Filosofai R. Bytautas bei S. Šalkauskis ir lietuvių kalbos normalizacija

LITHUANIAN KALBOTYROS QUESTIONS, XXXI (1994) LANGUAGES NOR MALIZACIJOS QUESTIONS ALBINA AUKSORIŪTĖ PHILOSOPHERS R. BYTE RATE AND THE S. SHELF IR LITHUANIAN LANGUAGES NORMALIZATION This article will try to review the theoretical philosophical assumptions of the development of the Lithuanian language, more precisely, how the philosophical approach to the Lithuanian language, especially its terminology, normization in Lithuania began to be formed. į Reference is made here to Philosophers of Lithuania R. Bytautas ir S. Šalkauskas, who was one of the first iš to take an interest in Lithuanian language issues. The aim was to reveal the views of these philosophers on Lithuanian į language, its development, and to show their contribution as philosophers to the normative development į of Lithuanian language. ir About R. Bytautoir S. Šalkauskas' philosophical views have been written A. Sverdiolas, Šliogeris, A. Plečkaitis, R. Bagdonavičius, V. Genzelis and B. others. ir The works ir of these philosophers, which deal with the issues of Lithuanian language, are discussed. K. "Gaivenis". At the end of a. the 19th century, the Lithuanian national liberation movement expanded, education began to rise, and the national, iš rural intelligentsia strengthened. Nors po 1863 m. The tsarist authorities banned the Lithuanian press, but at the end of the century they began to allow the ir distribution of illegal Lithuanian periodicals. 1883—1886 m. Eastern The Lithuanian revival newspaper “Aušra” published in Prussia, which is secretly transported į Lithuania. Dawn awakened national consciousness, raised the tasks of the national movement, gave this movement a certain organization. Po The work tą of Aušra was driven by other newspapers in particular "The be Bell", "The Light", "The ir Guardian of the Fatherland", etc. 1904 m. the ban on the Lithuanian press is lifted. The network of schools was expanded, mother tongue teaching was introduced in Lithuanian schools, and periodic non-periodical press was ir expanded. With the revitalization of Lithuanian cultural life, attention was paid to Lithuanian language, and į Lithuanian language research intensified. Especially favourable conditions for the development of the Lithuanian language were created after the creation of the independent state of Lithuania, because then Lithuanian became the state language used ir in government institutions, in the army and in other areas, where it was not allowed at ir all in the tsarist times. XX a. At the beginning of the 20th century, only linguists ne were concerned about the ir Lithuanian language, but other representatives of the intelligentsia. Philosophers ir were interested in Lithuanian language issues. One of iš the first Lithuanian philosophers to į pay attention to the Lithuanian language was Romas Bytautas (1886—1915). 1 Gaivenis K. Ramūnas Bytautas ir language culture // Language culture. 1987. Sąs. 53. P. 77— 79; as well as his. Theory of terminology by Šalkauskas // Special vocabulary of Lithuanian language: Questions of Lithuanian linguistics. V., 1983. T. 22. P, 128—136. 96 "JR. Bytautas was born Drobūkščiai, Telšių district. He finished primary school Kražiuose, studied Perm, o from 1897 year — Vilnius First High School. 1905 m. R. Bytautas joined į Moscow University, Faculty of ir Physics and Mathematics, but a po couple of months passed į Rights, 0 1907 m. — į Faculty of ir History and Philosophy, which he graduated 1912 m. gold medal. Jį received už 1911 m. written work ‘V. Vunto [W. "Critique of the Science of the Concept of Soul Substance". R. Bytautas was left at the chair of philosophy to prepare for his doctorate. 1912—1913 m. he worked in a gymnasium in Moscow, where he taught logic, psychology, Latin and Russian languages, but when his ir health deteriorated, he dropped out of the gymnasium ir į He then moved to Switzerland, where į he died. į ir R. Bytautas helped establish He was a co-founder of the magazine "Aurora". Jo philosophical views influenced Russian-Gea. rman a. philosophers of the late 19th ir and early 20th centuries were idealists. R. Bytautas proposed to supplement materialism with ir teleology and pantheism, and tried to combine ir materialism with idealism, following the principle of psychophysical parallelism. Pasak R. By nature, the primary elements of the ir universe ir are material, spiritual, — the essence of being is spiritual. Ją the subject can know, based on his inner experience, because the essence of being lies in the monad of the soul. The philosopher dealt with the essence of the nation, the formation of the nation, the language. The most important goal of the nation’s unification is ir spiritual creation, the — subject of which is a person seeking active — self-expression. The relationship between the individual and ir the society is the relationship between the individual and the society. su R, Bytautas at work “A nation is ir a national consciousness”, speaking about the nation, its specificity, pays considerable ir attention to language as the basis of the nation’s specificity. In defining a nation, he writes: “A nation is a company of people united by the interests of spiritual creation, which rise on the foundation of common language as an organ of collective [collective — A:.A.] (selective) spiritual action’’*. Pasak R. Bytautas, language is the foundation of mankind's spiritual functioning, on which the organization of society grows, through ‘or there is a spiritual cooperation of people. Language is the foundation of the culture of an entire nation. The philosopher believed that the historical su development of language was linked to the development of a nation's culture, reflecting the peculiaritsu ies of that culture. In language we see the nation's relationship with the world, its way of thinking, because „ in the ir jų words of the connections the meanings are į reflected jų in the ir people's view objects, advantages [ratio — 4.4.]