Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiškumas

doi.org/10.35321/term30-5 Variation in Eponymous Macroeconomic Terms Variation of Macroeconomic Terms with a Personal Name RAMUNĖ VASKELAITĖ Institute of the Lithuanian Language ORCID id: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6063-9699 A B S T R A C T The article examines compound terms formed with personal names and used in Lithuanian macroeconomics textbooks. After reviewing the uncertainties associated with evaluating such terms and the relationship between personal-name terms and eponymous terms, it seeks to reveal the variation in the terms used in these sources. Some causes of this variation and distinctive features of the use of personal-name terms also emerge. KEYWORDS: personal-name term, eponymous term, term variation. A B S T R A C T The article deals with compound terms used in Lithuanian macroeconomics textbooks, which are formed with personal names. It reviews the uncertainties related to the evaluation of such terms, the relationship between the term formed with a personal name and the eponymous term, and aims to reveal the variation of terms used in these sources. Some of the reasons for this variation and the peculiarities of the use of such terms are highlighted. KEYWORDS: term with a proper name, eponymous term, term variation. INTRODUCTION Compound terms formed with personal names are a phenomenon widespread in more than one field, but little studied in Lithuanian terminology research. In discussing various issues of terminology use, individual studies also mention terms such as Omo dėsnis or Ohmo dėsnis, Tomsono efektas or Thomsono efektas (Kaulakienė 2003: 113–114), Boilio ir Marioto Terminologija | 2023 | 30 95 dėsnis, Diuaro indas, Simpsono formulė (Kaulakienė 2014: 60), Doperio greitis, Dekarto koordinatės, Ebšteino sindromas (Gaivenis 1994: 14), pateikiama viena kita pastaba dėl jų vartojimo, bet atskirai tokie terminai beveik nenagrinėjami. Kita vertus, lietuvių terminologijos darbuose dėl jų pateikiamos pastabos ar užsienio terminologijos darbuose plačiau plėtojamos diskusijos tokių terminų vartojimo klausimu rodo, kad su asmenvardžiais sudaryti terminai kelia įvairių neaiškumų ir prieštaravimų. For example, several works by Lithuanian authors mention such terms when discussing eponymous terms, but their relationship to eponymous terms is characterized in not entirely uniform ways. Laimutė Kitkauskienė explicitly identifies terms formed with a personal name as eponymous, stating that the article adopts the position that “a term containing in its structure a proper noun—a personal name, the name of a city, village, other geographical place, country or nation, or tribe—is to be called eponymous” (Kitkauskienė 2011: 48). Thus, in examining the terminology of architecture, art, and construction, L. Kitkauskienė treats as eponymous terms not only one-word terms derived from a personal name, such as gobelenas (cf. Gobelin), makadamas (cf. McAdam) or mauzoliejas (cf. Mauzolo), but also compound terms containing a personal name, such as Simmlerio baldai, Medici porcelianas ar Viktorijos stilius, which can be described as formed with a personal name. It would appear that Jurgita Mikelionienė also regards both types as eponymous terms, although her article examines only the former—concept names that have become common nouns and are written with a lowercase letter1. Treating them as the result of appellativization (the process by which a proper noun becomes a common noun), she notes that eponymous terms are divided into fully and partially appellativized ones, and gives two compound terms as examples of partial appellativization: Cezario pjūvis, Bertoleto druska (Mikelionienė 2017: 129). It would follow that compound terms in which the personal name has not become a common noun are also considered eponymous, but are distinguished from one-word terms by their degree of appellativization. However, the definition of an eponymous term offered—“concept names derived from a proper noun” (Mikelionienė 2017: 127)—might prompt doubt as to whether such terms are indeed considered eponymous. L. Kitkauskienė’s definition, by contrast, would indicate that these are primarily terms containing a proper noun 1 In J. Mikelionienė’s article, they are further subdivided into terms phonetically adapted to the Lithuanian language system (e.g., koloradas, celsijus, siluetas, bernardinas) and derivatives (e.g., spartakiada, bergsonizmas, jakobianas). 