Keletas minčių apie terminų standartizaciją

TERMINOLOGY, SCIENCE LANGUAGE IR PRESENT Kazimieras GAIVENIS KELETAS MINČIŲ ABOUT The standardization of terms over the last two or three years has shown that the success of this work depends mainly on how the standards drafters understand the terms, what words they consider as terms, how they select, systematize, classify and define them. ir jų ir Be Furthermore, the authors of terminology standards often make another methodological ir error, namely: it seems to them that when preparing a standard for a particular field, terminology must be revised and reorganized, replacing good terms with even better ones. iš ir Iš This is not really necessary, because terms can be regulated only iš by the relevant terminology commissions, individual terminology standards 0 ne authors. When defining terms, the most commonly chosen distinctive features of this concept, 3 namely: scientific nature of the concept; precisely defined 1) meaning2) mė ir 3) the specificity of the concept. None of these features yet express the modern concept of the term. For example, no one doubts that it is possible to talk about sport terminology, but most of the concepts in this field are not scientific. The speciality of the term is a sign of its professional usage. However, it also does not determine the belonging of the word to the terminology, because in the professional language there are not only terms, but also professionalisms, jargons and other words. Therefore, terms are distinguished from ordinary words (non-terms) not by any single characteristic, but by a set of several of them. A term is not a particular word or a combination of words, but a word or a combination of words that has a special designative or nominative function. Therefore, from the many grammatical synonyms present in common language, only the most suitable ones should be selected for terminology. For example, you can say shoe brush, brush for shoes, shoe cleaning brush, shoe cleaning brush, brush for shoe cleaning, etc. All these synonyms do not fundamentally contradict the grammatical norms, but for terminology and terminology standards in this case only the noble word combination shoe brush denoting purpose is best suited. Therefore, terminologists, when approving terminology standards, often correct long names expressed in various syllables by rearranging them. In terminology, composite concepts are usually referred to by a few words. For example, the sample of ten approved term standards contained — terms in total. 6 ir is ir 1993 m. iš 908 Iš jų 230 monowords, 468 — biwords, 150 — three-word, 39 — four-word, 13 — five-word, 6 - six-word ir 2 — Seven Words. Comparing this sample su 9.016 standards terms sample of iš Russian technical terms standards”, we would see that our terms are slightly shorter. In Russian terminology standards, single-word terms are 10,16% (our — 25,376), two-word — 36,1696 (our — 51,5%), three-word — 26,99% (our — 16,5%), four-word — 15,5496 (our — 4,2%), five words — 6,48% (our — 1,49£6), six-word — 2,96% (our — 0,6%), seven words — 0,84% (our —0.296)?. Of course, this comparison can only be approximate because the samples are of different sizes. However, anyway, from this comparison it is clear that our standard terms are not shorter than the terminology of some other languages. In the practical term management activity, two types of conceptual relationships are usually distinguished: hierarchical and non-hierarchical relationships. The most common hierarchical relationships are genus-species and whole-dalics relationships. The first relationship in terminology is several times more common than the second. Both of these relationships can be illustrated by step diagrams, e.g.: genus-species relationships whole-part relationships: a) ir b) a) |emission Y particulate | emission secondary particulate emission | b) Atmosphere Stratosphere Ozone Thanks to asist for the statistics. A. Norcikaite. | Boankosa kparkocru HU H. O craHJItaprH3OBaHHOro TepMHITa // Hayurio rextueckas TEepMHHOJIOTHSH". M., 1989. 4. C.13. The remaining terms have connectives. In draft standards of terms, two-word compound terms, the main focus of which is the whole — machine, device, apparatus, and the secondary — its part (detail), are sometimes incorrectly named by terms of the type “adjective with suffix -inis, -ė + noun noun", e.g.: pavarinis > pavaros sraigtas, automobilinis — automobilinis variklis, etc. The elements of such terms are represented by the so-called ancestor of the relation of whole and part. Species are some of the grammatical means used in our language. One of them is the noun forms of adjectives and participles. Not all our dialects have these forms, so there are people who do not recognize them in terminology. In fact, it is often difficult to determine whether a term needs a noun form or not. However, in general, these forms of terminology are necessary. They show a permanent species-specific distinctiveness. For example, a residential house may be uninhabited at a certain time, but it is still called a residential house. Drinking water may not be drunk now, but it will still be drinking water, i.e. water of a certain quality. “In the Grammar of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language” (V., 1994). that the opposition of noun and ordinary adjective forms is not very clear and consistent, examples are given from terminology, e.g.: sweet and sour milk, but sweet and bitter pepper, black and white currant, etc. (p. 175). In fact, the noun form of the adjective is not used to name both fresh and sour milk, because it refers to a temporary characteristic