“%, Anot R. By-nation, the historical memory of the nation accumulated in the language, each nation has its own special historical experience and embodies it in its language. It must be said that R. Bytautas did not regard language as the sole basis of nationality. He believed that the specificity of a nation is determined by science, philosophy, art, all areas of culture. However, the philosopher emphasized the fact that language is especially important for Lithuanian culture. R. Bytautas understood ir the importance of attention to language in the national movement, because "people's appeal to their mother tongue means a break-up [release — A.A.] from spiritual slavery, the desire to be self-worth in their ir own way," He valued * Bytautas R. Nation ir national consciousness // Aušrinė. 1912. No. 17. P. 112. 3 Idem, P. 114. 4 Idem. 1912. No. 20. P. 239, 7. Issues of Lithuanian Linguistics, XXXI the 97 fact that Lithuanian intelligentsia see in Lithuanian language only a tool ne of education, but į ją see it as an independent į value of the spirit, to be developed in its own individuality. R. Bytautas understood the difficult ir task of perfecting the dialect to the heights of written language. In some of his works, the philosopher examines the current ir issues of the — formation of a common language. In my work “This and that of the iš philosophy of Lithuanian language” į he spoke to bą look at his positions as iš a philosopher. According to him, language is a special world of thoughts, so language is inseparable from thinking, through 0 jį — ir from all practical human activities. R. Bytautas- 's philosophical į approach to language was important and interesting. The philosopher begins his reasoning about Lithuanian language by comparing the historical situation of Lithuanians ir with other nations. R. Bytautas believes that cultural nations have developed their written language over centuries. Science has o su developed, ir writing has developed, new concepts have ir emerged, new words have been created to name them. According to him, the culture tų of these peoples developo su ja ed graduallir y, the language gradually developed. This iš slowly accumulated language wealth of cultural peoples. The situation was different with us. Humanity’s culture has advanced, į but Lithuanians have not participated in its development. Bavarian į immersed in Polish culture, so as I think R. There was no place where the culture of the people could be concentrated. The Lithuanian enlightenment studied and wrote in foreign languages, the Lithuanian people from the earliest times to the last ir century “had the most intelligent of minds. o tą Therefore, ir the language is little smeared. Ji It may have changed a lot dialectically, but philosophically, in terms of the iš quantity of į words and their ir meaning, it ji stood almost still, because people’s minds had to deal with the same concepts”*. su By describing the situation tą in this way, R. Bytautas ne understood everything correctly. He denied the Lithuanian do participation in the cultural development of mankind, stating that the spiritual ir culture of the nation had not been formed. By denying the development of the language, Bytautas was also wrong. R. In this case, it should be emphasized that only the scientific language has developed little. After finding out why the Lithuanian language did not change philosophically, R. Bytautas assesses the situation at the time, the changed conditions, the national movement that began, which, in his opinion, is jo ultimately a cultural movement. Describing the national movement, he notes that the Lithuanian nation decided to take over other nations, to take over all the material and spiritual wealth accumulated by mankind over thousands of years. ir Iš This is a ir great challenge for a language which needs to be developed to the level of other cultured nations. That such speech "evolution process" was carried out quickly, it is not enough to study only the grammatical system of language. Anot R. Bytauto, „mūsų [months — A4.4.] must first of all pronounce the Lithuanian language only the upper half ne grammatically, iš but — — ir iš the inner side philosophically — regarding the — iš meaning of į various word phrases”“*. ir R. Bytautas claims that the necessary level of language will not be reached until the language of people is known philosophically. Ir philosopher raises the most to important challenge of the time — ‘All 5 This article R. is about the iš Lithuanian language. K., 1908. P. 4, 4 Idem. P. 4—5. 