96 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variant iškumas concept names formed from words—terms containing a proper noun in their structure. By contrast, one master’s thesis that also examines eponymous terms appears to distinguish between the two. It considers as eponymous terms only one-word concept names that have the status of common nouns, e.g., fermis, mendelevis, kleveitas, whereas compound concept names containing a proper noun are called proper-name terms or terms containing a proper noun, but not eponymous terms; for example: “In total, 247 Lithuanian terms were selected from the dictionary during the study, of which 136 were proper-name terms (i.e., containing a proper noun, or, in other words, an onym), and 111 were eponymous terms, i.e., terms derived from a proper noun <...>” (Ulkyte 2016: 27). The tendency to regard as eponymous only concept names that no longer have the status of proper nouns is also suggested by the title of this master’s thesis—Tikriniai žodžiai ir eponimai chemijos terminijoje. It is true that terminology studies published in other languages, particularly those discussing eponymous medical terms, focus first and foremost on concept names containing a proper noun (e.g., Duque–Parra et al. 2006; Becker et al. 2021; Dyda, Pronińska 2021); however, other studies show that the concept of an eponymous term also includes both these and concept names that have lost the status of proper nouns and become common nouns (e.g., Cappuzzo 2008; Kucharz 2020). These studies, as well as observations made by Lithuanian terminologists, reveal another uncertainty or contradiction concerning terms containing a personal name: the question of their terminological value. In an article published in 1994, “Applying International Principles of Terminology to Our Terminology,” Kazimieras Gaivenis cited the commemoration of scientists, discoverers, or inventors as a positive feature of terms formed from their surnames, but also pointed out their shortcoming: these terms are insufficiently motivated (Gaivenis 1994: 14). The terminological value of such terms is widely debated in foreign-language terminology studies, where they are discussed extensively as eponymous terms, with particular attention given to their acceptability in medical terminology. The advantages cited for such terms include honoring distinguished people, their historical and cultural value, brevity, practicality, and facilitating communication, among others (e.g., Whitworth 2007; Cappuzzo 2008); their disadvantages, however, include inaccuracy, ambiguity, lack of informativeness, and other issues, as well as impeding communication (e.g., Duque–Parra et al. 2006; Woywodt, Matteson 2007; Cappuzzo 2008; Kucharz 2020; Kevlian et al. 2023). Terminologija | 2023 | 30 97 These contradictions are also reflected in terminology management. K. Gaivenis identified contradictions in international terminology management in the article mentioned above, discussing the difficulties that arise when attempting to apply international terminology-management principles to Lithuanian terminology. One such difficulty he noted was the contradictory recommendations in international codes regarding the use of terms formed from the surnames of scientists, discoverers, or inventors: their use is prohibited in the international code of anatomical nomenclature, restricted in the international code of zoological nomenclature, and permitted without any restrictions in technical terminology (Gaivenis 1994: 217). It has also been observed that such terms are avoided in some Lithuanian terminology dictionaries. The Medicinos terminų žodynas was cited as an example, in which they have almost all been replaced by other terms. Other terminographic sources, however, show that terms formed with personal names are included in dictionaries, for example, in the Chemijos terminų aiškinamąjį žodyną (Daukšas et al. 2003), the multilingual Fizikos terminų žodyną (Palenskis et al. 2007), the Aiškinamąjį geografijos terminų žodyną (Kavaliauskas et al. 2021), and they are plentiful in the Aiškinamajame ekonomikos anglų–lietuvių kalbų žodyne (AEKŽ 2006). Such terms are particularly abundant in dictionaries of eponymous terms (e.g., Firkin, Whithworth 2001; Barankin et al. 2004), one of which—the Traumatologijos ir ortopedijos eponimai: simptomai ir sindromai (Kasradze, Kasradze 2015)—was also published in Lithuanian. Observations in terminology studies also suggest that such terms are widely used. As early as 1994, K. Gaivenis stated that they were abundant in all fields of science, especially in the terminology of medicine, technology, physics, and mathematics (Gaivenis 1994: 14). Angelė Kaulakienė also provides examples of terms formed from the surnames of scientists or inventors in her examination of physics terminology (e.g., Kaulakienė 2014: 60), while J. Mikelionienė, choosing