T E R M I N O L O G I J O S D A R B I N I N K A I

Antanė KUČINSKAITĖ

A FEW THINGS ABOUT THE WORK OF TERMINOLOGISTS AT THE INSTITUTE OF THE LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE

I. 1945 – The Re-establishment of the Lithuanian Language Institute of the Academy of Sciences

I began working at the Lithuanian Language Institute of the Academy of Sciences of Lithuania at the beginning of 1945. The war front, which had swept through not long before (in the summer of 1944), had wrecked and destroyed much in Vilnius. However, both buildings of the Institutes of the Lithuanian Language and of Lithuanian Literature and Folklore (6 Antakalnio Street) remained intact. Unfortunately, though, the staff had scattered and were in no hurry to return.

The Academy of Sciences’ headquarters also survived (2 Karolio Poželos Street, today Žygimantų Street, where the Academy of Sciences Library is now located).

At the beginning of 1945, three of us began working at the Lithuanian Language Institute: its director, Prof. Juozas Balčikonis, and his two female employees, Bronė Vosyl yte (who died in 1972) and Antanė Kučinskaitė.

Until the Academy of Sciences’ headquarters, the institutes, and their staff had been definitively approved by the government, we worked as volunteers for a couple of months; as spring approached, we were recognized as official employees (and received a modest salary).

Each year, one or two more employees joined us, and attention turned to printing Volume II of the great academic Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language. In 1947, I was sent to Kaunas to supervise the printing at the Spindulys printing house. The second volume of the Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language was printed at the end of 1947. The Lithuanian Language Institute kept me in Kaunas for a couple of years, assigning me to a group of lexicographers determined to publish without delay a one-volume Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian. In 1950, the editorial office of the Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian was moved to Vilnius, so I returned too. I was tasked with writing instructions for editing the great academic Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language.

75

2. The First Steps of Terminologists at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language

In 1950, at the initiative of the gifted organizer Jonas Kruopas, the idea was raised of reviving terminological work at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language, as scholars from various fields were increasingly turning to the Institute, asking for help in resolving pressing questions of essential terminology. There were few staff members at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. In 1952, the three of us made up a small group of terminologists: Associate Professor J. Kruopas, Napalys Grigas, and me.

3. The Institute’s Terminologists Collaborate with Lawyers

The lawyers were the first to take up the practical task of standardizing terminology. In 1952, the experienced legal expert Associate Professor A. Žiurlys, who had a very keen feel for his native language, approached the Institute of the Lithuanian Language, asking for help from its terminologists. The Presidium of the Supreme Council was to issue four codes urgently: the Criminal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Civil Code, and the Code of Civil Procedure.

A group of distinguished lawyers were bending over backwards to ensure that these four codes were prepared for publication exemplary both in substance and in terms of Lithuanian language culture.

Once or twice a week, and often more frequently, the Institute’s terminologists and the lawyers would meet at A. Žiurlys’s apartment for entire half-days, striving to formulate legal provisions concisely, precisely, and correctly, as the precision of the language of the codes required.

Those discussions were very valuable lessons for me. A. Žiurlys’s remarkable feel for language and ability to choose the most apt word and the most logical phrase encouraged me, when coining or refining scientific terms, not to become detached from the way ordinary people think or from a feel for the spirit of the Lithuanian language...

When meeting with legal experts, we would have to spend longer discussing specialized legal terms. At times, we would also stumble over matters of syntax or simply grammatical correctness.

For example, I remember that already at the very first meeting I stumbled over the Crim-

76

in the Criminal Code, the wording of the sentence:

“<...> shall be punished by three years’ imprisonment <...>”

In my opinion, this is illogical too: the sentence (imprisonment) should be stated first, and only then its duration. Thus:

<...> shall be punished by imprisonment for three years <...>

After some debate, the lawyers nevertheless accepted my proposal.

Although the wording I proposed is used throughout all four codes, journalists in the press still emphasize the duration of the sentence first and only then describe the sentence itself in a phrasing unacceptable in standard language.

Perhaps the concision of colloquial language has an influence here; compare:

–How much did he get? – Three years.

–What sentence did he receive? – Three years.