08 the most important thing of our written language — today is the pronunciation of the middle content of iš the human į language; of all we need kninga ir [book — A.A.] — this is the philosophy of Lithuanian language'". jo The only aim ir is to draw the attention of speakers to the į philosophical content of the Lithuanian language. The Lithuanian language hides inexhaustible wealth of thought expression, which is unknown. R. Bytautas urged to take into į account the philosophine cal content of language only by naming new ir concepts, but by improving and standardizing language. He believed that in the development of language, it was particulair rly important to strive for the unity of language thinking. R. Bytautas tries to philosophically justify the importance of the need for ir standardization of ir the common Lithuanian language. He only ne theoretically looked at the į necessity of standardizing the Lithuanian ir language, but practically he himself banned it. dė to do so in the already mentioned works and articles „Lithuanian literary affairs“ (1908), "How to pronounce ir writing foreign words" (1912). R. Bytautas died young, so he did not manage to do much, ko but the work was jo continued by his colleague philosophS. er Šalkauskis, R. Bytautas encouraged an interest in Lithuanian language, especially terminology. As Šalkauskis himself S. wrote, R. Bytautas infected jį "in his ardent love of terminology question"? ir vadine R. Bytautas as his direct inspiration. S. Šalkauskis was (1886—1941) — a prominent member of independent Lithuanian society, philosopher and educator. He was born Ariogalos, Raseinių district. 1905 m. S. Šalkauskis graduated from Šiauliai ir Gymnasium and went to study law į Moscow University. After graduating from law school, he left į He moved to Samarkand, where he worked as a bank clerk. His work as a lawyer did not satisfy him, and he jo increasingly ir devoted himself to philosophy. 1915 m. S. Šalkauskis left for į Switzerland ir He studied philosophy at the University of Fribourg. He received his PhD from the University of Fribourg 1920 m. In the same year he returned į Lithuania, he engaged į in academic work: taught In the higher courses, there were Professor of Philosophy, Vytautas Magnus University, Faculty of Theology and Philosophy. 1922 m. S. He is now a professor at the University of Tartu and heads the department of history. ir 1939 m. S. Šalkauskis was elected Rector of VDU. After the Soviet army occupied Lithuania, the professor was iš dismissed from the o post of rector, the Faculty of Theology and iš Philosophy was closed and he was removed from his professorship. S. This site has moved į Vilnius. 1941 m. The Provisional Government of Lithuania appointed jį He was a professor at the University of Vilnius, but he no longer worked. When his health weakened, S. Šalkauskis left for į Šiauliai, where he 1941 m. died in ir the winter. S. Šalkauskis, the most famous representative of neo-Scholastic philosophy in Lithuania, was V. He later became a soloist. In his works on general questions of philosophy, he argued that philosophy is "Royal science", independent of special sciences, promoted the principle of harmony ir of knowledge of faith. Spiritual culture and people’s views were considered by Šalkauskis S. as a decisive factor in society’s life. He linked the distinctiveness of Lithuanian national culture su Eastern ir Western nations * Idem. P. 5. 8 Šalkauskis S. Theory of terminology ir Lithuanian terminology of philosophy // Logos. 1927, No. 1. 'P. I 7 99 the synthesis of cultures. Šalkauskis S. himself expressed his vocation by determination to carry out "national education through philosophy". He faithfully served this vocation throughout his life. The most important works of Šalkauskas S. are "The framework of cultural philosophy" (1926), "Introduction to Philosophy" (1928), "Civic Education" (1932), "The Ideology of Futurists" (1933), “Lithuanian Nation ir and its Education” (1933), "General Basics of Pedagogy" (1936) ir kt As already mentioned, Šalkauskis was one of S. the creators ir of the terminology of Lithuanian philosophy. At that time, the problem of creating Lithuanian terminology existed ne only as a linguistic, logical, but as a problem of ir social progress. “At the a. beginning of the 20th century, po 40 years of heavy national oppression of tsarism (Lithuanian written cultural life ir prohibition) again risen to science education, faced with many new ir subjects, concepts in su various fields of science, economy, culture, iš politics, on the other hand o — su poorly developed terminology of the Lithuanian language, which until then was mainly used to denote concepts of the art of everyday life. The Lithuanian ir language faced the difficult task of terminologically adopting the diverse historical experience of humanity". The term has been used by scientists of various disciplines. However, iš the initial creation of terms was individual, clearer system of be pre-established ir iš theoretical bases. The creation ir of Lithuanian terminology acquired a more systematic and organized character only after the establishment of the independent Lithuanian state. The term was created to provide a theoretical basis for terminology. 