6-oji tarptautinė mokslinė konferencija „Moksliniai, administraciniai ir edukaciniai terminologijos lygmenys“

Terminologija / Terminology 2025, No. 32, p. 1–7 Contents link ISSN 2669-2198 (electronic / online) Copyright © 2025 Eglė Ingelevičiūtė-Jablonskienė. Published by the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. // Published by the Lithuanian Language Institute. This article is open access, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction of the content in any media, provided that the author and source are acknowledged. Received: / Gauta: 2025-11-10. Accepted: / Priimta: 2025-11-14. 1 6TH INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC TERMINOLOGY CONFERENCE “SCIENTIFIC, ADMINISTRATIVE AND EDUCATIONAL LEVEL OF TERMINOLOGY” 6th International Scientific Conference “Scientific, Administrative and Educational Dimensions of Terminology” EGLĖ INGELEVIČIŪTĖ-JABLONSKIENĖ Institute of Lithuanian Language El. email: [email protected] ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2644-4920 https://doi.org/10.35321/term32-11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On October 16-17, the Institute of Lithuanian Language hosted the 6th International Scientific Conference on Terminology “Scientific, Administrative and Educational Terminology”. This conference can be called jubilee – the first conference with this name was held ten years ago, in 2015. The conference was held in a hybrid way: participants and listeners came both live and connected remotely. A total of 34 papers were read – many scientific researches, terminology tools, various terminology directions were presented. The speakers represented as many as 18 countries. As in previous years, the conference was actively attended by scholars from Spain, France, Sakartvelo, Poland, Hungary, Latvia and, of course, Lithuania, but there were also presentations from terminologists from such distant countries as Canada and Mongolia. The first day began with an important topic, which is discussed in this conference for the first time – the variability of terms. Guest speaker Judit Freixa, representing Pompeu Fabra University, read a presentation on the term variability and the analysis of terms related to climate change. She examined how the form and meaning of the terms in this field differ in different contexts, and 2 argued that these differences reflect both linguistic and semantic changes, revealing the flexible nature of environmental terminology. The term global warming, as a variant of global heating, reflects attempts to adapt the terminology to communicational, ideological and cultural needs. According to the researcher, variability in the climate change discourse is not a flaw – the term can serve not only as a label, but also as a means of communication. The topic of variability was also touched by other speakers: Fátima Noronha, representing the University of Algarve, spoke about the diastratic variability of terms in the Mediterranean diet, where traditional communities seem to assume the role of specialists, and explained how different discursive communities influence the terminology in this area. Variability was also mentioned in another, increasingly relevant topic – artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models. Although the issue of AI was already discussed at the last conference, this time it was discussed in much greater detail. This is not surprising: the sudden breakthrough of AI technologies is significantly changing many fields, including terminology research, where AI tools are increasingly used to create, analyze and systematize terms. This is also clear from the reports. Mojca Pecman, a guest speaker from the Université de la Ville de Paris, spoke on the first topic of AI. The researcher reviewed the use of AI tools in terminology, specifically, the integration of generative AI (GDI) into the terminology analysis system ARTES used at the University, especially with regard to new terms and variantity. After discussing the relationship between terminology, textual linguistics and AI, M. Pecman presented the protocol used to evaluate GDI tools in the context of new term analysis and a survey of master students on the use of GDI tools. Students say that AI facilitates terminology work. Barbara Heinisch of the University of Vienna had a more negative view of AI, arguing that while large language models can facilitate some terminology work, they also pose the risk of language homogenization. An Austrian researcher presented a case study. She investigated how ChatGPT handled university terminology in three variants of German: Austrian, South Tyrolean, and Standard German. ChatGPT, despite requests, usually provided the most popular terms in Standard German, and in some cases pseudoterms. Other speakers also spoke about the practical use of AI in terminology. Egidijus Zaikauskas, working in the Directorate-General for Translation of the European Commission, examined the term management by means of AI. He stated that the Directorate can deal more efficiently with extremely large flows of texts thanks to the DI, since the DI tools help to select