МОКСЛО КАЛБОС КУЛТУРОС ИР ТЕРМИНОЛОГИЈОС ПРОБЛЕМОС

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXIV(1985)

REIN KULL

INTERNATIONALIZATION OF TERMINOLOGICAL LEXIS AND CURRENT PROBLEMS OF TERMINOLOGY STANDARDIZATION

1. In our time, under conditions of scientific and technological progress, particular importance attaches to problems arising in connection with the internationalization of terminology. The rapid development of science and production, the deepening of international cooperation, and the expansion of information exchange have brought these problems, along with other issues of interlingual communication, to the fore.

The internationalization of scientific and technical terminology is associated with a whole range of specific problems. As is well known, the international-level standardization of scientific and technical terminology means, first and foremost, the coordination and standardization of conceptual systems. As for standardizing the form of expression, much remains unclear, and there are also many disagreements. Nevertheless, the general internationalization of scientific and technical terminology and the increasing proportion of so-called terminological internationalisms—international terms and term elements—are evident facts.

Of course, one could object that terminological lexis that is international in the full sense of the word does not exist at all. It would be more accurate to speak not of an international, much less a worldwide, unity of terms and term elements, but rather of an interlingual unity in a narrower sense. This is confirmed, if only by the fact that the coincidence of the material form of a term or term element (naturally, excluding certain variations in spelling and sound composition), for example, in twenty languages, does not yet attest to its terminological internationality, since such coincidence characterizes internationality only to a negligible degree, given that there are several thousand languages in the world. Moreover, one can say that terms with the same root also vary across languages, differing not only in form (graphic and phonetic differences, grammatical adaptation), but often in meaning and usage as well. Consequently, the international unity of terms in such a case may be considered illusory. However, these claims—or, rather, an exaggeration of the significance of such phenomena—are easily refuted.

94

There are many languages in the world—from 2,500 to 4,000–5,000, according to various sources¹, but it should be borne in mind that most are spoken languages with small numbers of speakers. These languages are capable of meeting mainly everyday needs and perform only an auxiliary function, nothing more. When it comes to the international coordination and standardization of scientific and technical terminology, however, it is realistic to take into account the more developed languages, which are capable of serving as languages of science and higher education. There are ten times fewer such languages, numbering several hundred². According to our data, only 200 languages have more than a million speakers³. According to the journal “Sprachpflege,” as of 1980, there were 67 official languages of independent countries of the world (across 162 countries), not including the languages of the Soviet Union; adding Russian and the languages of our Union republics gives a total of 82 languages in 163 countries⁴. At this scale, the existence of one and the same term or term element in 20–30 languages indicates a fairly high degree of internationality. In the case of “small” languages (those with few speakers), the existence of one and the same term in some of them and simultaneously in two major world languages carries the same weight⁵.

It is evident that we can speak of greater unity in the linguistic form of terminological-lexis elements primarily with reference to one group or subgroup of related languages (e.g., Indo-European languages, Slavic languages), and on a broader scale, to a particular region of world culture or the area of a language of worldwide significance (e.g., the European-American region, the area of internationalisms among the peoples of the USSR, the East Asian area)⁶. At the same time, the process of the general internationalization of scientific and technical terminology, especially in fields more closely connected with the scientific and technological revolution, is evident. The number of term elements that are widespread not

¹ Eesti nõukogude entsüklopeedia, kd. 4.—Tallinn, 1972, märksõna „Maailma keeled“; Большая советская энциклопедия. 3-е изд.—М., 1978, т. 30, ст. «Языки мира».

² According to specialized literature, of the 2,500–3,000 languages in the world, only 250–300 have a literary form; all the rest are unwritten. See: Beloded, I. K. Language and Social Progress.—In: The Scientific and Technological Revolution and the Functioning of the Languages of the World. Moscow, 1977, p. 5.

³ See: Edasi, 19.11.1970, p. 3.

⁴ Sprachpflege, 1980, no. 7–12; 1981, no. 1–4.

⁵ Cf.: Bush, O., Balduchnik, Y. On Criteria for Identifying Lexical Internationalisms (Predominantly of the European Area).—In: The Scientific and Technological Revolution and Problems of the Culture of the Language of Science and Terminology: Abstracts and Papers.—Vilnius, 1983, p. 19.