of the concept. In addition, in terminology, species contradictions can be expressed only by antonyms, but by other species terms, e.g.: white dwarf (star) black dwarfne ir — kė (star); ferrous metals — non-ferrous metals; black market, white soot, there is no species conflict in the white — row at all. The noun forms are not required in terminology only when the generic designator has its own adverbial designator, e.g.: light concrete (Voice. Lightweight concrete, angl. light-weight concrete), bet ypatingai lengvas betonas (Voice. lightweight concrete, angl. very light concrete). In general, nominative adjectives in draft terminology standards are used by ir participants in an unnormal mi way, but there are cases where they are missing when jų used in ir excess. Some authors of terminology standards translate the missing Lithuanian terms into other languages iš and believe that the ir translation of terms is a transfer of the meaning and form of foreign 8 equivalents. ir ir Iš translation of actual terms is only a transfer of meaning (terminological meaning), the coincidence or non-coincidence of the form of o terms depends on the language affinity. For example, the English standard name is ‘Asphalt Concrete Mixtures and Asphalt Concrete for Road Construction”. Jj When translating it is necessary to ne use the English construction by repeating) name “Asphalt concrete mixtures ir asphalt concrete for motorways”, but the original Lithuanian word combination (“Automobile road asphalt concrete and its mixtures”). According to the standard of the Republic of Lithuania "Principles and methods of terminology" (Lietuvos RST 1115-90), the definition of terminology concepts has several objectives: 1) description of the concept at a certain level of abstraction; 2) the distinction of that concept from neighbouring concepts; 3) determination of the relationship of the concept with other concepts in order to indicate its place in the system; 4) exclusion of a concept in order to normalize terms. In practical terminology work, intensive and extensive definitions are most often used. The first definitions indicate the closest relative term, which is already defined or all Known, and the attributes that characterize the term as a species of that genus (a). The second definitions list the species concepts belonging to one abstraction sub-level (b). For example: : (a) ‘bibliographical record’ means bibliographical and other data on a document (or part thereof or group of documents) presented in a prescribed order, which makes it possible to identify it when searching in a catalogue*; (b) terrestrial metals: Al, Sc, Y, La’. The first type of definitions are more typical for the standards of terms, the second type of definitions occur only in dictionaries of terms. Intense are usually classical definitions definitio per genum proximum differentiam specificam. ir o et In these definitions, a species difference can go one, but several ne features. This is because it is sometimes impossible to find a single characteristma ic that would distinguish the defining object from all other objects that would essentially reveal the content. ir iš jo Errors in the definition of terms in standards most often arise from the incorrect iš perception of the relationship between the ir defining and defining concepts. * LST 1350: 1994 draft. SHigh K. Dictionary of Chemistry. V., 1960. 9 Kimo. For example, the optics term lens cannot be defined as: “A lens is an optical device limited by two protruding surfaces- .” The distinguishing feature “two raised surfaces” chosen here is typical only for some lenses. Their surfaces are all kinds: both raised, both concave, one flat, another convex, one concave, another convex, etc. Thus, a more accurate definition of a lens could be as follows: "A lens is an optical device with two surfaces that refract light rays". The vicious circle of definitions occurs when an object is defined by a concept that itself becomes clear only from the defining concept. For example, the terms drugs (a) and anesthesia (b) cannot be defined as: (a) ‘medicinal substances causing anaesthesia’, if: (b) ‘drug-induced body state’. Terms cannot be defined by words of different categories or incompatible meanings, e.g. creep — "the case when a solid body plastically deforms from long-term loads or stresses- ". The term creep indicates a permanent characteristic of the material, while the word case refers only to a single and separate event. This definition needs to be corrected, for example: creep — the property of a solid body to plastically deform from long-term loads or stresses- ." Sometimes it is said that the so-called negative definitions are faulty. But in terminology they are not always wrong. Negative definitions are used in those cases where the essence of the term (concept) consists of negative characteristics, e.g.: irreparable defect — defect which cannot be repaired technically and is economically unreasonable. In the definitions of the standards of terms, confusing compound sentences, as well as various modal words and other insertions, such as: usually, exclusively, mainly, in comparison, in particular, etc., should not be used. In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that our experience with terminology standardization is still limited. We are still learning this interesting and promising term management job. Therefore, the Lithuanian Standardization Office should issue more provisional terminology standards, and the drafters of terminology standards should be more interested in the experience of countries that have been working on this work for a long time. 10