terms from texts, analyze them, describe them, select the equivalents of terms in various translation languages, and also raised the question of how reliable the terminological data obtained by the DI tools are, and whether it is possible to teach the DI to respect the rules and traditions of terminology management. Dace Šostaka also questioned the reliability of the terms obtained by such means. Representing a group of researchers from the University of Latvia – Maksims Čižikovs, Juris Borzovs, Jānis Zuteris – she presented a specialized large 3 language model, which was developed to automatically generate Latvian equivalents of English information and communication technology terms, since there is a rapid increase of new terms in this field, especially English ones. The topic of knowledge models can also be linked to AI, as Piotras Nagórka from the University of Warsaw examined whether such models can be used as tools to test hypotheses. In summary, it can be said that the use of AI tools in terminology not only has many prospects, but also poses challenges. The question of synonymy is also inseparable from the question of variantity, which has been raised at this conference for many years, but this time it was discussed only in the presentation of Asta Mitkevičienė, a researcher and head of the Terminology Center of the Lithuanian Language Institute. After examining the minutes of the meetings of the VLKK Subcommission on Terminology, in total about 600 comments related to synonymy, she concluded that the number of synonyms in the dictionaries of terms under consideration is usually reduced, but sometimes increased, and in certain cases the status of synonyms is changed. Polysemy phenomenon was discussed more extensively at the conference. This was the topic of the third guest speaker, Hendrik Kockaert from the Catholic University of Leuven, who opened the second day of the conference. He examined the contradiction between context and polysemy and the delicate relationship between terms and concepts, particularly relevant in the context of ISO 704. Using examples related to trawlers, the researcher sought to show that the choice of terms and the writing of definitions are closely related to the contextual dimensions of conceptual systems. According to him, polysemy and context should be given special attention in ISO 704 because of their pivotal role in terminology. Igor Kudashev from the University of Tampere in Finland also spoke about polysemy. He discussed the concept of nomenclature and compared various assessments of it. At this conference, a relatively new topic, little discussed in previous conferences, was an engaging talk – the phenomenon was discussed in detail in three presentations. Mylène Larivière from the University of Montreal, Canada, was the first to present the development of gender-neutral language resources for health text writers and workers. According to her, such a need is determined by the binary grammatical gender in French, since such a gender is linked to extralinguistic realities and can determine power relations. The researcher created the resource based on texts, anticipated that it will be tested by non-binary sexuality and health sector professionals. The topic of inclusive speech was extended in the presentation of Vasiliki Chelidoni, a scholar from the Ionian University. She stated that multilingual parallel collections of EU administrative texts could create gender-neutral term bases that would not only be in line with the EU’s values of diversity, equality and inclusion, but could also contribute to improving the quality of machine translation and outputs from major language models. These two presentations were beautifully summed up by Elena Chiocchetti from Eurac Research and her remote co-author Olivier Tolszczuk-Jalbert from the Canadian Government Translation Office, who presented a presentation on the role of the terminologist in inclusive terminology. Speakers suggested that inclusion can be the goal of terminology work and that terminologists should act as advisors: identifying non-inclusive forms of terms, proposing alternatives, explaining when which terms should be used, and disseminating inclusive terms. As in previous conferences, this year a 4 number of presentations reviewed the state of national terminology. A group of researchers from the ELTE Linguistics Research Centre – Veronika Lipp, Dóra Mária Tamás, Gábor Prószéky – presented a draft of a national strategy for Hungarian terminology. As part of this project, the Hungarian Centre for Linguistic Research established the National Terminology Harmonization Centre, which aims to create a central terminology portal and a multilingual national term database. Ágota Fóris and Ádám Rixer, researchers at the Charles Gaspar University of the Hungarian Reformed Church, presented a report on the status and terminology of the Hungarian legal and administrative language. Their investigation highlighted three closely related aspects: the importance of creating a common national and regional terminology policy, the requirement of intelligibility in legal and administrative documents, and