⁶ According to V. Akulenko, the world’s languages can be divided on the basis of internationalisms into five largest areas and many subareas.—See: Akulenko, V. V. The Scientific and Technological Revolution and Problems of International Terminology.—In: The Scientific and Technological Revolution and the Functioning of the Languages of the World. Moscow, 1977, pp. 78–79.

95

not only within a single cultural region or the area of a world language, but much more broadly. This includes, for example, the names of international units of measurement⁷. In this sense, one may speak of global isoglosses⁸, or even of a stock of so-called world words⁹. It has been established that there is a whole range of words that, having adapted phonetically and graphically to the conditions of particular languages, have become globally widespread—they are used in the most diverse languages and language groups around the world. Such lexemes include words characterizing modern civilization and everyday life, e.g., coffee, radio, cinema, film, machine, disco, etc.¹⁰ Compared with the general vocabulary of developed literary languages, the number of such “world” words is small; however, it should be borne in mind that the number of such lexemes is growing and that, besides universally adopted direct borrowings, numerous regular morphological correspondences (various types of calques) can also be classed as widely распространенные term internationalisms¹¹. Evidence of global internationalization is also provided by international lists of terms in various fields of contemporary science, compiled in recent years by the International Committee for Terminological Neologisms (ICUTN) and published in the journal Babel of the International Federation of Translators, as well as by the committee’s activities as a whole¹².

The internationalization of terminology is promoted, on the one hand, by ever-expanding and deepening international cooperation in the general standardization of scientific and technical terminology, as a result of which increasing attention is paid to the linguistic correlation of terms. On the other hand, the number of term internationalisms is also growing because, when creating certain neologisms—for example, when naming such widely used products as modern fibrous substances, preparations, and various other materials—there is a conscious attempt to choose a euphonious name that is equally convenient to use in many languages.

2. As in the European-American region, in the area of the Soviet Union (where Russian serves as the means of interethnic communication), terms and term elements of Greco-Latin origin occupy a very important place among the internationalisms mentioned above—

⁷ V. V. Akulenko, op. cit., p. 79.

⁸ Ibid.

⁹ Vesikansa J., Karttunen K., Viherjuuri M. Maailmansanoja Suomessa.— Helsinki, 1980, s. 29—33.

¹⁰ Op. cit., pp. 34—61. (This “little world dictionary” contains 100 words that are widely used around the world.)

¹¹ V. V. Akulenko, op. cit., p. 80.

¹² Stoberski Z. Międzynarodowa terminologia naukowa. Problemy. Postulaty. Oczekiwania.— Warszawa, 1982.— 124 s.

96

...as well as units of special vocabulary from English, French, or another European language of global significance. Comparing the relative weight and use of such internationalisms in Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian, one can say that, despite certain linguistic differences, the terminological vocabularies of these languages have much in common and are analogous ¹³. One characteristic feature of these languages is that parallel use of lexical variants—native and foreign, indigenous and international—is common in their terminological vocabularies. At the same time, members of such pairs that are essentially equivalent are far from always being equal in frequency of use, breadth of application (including derivational possibilities, etc.), semantics, stylistic coloring, and so on.¹⁴ In principle, the same widespread parallel coexistence of native and foreign terms is found in many languages, naturally with their own specific differences and characteristics.

To avoid ill-considered and premature decisions regarding the unification of the linguistic aspect of scientific and technical terminology, the differences among specific lexical strata need to be studied in greater detail, including the specific relation between terminological internationalisms and native expressions in different languages. Comparative and contrastive studies of the terminological vocabularies of different languages, as well as various interlingual lists covering different fields of scientific and technical terminology, would undoubtedly prove useful here. In this respect, it seems necessary both to make a comparative study, using a common methodology, of the general developmental features of the specialized vocabularies of the languages of the union republics, and to compare the contemporary terminological vocabularies of these languages in terms of the use of terminological internationalisms. A computer-based system could be used for this purpose. The aforementioned international lists of terms compiled by ICUTN, as well as the World Bank of Terminological Neologisms (WBTN), being compiled on the basis of this material, could serve as valuable sources. Unfortunately, comparative lists obtained in this way have a significant drawback: they omit national equivalents and parallel expressions for terminological internationalisms. In fact, in many cases, alongside the international term in one or another

¹³ See, for example: K e i n i s S. International Elements in Lithuanian Terminology.—In: Issues in the Development of Scientific and Technical Terminology. Riga, 1973, pp. 140—142; S k u i n y a V. P. The Relation between International Elements in Latvian and Russian Terminology.—Ibid., pp. 145—160.