to survey the one-word eponymous terms included in the 2013 edition of the Tarptautinių terminų žodyną, notes that this dictionary contains few compound terms such as Cezario pjūvis or Bertoleto druska, although they are very common in usage (Mikelionienė 2017: 129). The updated Terminų žodynų rengimo bendrieji reikalavimai, approved by a protocol resolution of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language at its meeting of 20 December 2007, indicate that terminology management is already tending to recognize such terms more explicitly. The document does not state that they should be used, but point 29 of this document regulating the compilation of terminology dictionaries specifies that “[P]reference is given to the original forms of proper names used as components of terms (except in traditional cases). Terms with 98 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiškumas adaptuotomis formomis pateikiami nuorodiniais straipsniais“ (TŽR 2007). Išeitų, kad su tikriniais žodžiais, taigi ir asmenvardžiais, sudaryti terminai laikomi sudedamąja terminų žodynų (vadinasi, ir terminijos) dalimi. Beje, jų jau minima ir naujajame lietuvių kalbos rašybos taisyklių sąvade – 2022 m. išėjusiame leidinyje Lietuvių kalbos rašyba: taisyklės, komentarai, patarimai (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 137–138), tiesa, pirmenybę teikiant ne originalioms formoms. Tiksliau, aptariant įvairių pavadinimų rašymą, čia aptariamas ir terminų rašymas, o jį aptariant suformuluojama, kad kitų kalbų asmenvardžiai ir vietovardžiai paprastai transkribuojami, pvz.: Omo dėsnis, Stjudento skirstinys, Brauno procesas, Bugero ir Vėberio dėsnis, Džaulio dėsnis, Kocho mėginys, Elžbietos stilius, Eustachijaus vamzdis, Tyzenhauzo kilimai (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 137–138). Palyginti su Terminų žodynų rengimo bendraisiais reikalavimais, lyg ir susidarytų dar vienas su asmenvardiniais terminais susijęs prieštaravimas, tačiau, žinoma, tie reikalavimai orientuoti į specialiąsias bendrinės kalbos vartojimo sritis, o kalbamasis rašybos taisyklių sąvadas – pirmiausia į bendrąją vartoseną. As can be seen, there are many contradictions and uncertainties related to complex terms containing personal names; however, apart from the aforementioned master’s thesis and several articles in which attempts have been made to view such terms as eponyms, Lithuanian terminologists have perhaps barely examined them, possibly because of their questionable terminological value, although personal names themselves receive considerable attention in works across various branches of linguistics (e.g., Kniūkšta 2004; Ambrazas 2008; Baltrušaitienė 2009; Gudelienė 2016). Yet, as it turns out, it would be relevant to examine various aspects of the names of concepts formed with personal names, for example, their prevalence, structural or semantic features, synonymy, and variation. This study approaches such terms from the perspective of variation, selecting the terminology of macroeconomics, one of the two constituent parts of economic theory, as its subject. Thus, the aim of the study is to examine tendencies in the variation of terms formed with personal names in macroeconomic terminology. The sources used for this terminology are eight randomly selected macroeconomics textbooks for higher education2, covering 2 The textbooks are mostly titled simply Macroeconomics. However, a macroeconomics course may be presented not only in a separate macroeconomics textbook but also in an economic theory textbook, which devotes sections to macroeconomics and microeconomics. Accordingly, two economic theory textbooks (Andr, Jak) were also used as sources, specifically the sections covering macroeconomics. All the sources examined were prepared in Lithuanian, with only one being a translation (W). Terminologija | 2023 | 30 99 the period 1994–2017 (they are listed in the bibliography and, when examples are given in the text, will be designated by abbreviations typical of terminology research). The objectives of the study are to extract from these sources terms formed with personal names, identify their variants, assess the variants from the perspective of the typology of term variation, and highlight the main features of variation characteristic of these terms. Examining the variation of these terms should also bring to light at least some of the causes of variation characteristic of them. Nevertheless, before proceeding to the analysis, the question of terminology still needs to be resolved, since the discussion of the uncertainties associated with terms containing personal names has already revealed that the terminology relating to the