1921 m. was formed the Terminology Commission of the then Ministry of Education. Its Chairperson is appointed J. Jablonski. Members of the Commission K. Būga, A. Dambrauskas, P. Mašiotas, J. Tumas, A. Varnas, A. Vireliūnas, later J. Balčikonis, A. Salys, P. Skardžius, S. Šalkauskiir s, etc. The terminology commission worked for five years. Su The work of the terminology commission officially started the organized creation of Lithuanian terminology. The best linguists of the time did considerable work on du terminology to — K. Buga ir J. Jablonski. K. He contributed greatly to the creation of terms in language science, he himself proposed a number of terms, he ir participated in the work of the 1921—1924 Terminology Commission, in his articles he examined various terminology issues, Jablonskis created the terminology of Lithuanian J. grammar, he himself actively participated in the creation of Lithuanian terms in other sciences, necessary for ir school. He led the Terminology Commission and took care of how to better organize the terminology work. J. Jablonski's terminological views provided the theoretical foundations for the development of Lithuanian terminology. Po K. Boogs ir J. After Jablonski’s death, the journal “Gimtoji kalba” helped to establish ti the theoretical principles of activity, to confirm the requirements for terminology and to manage terminology in practice. (1933—1941). S. “The basic principles of terminology production”, where he attempts to formulate the rules of terminology work. In the Lithuanian Language Society, a terminology section was formed, which took care of terminology matters. So it can be said, "that 9 Vaišvila A. The Science of Logic in Lithuania. V., 1980. P. 11-12. 100 XX a. pirmaisiais dešimtmečiais susidarė nacionalinė terminologijos mokykla, pasirėmusi ir pačios lietuvių literatūrinės kalbos kūrimo bei norminimo pamatais ir lietuvių bei kitų kalbų terminologijos patyrimu “1°, Šalia kitų mokslo sričių terminijos ypatingas dėmesys buvo skiriamas filosofijos terminijai. According to S. Šalkauskas, the terminology of philosophy “is increasingly important because it includes almost all abstract terms of general content, which have great significance for the whole intellectual life and, by the way, for special sciences”- *?., S. Šalkauskas’s terminology legacy consists of two parts: 1) the study of terminology theory “Theory of terminology and Lithuanian terminology of philosophy”, published in the journal “Logos”, and 2) the dictionary of philosophy terms “General terminology of philosophy” (1938). The dictionary contained about 1600 Lithuanian philosophical terms with their French, German and Russian equivalents and explanations of their usage. S. Šalkauskis became interested in theoretical terminology issues before he began to standardize Lithuanian terminology in philosophy. In his work "Theory of terminology and Lithuanian terminology of philosophy" he laid out the theory of term creation and standardization. S. Šalkauskis, beginning to explain his theory, emphasizes that in terminology the science of language closely coincides with the science of philosophy, so that in this field not only philosophers or only linguists are competent. And only by the joint efforts of linguists, philosophers or otherwise interested scientists can scientific terminology be created!2. S. Šalkauskis explains the importance of this connection by describing the term itself. The term, as a word, belongs to the science of grammar, as a concept, it belongs to the science of logic, and as a concept, having a certain special content, it belongs to the corresponding science, into the object of which this concept is included. Thus, the general question of terminology simultaneously touches the fields of logic and grammar, thus belonging to the science of language and philosophy. ; "S. Šalkauskis believes that terminology requires a kind of discipline; which would combine the data of linguistics and philosophy’®. S. Šalkauskis doubts whether the philosophy of language proposed by R. Bytautas can be recognized as a separate philosophical discipline, since not every subject that comes into contact with philosophy is included in the science of philosophy. According to him, the subject of philosophy of language, as far as it falls within the scope of philosophy, can be studied in logic, psychology and philosophy of culture in individual respects. Emphasizing that terminology is not a separate, independent discipline of science, S. Šalkauskis considers it a special part of semantics. In this sense, he concluded that the term is inseparable from the mark and from the concept of the concept. The philosopher emphasizes that “theory of terminology must also take into account what logic, psychology and philosophy of culture say about the general facts of language and its manifestations. 10 Keinys S. The Revolution of Science and Technology and the Development of Lithuanian Terminology //The Development of the Culture of the Scientific Language and of Lithuanian Terminology: Issues of Lithuanian Linguistics. V., 1985. T. 24, P. 182, 11 Šalkauskis S. Min. veik. 1925. No. 1. P.4. 12 See ibid. P. 2. 