¹⁴ The pairs of native and foreign terms in Estonian are analyzed in greater detail in Henn Saari’s dissertation and article. See: S a a r i H. Analysis of the Principles of Estonian Terminology: Author’s abstract of a dissertation... Candidate of Philological Sciences.—Tartu, 1981, pp. 19—21, and his article in this collection.

7 Užsak. Nr. 1007

97

national language, a native term is used as an equivalent on an equal footing; moreover, it is not uncommon for the interlingual variant to be used much less frequently despite the presence of a common native term. If such parallel expressions existing in national languages are not taken into account, the picture of the spread of internationalisms will be distorted to some extent, and their relative weight exaggerated. To judge objectively the interlingual spread of terminological internationalisms, more precise lists are needed. In principle, such a more detailed comparison of the terminological vocabularies of different languages is entirely possible if automated terminological data information systems are developed and the opportunities they afford are put to use.

3. Recently, there has generally been a tendency to bring together terminological activities developing in various directions into a single integrated system, in which major terminology centers and automated information and terminology systems would play a significant role. Only in this way can contemporary research capabilities and the development of rapidly evolving scientific and technical terminology be ensured. The Soviet Union has also taken this path. As is known, the central automated ASITO system for standardized terms has been in operation for some time ¹⁵. Other computer-based terminological databases also exist. In the future, a comprehensive system, “Machine Fund of the Russian Language,” is planned, with specialized vocabulary (scientific and technical terminology) as one of its independent components ¹⁶.

Contemporary needs and requirements of terminological unification make it necessary to compare Russian terminology with the national terminology of a given Soviet republic, and vice versa, and sometimes to compare the languages of the union republics with one another. In the future, scientific and technical terminology can be successfully unified on an all-Union scale only if a system is in place that links the union republics in this regard, provided that automated information and terminology systems and banks are used. To this end, the Institute of Language and Literature of the Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR has begun creating a terminological data system based on the use of computers. Developing and deploying such an automated system is a rather complex task, the solution of which is carried out in several stages (com-

¹⁵ See: Scientific and Technical Terminology. 1978, No. 9/10, pp. 4 ff.; 1979, No. 7, pp. 3 ff.; 1980, No. 5, pp. 9 ff.

¹⁶ See: Ershov A. P. On the Methodology of Constructing Dialogue Systems: The Phenomenon of Business Prose.—Problems of Cybernetics. Moscow, 1982, issue 80, pp. 3—20; Viks Ü. Vene keele fond.—Keel ja Kirjandus, 1983, no. 5, pp. 277—278.

98

… definition of the system, selection and fixing of the search image, and thus development of both the input and machine-readable data records, preparation of the relevant programs, testing of the system developed, and accumulation of data for the terminological bank in certain subsystems). It should be borne in mind that the creation of an automated system of terminological data must take place within the framework of developing an integrated system of terminology-information services. We therefore plan to create an integrated terminology-information system that meets modern requirements and will include conventional terminological card files (the consolidated terminological card file of the Institute of Language and Literature of the Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR contains about half a million dictionary cards), terminological dictionaries, reference publications and other supplementary materials, as well as the terminological data bank being created on a computer.

The integrated information and terminology system being created is designed to meet both local and broader needs.

The main tasks of this system are as follows:

a) to promote the study of the scientific and technical terminology and term formation of the national language in question;

b) to provide assistance in resolving specific issues arising in practical terminological work (the terminological bank’s reference and search capabilities, used in training in various specialties, editing and translation, and the ordering, unification and standardization of terminology);

c) to facilitate the preparation of various terminological dictionaries (with the help of a computer linked to the terminological bank, it is easy to generate various lists and indexes of terms; the automated system of terminological data is linked to an automated phototypesetting system);

d) to provide the methodological and software foundations for creating similar automated systems in other Union republics.

The accomplishment of the final task of the system under consideration is connected with the all-Union program “Machine Fund of the Russian Language,” as well as with other all-Union initiatives in the field of rapidly developing scientific and technical terminology.