phenomenon selected for examination here is also quite inconsistent. The article will examine only terms whose components include a personal name (or names) that retains its status as a proper noun and is written with a capital letter. If such terms are studied as eponyms, they could be distinguished from other kinds of eponymic terms—one-word names of concepts in which a proper noun has become a common noun—by a term reflecting their structural features, namely, complex eponymic terms (see Kitkauskienė 2011). In this article, however, terms containing personal names will not be considered from the perspective of eponymy; moreover, the term complex eponymic terms would not distinguish terms formed with personal names from those formed with other kinds of proper names. Using the classification of proper names customary in onomastics, they could be called anthroponymic terms; this would distinguish terms formed with personal names from those formed with names of other living beings (mythonyms, zoonyms) or non-living entities (e.g., toponyms). In terminology, however, a different naming tradition seems to be taking shape. For instance, in several works A. Kaulakienė has referred to terms formed with the surnames of scholars or inventors as surname-based terms (e.g., Kaulakienė 2014: 60). Yet terms are formed not only with surnames but also with given names, as in Victorian style or Napoleonic style, so K. Gaivenis’s term personal-name terms is more convenient for discussing them. It should be noted, however, that, judging from K. Gaivenis’s comment3, he used personal-name terms to refer not only to complex terms formed with a personal name, 3 K. Gaivenis noted that Lithuanian has two types of personal-name terms: one-word terms (džaulis, kelvinas, rentgenas, voltas, etc.) and complex terms (Archimedo dėsnis, Adisono liga, Ebšteino sindromas, etc.). He also mentioned personal-name terms formed with an adjective, which are popular in Russian terminology (e.g., markovskij proces), but noted that such terms should be avoided in Lithuanian, where they would be considered nonstandard (Gaivenis 1994: 14). 100 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiškumas but also to one-word terms derived from personal names, e.g., džaulis, kelvinas, omas, rentgenas. If it were necessary to distinguish between the two, the terms one-word personal-name terms and complex personal-name terms could be used; however, this article will examine only the latter, and in this context the term personal-name terms will suffice. As is also evident from the recently published Lithuanian spelling guide mentioned above, personal names are conventionally understood as proper nouns that designate people and are further subdivided into official personal names (given names and surnames) and unofficial personal names (nicknames, pseudonyms, etc.) (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 101). The macroeconomics textbooks yielded only complex terms formed with official personal names; accordingly, the term personal-name terms used here will cover only terms formed with such names, most of which, as will become clear, are formed with a surname (or several surnames). It can also be stated in advance that all personal-name terms found in the macroeconomics textbooks are formed only with non-Lithuanian personal names (adapted or unadapted); therefore, the term personal-name terms used here will cover only such terms, and there will be no hesitation in referring to a personal name as a foreign name. 1. GENERAL DATA ON VARIATION AND TYPOLOGY OF VARIATION A survey of the compound anthroponymic terms—henceforth referred to simply as anthroponymic terms in this article—selected from eight macroeconomics textbooks for higher education shows that they are used inconsistently across the sources. The 1997 edition of Foundations of Macroeconomics contains just five such terms: Phillips curve Dril 48, Laffer curve Dril 142, Say’s law Dril 72, Fisher equation Dril 46, and Keynesian economic theory Dril 73. There are not many more in the translated textbook published in 1994—15: Phillips curve W 248, Say’s law W 170, Gresham’s law W 44, Okun’s law W 118 (and Okun’s law W 406), Malthus’s problem W 315 (and Malthus’s problem W 402), Pigou effect W 170, Barro theory W 336, Gramm-Rudman Act W 194, 197, Humphrey-Hawkins Act W 266, and so on. In addition, some anthroponymic terms appear only in the Glossary of Special Terms at the end of the textbook and are not used in the text: Engel’s laws W 395, Fisher equation W 396, Lorenz curve W 402, Keynesian economic theory W 399. However, for example, in the textbook prepared by a team of authors at Vilnius University, the