13 Ibid. 101 the foundations“! *, Especially this is important supposedly when it comes to the terminology of philosophy. S. Salkauskis emphasizes that when compiling Lithuanian terminology of philosophy it is necessary to take into account the requirements he has raised and he himself pays a lot of attention to this. To discuss the meaning and characteristics of the term, S. Šalkauskis starts from the origin and primary meaning of the term itself. He mentions that it is the Latin word terminus, meaning the final boundary where something ends. The transfer of the word term into the field of philosophy and the analogous application to it of its primary meaning gave the term a new meaning — jj was understood as the final element or the beginning, which is accessible in the analysis of a thing. S. Šalkauskis, transferring the primary meaning of the term from analogy to the fields of logic, grammar and writing, describes the term in three ways — as perceptual, verbal and written. The philosopher very consistently sets out the evolution of the perception of the term itself. Suppose we have to perceive some object. The perception of the essence of the object ends with the formation of the concept, and the concept of the mind is expressed by spoken or written word, and the word is already “the real term, i.e. the end, or the limit, which the knowledge reaches, is expressed in a superlative way”!5, Thus, first of all, S. Šalkauskis discusses the term from the side where it relates to philosophy, describes it as a perceptual term. S. Šalkauskis states that in modern times, when special sciences have greatly expanded, the understanding of the term has narrowed; a term is a narrower concept than a word in general. The philosopher emphasizes that a term is a word that means a concept, but not any concept, but one that has a special meaning for some subject of science. In explaining the signs, S. Šalkauskis distinguishes several groups of them — natural and contractual Zenkles, formal and instrumental, revealing and representing Zenkles. A word is usually an agreed sign, because, according to S. Šalkauskas, the relationship between the word as a sign and the thing it represents is not natural, but only arbitrarily determined or agreed. The philosopher also describes the word as an instrumental sign, because the word is a tool, an instrument for expressing a thing and a concept related to it. And to the understanding of the deepest meaning of the word, in his opinion, is accessible through the statement that words are "revealing signs for concepts and representing signs for things"'*. After setting out the peculiarities of the sign, word and concept, S. Šalkauskis returns to the definition of the term: "a term is always a verbal sign representing a thing and revealing a concept"- *". However, not all such words are terms. In order for such a word sign to become a term, it must enter the field of some science and be scientifically processed. The philosopher shows the difference between the meaning of a word and its meaning, and the relationship between the meaning of a word and its meaning is included in the description of the term. According to him, the meaning of a word depends on the thing it represents, and the meaning of a word depends on the concept that corresponds to the signifying thing. The definition of a word is nothing more than a precise indication of what concept lies at the basis of the word. Thus, to define the term of science is to determine the relationship of its meaning and meaning with the concept on which it is based. S. Šalkaus14 Ibid. P.5. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. P. 9. 17 Ibid., 1927. No. 1. P. 9. 102 ES TR TPE Ry Ąą ai i a Ne AR a Utd tip kis emphasizes that the discussion of a term must always go hand in hand with the discussion of the concept it represents- ." Therefore, there can be no well-developed terminology where the subject of science is not well-developed, but on the other hand, the development of the scientific subject can only take place in conjunction with the development of the corresponding terminologsu y. ; S. Šalkauskis was the first to examine the categories of terminology and the ways of expressing them. He notes that he had to discuss the ways of expressing terms in terms of logic and ontology, which is foreign to linguists. This approach was difficult because the categories of ontology set very broad boundaries and can be understood and interpreted differently. The philosopher discusses the two main categories of ontology —substance and transcendence and gives the following definition of them: “substance is the self-existent being, i.e., that which has existence in itself, while transcendence is that which has existence in something else, namely, substance”! ?. The philosopher explains that terminology examines the facts of thought, taking into į account the relationships with language, i.e. with those means of expression that correspond to them. On the one hand, according to the modes of being or states, modes of perception or categories of thought are formed, on the other — according to the modes of perception, modes of expression or categories of terminology are formed. According to him, a category of terms is a group of terms, typical by their gender, usually by their suffix, corresponding to a group of concepts having a certain commonality. — ir