the bilingualism of Hungarian and English in legal and administrative academic language. The speakers stated that the legal and administrative terminology strategy should be aligned with the general Hungarian terminology strategy and recommended the model of additional bilingualism. Lia Karosanidze and Linda Giorgadze, researchers at the Arnold Chikoba Linguistics Institute of Tbilisi State University, presented the term bank in their country, the online version of the term bank and related work. At the same time, the terminology situation in Sakartvelo was discussed. According to them, "terminology is a reflection of national politics." Albina Auksoriūtė, researcher of the Terminology Centre of the Lithuanian Language Institute, spoke about terminology policy and its legal regulation in Lithuania: she reviewed the laws on the state language Lithuanian, the activities of the State Commission on the Lithuanian Language, the laws and regulations governing the Terms Bank. She emphasized that terminology policy in Lithuania is one of the constituent parts of the state language policy, there is no separate document regulating terminology policy. According to her, state-funded language programs administered by the State Lithuanian Language Commission raise the prestige of the Lithuanian language and increase public interest in the language, contribute to Lithuanian language research and language resources development. However, there are also problems: the number of dictionaries published every year decreases, specialists in various fields do not want to undertake it, since it is not considered a scientific work. In addition, many scientific articles are published in English, and this trend is worrying because Lithuanian terminology is not used or created. The excessive use of English seems to be causing problems not only in Lithuania: Daria Protopopescu, representing the University of Bucharest, who examined the loss of language domains in relation to Romanian cybersecurity terms, said that it is difficult for translators to find suitable equivalents when translating texts in this field, since cybersecurity is a relatively new field and Romanian specialists usually use English terms. The topic of translations was highlighted in other presentations as well – after all, translations have a considerable impact on language development. Maria Crina Herteg from the University of Alba Iulia “1st December 1918”, based on 5 the English and Romanian texts of business contracts, revealed the difficulties of accurately integrating business terminology into translation. Munkhtsetseg Namsrai, a researcher at the Institute of Language and Literature of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, studied the translation of metaphorical terms in economics from English into Mongolian. Using examples such as angel investor, the scholar explained that such metaphorical terms cannot be translated directly into Mongolian because English-speaking and Mongolian cultures are very different and some concepts, such as angel, may remain misunderstood. When translating metaphorical terms, it is necessary to have a good understanding of the cultural and cognitive aspects of the original and the translated language and to adapt the translated terms to the translated language. As usual, the conference discussed not only new, but also traditional term management tools, such as term dictionaries. Isabela Pizarro Sánchez from the University of Valladolid discussed the terminology of food allergens in lexicographic and terminological sources based on a comparative analysis of English and Spanish. It found that the definitions of such allergens are often one-dimensional (for example, celery is defined only as a vegetable without mentioning its potential allergenicity), the terminology is often fragmented (in Spanish, a term may be marked as obsolete even though it has official status in the EU list of allergens) and pragmatic contextualisation is limited (notices of use or references to legal regulations are rarely provided). Marlies Alber from Eurac Research spoke about terminology work in the legal field based on existing legal texts and stressed the need to combine text-based terminology work with a systemic approach and to take into account stakeholders and user needs. Researcher Regina Kvašytė from the Institute of Latvian Language of the University of Latvia examined multilingual dictionaries that include both Latvian and Lithuanian terms. The oldest such dictionary is the Dictionary of Economic Terms published in 1946 at the Baltic University in Germany, and the current terminology (since 1990) contains nine such sources, the latest of which is the Ten-language Dictionary of Natural Geography Terms published in Lithuania in 2019. Aušra Rimkutė-Ganusauskienė, a researcher at the Lithuanian Language Institute, examined the peculiarities of the structure of definitions of species geography terms. She concluded that the most common definition model in the Explanatory Dictionary of Geography Terms is the naming of the logical dominant at the beginning of the definition and after the comma revealing