However, the concision of colloquial language often conflicts with the norms of standard language. Not everything is suitable for formal language, especially in legal regulations.

One term proposed by A. Žiurlys at meetings with lawyers has stayed in my memory: veika. This is an unusual neologism for linguists, although it is formed quite correctly. Thus veikti: veika, like traukti: trauka, slaugyti: slauga...

A. Žiurlys explained that lawyers need to distinguish between two closely related concepts, veikla and veika. Large-scale actions would be veikla, whereas actions expressed more passively would be veika.

A. Žiurlys also pointed out that the word liudininkas conflicts with the rules of Lithuanian word formation. Those attending the meetings agreed that the legal term would be liudytojas.

Collaboration with lawyers, especially later when discussing the Dictionary of Legal Terms, was good practice for us, the inexperienced terminologists at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language.

4. The ranks of terminologists are growing, and the scope of their work is expanding

With a great deal of organizational and administrative work to handle, associate professor J. Kruopas, head of the Dictionary Sector, could rarely attend meetings of terminologists with specialists in various fields of science; therefore, he brought in

77

two more researchers to the Terminology Commission of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature: Vladas Bartusevičius and Vitas Labutis.

As an athlete himself, Vladas Bartusevičius was well versed in the subject when the “Dictionary of Sports Terms” was being prepared for publication, while V. Labutis soon emerged as a truly gifted terminologist. Together with A. Kučinskaitė, he carefully considered the material and offered good advice while the “Dictionary of Physics Terms” was being prepared for publication.

In 1970, V. Labutis and A. Kučinskaitė considered culinary and everyday-language terms. Lists of product names were reviewed at meetings organized by the Ministry of Trade.

5. The main area of work of the LKI Terminology Commission: the “Dictionary of Medical Terms”

The Terminology Commission devoted most of its time and effort to the “Dictionary of Medical Terms.” This is a substantial volume (nearly a thousand pages), meticulously compiled in three languages: Latin, Lithuanian, and Russian.

For several years, the Terminology Commission and the compilers of this dictionary would spend entire half-days discussing each term from the perspectives of aptness, precision, and correctness. Antanė Kučinskaitė was the most active participant in all the meetings with medical specialists over several years (the other members of the Terminology Commission took turns attending). In its final years, Vitas Labutis distinguished himself as a gifted terminologist. “Part of the manuscript prepared for publication was read by K. Gaivenis and J. Klimavičius, research associates of the Terminology Group of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature,” the foreword to the “Dictionary of Medical Terms” states¹. In my opinion, they were the most gifted terminologists of that time.

When considering medical terms, first it was necessary to address the more common errors in medical professionals’ speech, namely: medicines are not for flu but against flu; a sore spot is not to be smeared but treated with ointment; illnesses are not a way out

¹ Astrauskas V., Biziulevičius S., Pavilonis S., Vaitilavičius A., Vileišis A. Medicinos terminų žodynas. V.: Mokslas, 1980. P. 3.

78

(uxxo), but an ending; not the sick, but patients; not pathological anatomy, but pathological anatomy, etc., etc.

Unfortunately, doctors still have not managed to rid themselves of such mistakes...

When considering the terms themselves, some tricky cases of word formation had to be resolved. For example, congenital anomalies. A baby is born with one eye—in other words, one-eyed, but the condition itself needs a name. The compilers of the “Dictionary of Medical Terms” proposed the term one-eyedness. Born with one leg—one-leggedness; with one arm—one-armedness, and so on. At first, such terms seemed unacceptable, but doctors do need them after all... Even absence-of-chest! Or monkey-headedness! On closer examination of the word-formation cases, such formations do not seem objectionable.

Very complex Latin terms used by doctors also occur, e.g.: encephalomyeloradiculopathia—a disease of the brain and spinal cord and the nerve roots. It is impossible to find a Lithuanian term—a counterpart—for them. In Lithuanian, one can only convey the descriptive meaning of the Latin term. Quite a few similarly “kilometric” Latin terms occur in medical science.

We congratulate the author of these memoirs

linguist Antanė KUČIŪNIENĖ

on her distinguished anniversary, wishing her

many more long and creative years.

79