Following Aristotele ir medieval logicians, S. Šalkauskis distinguishes substance- -subject ir substance-object. The substance-subject being a living being is first and foremost man, so it acts, happens, ir determines, consciously relates and is an active manifestation of quality. Accordingly, S. Šalkauskis distinguishes four more types of this category: the subject of action, the subject of development-establishment, the subject of quality and the subject of relationship. The subject-substance is usually an inanimate object, less frequently a living being, rarely a human being. ir ir The substance-object is affected, used as a secondary substance as a tool, a means, finally an object in which everything fits. ar — The philosopher presents ir four types of this category: the object of action, the secondary material, the tool or the object of capacity. ir S. Šalkauskis described in great detail the inventory of the means of making these terminology categories, provided tables in which he indicated which endings of the adverbs are characteristic of one ar category of terminology. ar S, In his theory of terminology, Šalkauskis presents the sources of term creation and describes the usage of terms. It distinguishir es and discusses three main sources of terms. Some terms are taken from the living language of the People to be iš adapted specifically to the language of ir science, others are newly formed according to the laws of language — by analogy with its typical manifestations, the third group of terms is ir simply borrowed su from other languages. ir iš The sources of terminology discussed by S. Šalkauskas are also important for the development of current terminology, but he did not mention the common language, iš which is one of the main sources of modern terminology creation. 18 Zr. Idem. P. 10. 12 Ibid., 1934. No. 1. P, 7. 103 According to S. Šalkauskas, there are four main ways in which dialect words are introduced into scientific terminology. It is the refinement of the meaning and meaning of words, the expansion of meaning, the narrowing of meaning and the elevation of meaning by analogy. Speaking of the second source of terminology, the philosopher notes that new words can be formed in two ways: by inventing new words and by stirring up words. In the latter case, enriched words are formed, and he calls the creation of new words with prepositions, suffixes and endings the creation of new words. S. Šalkauskis emphasizes that the novel must be typical in its gender, so novels must be formed according to separate categories of concepts. Important are the requirements raised by S. Šalkauskas, which must be applied when borrowing terms from other languages. In his opinion, borrowing foreign words is justified only when “the required term cannot be obtained either by adapting a word from ordinary people’s language, or by forming a new term by means of digging or deducing- *20, S. Salkauskis was the first to attempt to formulate the basic principles of terminology. In 1927, he presented them in the second issue of the journal Logos, and in 1935 he published them in the journal Gimtoji kalba in an article entitled „Pagrindiniai terminų kūrimo principai- “. The author hoped that more people interested in terminology would read “Native Language” and would find it important to get acquainted with his thoughts. S. Šalkauskis tried to establish common principles for the creation of terms in all branches of science, dividing them into three groups: principles of antiquity, principles of innovation and principles of evolution. The ancient principles include the principle of maximum use („it is neither desirable to borrow a foreign term nor to produce a new one of your own, if it is possible to satisfactorily adapt a word of the human language for the purpose of science“- *?*) and the principle of traditional adoption (no word established in the language can be removed from scientific circulation without clearly justified reasons). These principles are also relevant to today's terminology. The principles of innovation he formulated are also important — the principles of typicality, maximum usefulness and aesthetics, because the current terminology also requires that the newly created term be typical, functionalally suitable for new derivatives. S. Šalkauskis presented only two principles of evolution — categorical termination (“the use of typical endings for producing terms according to the corresponding categories of concepts must be kept alive in the language circulation and consistently developed to the limits of its right”*?- *) and the change of the meaning and meaning of words (where necessary, the meaning and meaning of words must be changed in such ways as could be confirmed by the laws of the sciences of language and logic). S. Šalkauskas’s principles for creating terms were significant at the time, because most of the new Lithuanian terms were created taking them into account. S. Šalkauskis applied his theory of terminology in practice, standardizing the terminology of philosophy. The already mentioned dictionary of philosophy terms prepared by S. Šalkauskas 20 Ibid., 1927. No. 1. P. 24, 21 Šalkauskis S. Basic principles of terminology //Gimtoji kalba, 1935, No. 4, P. 10. 49—50, 22 Ibid. P. 51. 104