the essential characteristics of the definition. Historical aspects of terminology were explored in more than one paper, for example, by analysing groups of terms in older sources. Alvydas Umbrasas, a researcher of the Terminology Centre of the Lithuanian Language Institute, spoke about personal names in the draft dictionary of legal terms (1920) – this is a field in which the person is both a subject and an object, so personal names are extremely relevant and widely used. Palmira Zemlevičiūtė, a researcher at the same centre, addressed a similar topic – she spoke about anthroponymous names in the first Lithuanian interwar psychiatric textbook and how they became generic terms. Many terms, such as color blindness, parkinsonism, originated from famous scientists in medicine and other fields who first 6 the names of those who described or were otherwise involved in the relevant phenomena. Beatrice Ragazzini of the University of Bologna examined the history of scientific debates between experts in the 19th century in order to investigate the role of terms in the development of science, and concluded that there is a close interrelationship between the history of science and names and classifications. Dalibor Vrgoč, who represented Croatia and the Croatian Language Institute, told about Israel’s war against Hezbollah in 2006: one of the key reasons for Israel’s defeat was poor terminology: because of its excessive abstractness and ambiguity, the soldiers who received instructions did not always understand them properly. Of course, not a single report, in addition to those already mentioned, was focused on the scientific field, theoretical and methodological issues. Ramunė Vaskelaitė, a researcher at the Lithuanian Language Institute, discussed the evaluation and application of the principle of term brevity, which receives less attention in terminology works than other principles applied to terminology. Jana Levická, from the Institute of Linguistics of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, spoke about determination based on text-based research on the term narratives. She examined the use of the term in specialized and journalistic texts, studied the collocations of the term in these texts, thus revealing the differences in usage. Regarding texts, they were certainly used in more than one study presented at the conference, but in the presentation of Mykolas Romeris University researchers Olga Usinskienė and Sigita Rackevičienė texts were the object of research itself. They presented a parallel English-Lithuanian textbook of EU migration documents using Sketch Engine and the tools that can be used in this program, including language part marking and lematization functions available from December 2024. Although, according to the researchers, these functions have opened up new possibilities to analyze Lithuanian language data, more improvements are needed to extract Lithuanian terms more efficiently. Some of the researchers of the Lithuanian Language Institute’s papers were distinguished by their interdisciplinary nature – it is difficult to assign them to one thematic direction, because they intersect several aspects of terminology and other branches of linguistics. Lina Rutkienė presented the semantic and grammatical changes of verbs and nouns. According to her, in terms of semantic changes, it is worth mentioning the shift from one categorical meaning to two – one linguistic unit begins to encompass two categorical meanings, which become the constituent elements of the new word’s meaning. And Rima Bakšienė, Agnė Čepaitienė and Jolita Urbanavičienė reviewed Lithuanian equivalents of terms of the International Phonetic Alphabet. The International Phonetic Alphabet, first published in 1886 and used to study the phonetic units of different languages, has been used more widely in Lithuania only since the beginning of the 21st century. However, there is already an official set of TFA signs for the common Lithuanian language, prepared by the authors of the report and approved by the State Lithuanian Language Commission, which has been systematically adapted to Lithuanian dialect sounds. Among the many presentations focused on the scientific and administrative fields, only one was directly related to the educational terminology field. Vesna Lušicky, from the Centre for 7 Translation Studies at the University of Vienna, discussed the CLARIN ERIC system, which connects many universities and research centres, and the resources it contains, which can be perfectly integrated into teaching. However, the more subtle educational aspect was also touched in other presentations, and it was repeatedly raised among the questions asked to the participants by the listeners. During these two days, the conference participants got acquainted not only with scientific discoveries and new researches, but also with Lithuanian culture and language: on the first day they were invited to a virtual journey through the works of Mikalojus Konstantinas Čiurlionis, and on the second day they visited the interactive language museum of the Lithuanian Language Institute “Lithuanian Studies Center”.