137.

G а й в я н и с К., К л и м а в и ч ю с Й. Some issues in terminology work in the Lithuanian SSR. – Scientific and Technical Terminology 2, Moscow, 1973, 19–23.

G r i n i u s K. On Lithuanian terminology in botanical organography. – The Lithuanian Nation 2 (3), Vilnius, 1914, 431–443.

I n d r a š i u s N., N. K u č i n s k a i t ė A., V a i t i l a v i č i u s A. Draft of basic psychiatric terms. – Health Protection 1, Vilnius, 1967, 56–59.

J a b l o n s k i s J. Eng. A. Macijauskas. Technical Glossary [Review]. – Writings of Jablonskis 4, Kaunas, 1935, 284–287.

J a b l o n s k i s J. Letter (66) to J. Basanavičius. – Letters of Jonas Jablonskis, Vilnius, 1985, 71–72.

Jurgis Pabrėža (1771–1849), Vilnius, 1972.

K e i n y s St. The scientific and technological revolution and the development of Lithuanian terminology. – Issues in Lithuanian Linguistics 24, Vilnius, 1985, 179–196.

K e i n y s St. An overview of the development of Lithuanian terminology (up to 1940). – Linguistics 18, Vilnius, 1967, 5–34.

K l i m a v i č i u s J. Metricians, you are welcome among us, fellow terminologists! – Science Lithuania, 2000 16, 1, 11.

K l i m a v i č i u s J. Terminology: work and workers. – Information Bulletin 9, Vilnius, Ministry of Education and Science, 2001, 18.

K r u o p a s J. A. Kašarauskas’s lexicographic works. – Questions of Lithuanian Linguistics 13, Vilnius, 1972, 189–208.

K r u o p a s J. K. Dra(s)utavičius’s (Drąsutis’s) terminological glossaries and lists. – Questions of Lithuanian Linguistics 16, Vilnius, 1975, 265–271.

L a š a s V. On some terms used in medicine. – Health Protection 4, Vilnius, 1965, 52–53.

L e m c h e n a s Ch., Š u m i n a s A. On certain issues of terminology. – Truth 1967 72 4.

White Book of Lithuanian Science and Technology, Vilnius, 2001.

30

Naujausia lietuvių terminologijos ir terminografijos literatūra (1991–1992). Sudarė J. Gaivenytė ir St. Keinys. – Terminologijos vagos 1, Vilnius, 1994, 101–109.

Recent Lithuanian terminology dictionaries. Compiled by J. Gaivenytė. – Terminology 3, Vilnius, 1996, 105–117; 4, 1997, 94–97; 5, 1998, 151–159; 6, 2000, 116–123; 7, 2000, 107–113; 8, 2001, 146–151; 9, 2002, 164–169; 10, 2003, 186–192.

Pavlonis S., Vaitilavičius A. A critical review of certain Lithuanian medical terms. – Health Protection 3, Vilnius, 1959, 56–60.

Rygiškių Jonas. Designations, or terms, adopted by the Terminology Commission [Review]. – Writings of Jablonskis 4, Kaunas, 1935, 322–324.

Rygiškių Jonas. Our new terms. – Writings of Jablonskis 4, Kaunas, 1935, 307–308.

Rygiškių Jonas. A justification and a reply. – Writings of Jablonskis 4, Kaunas, 1935, 308–310.

Rumšas P. Jablonskis’s contribution to Lithuanian arithmetic terminology. – Language Culture 29, Vilnius, 1975, 3–16.

Rumšas P. The history of Lithuanian geometry terms. – Our Language 2, Vilnius, 1974, 4–19.

Rumšas P. Prie matematikos terminijos ištakų. – Zigmas Žemaitis, Vilnius, 1979, 52–58.

Šikšnys M. My Lithuanian language lessons and recollections of J. Jablonskis. – Linguistics 5, Vilnius, 1962, 81–87.

Terminologijos darbas. Vertė A. Kaulakienė. Vilnius, 1973.

Principles and methods of terminology. Lithuanian State Standard 1115–90 (ISO 704–87), Vilnius, 1990.

Terminology dictionaries (1985–1990). Compiled by N. Banevičienė, supplemented by St. Keinys. – Questions of Lithuanian Linguistics 31, Vilnius, 1994, 192–200, 201–202.

Terminology dictionaries and terminology standards. Prepared by A. Smetona. – A. Paulauskienė Lithuanian Language Culture, Kaunas, 2001, 247–254.

Terminų žodynų kartotekos sudarymo instrukcija. Vilnius, 1972.

Umbrasas A. The state of legal terminology in Lithuania in 1918–1940. – Terminologija 8, Vilnius, 2001, 76–94.

Urbonas S. On some unsuccessful terms. – Health Protection 4, Vilnius, 1968, 44–56.

Vaitilavičius A. On the question of Lithuanian medical terminology. – Health Protection 2, Vilnius, 1957, 56–61.

Valatka J. A few remarks on newly prepared medical terms. – Health Protection 12, Vilnius, 1952, 33–34.

Zemlevičiūtė P. Doctor Jonas Basanavičius and his Medega musu tautiszkai vystinyksytai. – Terminologija 9, Vilnius, 2002, 103–121.

Žemaitis Z. From recollections of J. Jablonskis. – Literature and Language 1, Vilnius, 1959, 32–39.

Žemaitis Z. History of Lithuanian mathematical terminology. – Issues in Lithuanian Linguistics 8, Vilnius, 1966, 195–201.

31

LITHUANIAN TERMINOGRAPHY: FEATURES OF THE PAST, DIFFICULTIES OF THE PRESENT AND TASKS

Summary

Lithuanian terminography can be said to have begun in 1821. The old terminography is in manuscripts, the first printed terminological dictionary appeared in 1907. For nearly one hundred years terminographical work was done by single enthusiasts, mainly botanists. The Lithuanian Scientific Society (established in 1907), stimulated by the movement of national revival, gave a stimulus to a more organised approach, but did not have enough time to offer an appreciable result. The beginning of organised terminography – discussions about creation of terms by specialists united round the Lithuanian linguist Jonas Jablonskis in the rear of the World War I, in Voronezh in Russia. The principle of purity in Jablonskis’ concept of terminology was essential. In the first Terminological Commission, which worked in the Republic of Lithuania between 1921-1926, even the teaching of Jablonskis and his authority did not stop unprofessional and unmoderate purism, which revealed itself in plentiful and inappropriate neologisms. However, the later Terminological Commission of the Lithuanian Language Society established the organised creation, discussion and approval of terminology and institutionalized it. From 1938 until 1954 there is a big gap in the work of terminography. The preparation of the first normalising dictionary of the Lithuanian language (