most recent of the macroeconomics textbooks reviewed (published Terminologija | 2023 | 30 101 in 2017), 42 terms formed with one or more personal names are used, while Remigijus Čiegis’s 2013 Macroeconomics contains as many as 62. On this basis, it would be easy to assume that anthroponymic terms are becoming more widespread. Two circumstances, however, immediately prompt us to qualify this assumption. First, quite a large number of such terms were already used in the 2006 Vilnius University textbook (on which the 2017 textbook was based), as well as in Kaunas University of Technology’s 2008 Macroeconomics: 38 and 43 terms, respectively. By contrast, the macroeconomics section of the 2016 Economic Theory uses only seven anthroponymic terms, although this is also one of the most recent textbooks selected for this analysis. This suggests that the number of anthroponymic terms in textbooks may also depend, among other things, on whether their authors choose to use or avoid them. In addition, macroeconomics textbooks vary in length. The textbook containing only five anthroponymic terms runs to 12.75 printer’s sheets, whereas the 2008 textbook, which uses 43 anthroponymic terms, runs to as many as 40 printer’s sheets. Without discussing in greater detail for now the reasons for the varying prevalence of anthroponymic terms, it should also be noted that some terms occur in just one textbook. If such a term, found in only one textbook, is used there only once as well—for example, Engel’s laws W 395, Kuhn’s theory Sn 60, Popper’s theory Sn 60, Walras’s law Sn 370, Triffin paradox Čieg 263, Beveridge curve Č 155, Hume mechanism Čieg 263, Oliver-Tanzi effect Sn 452, or Humphrey-Hawkins Act W 266—then, understandably, it cannot have variants. But even when a term occurs several times, instances of variation within an individual textbook are rare. For example, the 1994 textbook uses Okun’s law W 118, while the Glossary of Special Terms at the end of the textbook gives Okun’s law W 406; the text has Laffer’s curve W 200, while the glossary has Laffer curve W 401; and there are also Malthus’s problem W 315 and Malthus’s problem W 402. However, when a term is used in more than one textbook, it usually has variants, for example: Solow residual Čieg 367 and Solow residual Sn 508; Pigou effect Čieg 79, W 170 and Pigou effect Sn 271; Juglar cycles Gav 269, Sk 143 and Juglar cycles Čieg 174, Sn 374; Phillips curve Andr 277, Dril 48, Gav 244, Jak 236, Sk 177, Sn 438, W 248 and Phillips curve Č 176; Say’s law Dril 72, Sn 48, W 170 and Say’s law Č 26; Okun’s law Andr 259, Čieg 127, Gav 209, Sk 154, Sn 404, Okun’s law W 118 and Okun’s law Jak 242; Gresham’s law Sk 199, Gresham’s law Gav 118, Sn 208 and Gresham’s law W 44; Lorenz curve Čieg 67, Lorenz curve W 402 and 102 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiškumas Lorenz curve Sn 567; Mundell–Fleming model Sk 265, Mundell–Fleming model Sn 489, Mundell and Fleming model Gav 286. The only terms that can be cited as occurring in several textbooks without forming a series of variants are Haavelmo theorem Čieg 168, Sn 182 and Wagner’s law Sk 83, Sn 174; terms that occur in only a few textbooks include Malthusian trap Andr 303, Jak 247, Fisher hypothesis Andr 277, Jak 234, and Okun coefficient Gav 209, although other terms formed with the personal names Malthus, Fisher or Okun, as will become clear, do have variants. Thus, in the sources analyzed, variation in anthroponymic terms is most evident at the intertextual level. In the relatively extensive research on variation in Lithuanian terminology, variants are generally understood as terms with the same meaning but different forms of expression, or as different forms of a term (see Mitkevičienė 2004: 124; Zemlevičiūtė 2012: 106)4, and are customarily classified into particular types. Studies discuss spelling variants (Zemlevičiūtė 2011, 2018), also called orthographic variants (Zemlevičiūtė 2012; Drukteinis 2015), phonetic variants (Zemlevičiūtė 2003: 94–95; 2009: 177), morphological variants (Stunžinas 2008; Zemlevičiūtė 2012), and others. Asta Mitkevičienė (2004), who provides a comprehensive inventory of variants, lists the following types: phonetic and spelling variants, morphological variants, syntactic variants, and working variants. Morphological variants are further divided into variants of number, gender, and other types; variants of endings and final elements are also treated as a separate subgroup of morphological variants, as in formula and formulė, idilė and idilija, oblis and oblius, turėklas and turėklius, krumplys and krumplis (Mitkevičienė 2004: 133–135; Stunžinas 2008: 124; Zemlevičiūtė 2012: 114). Discussions of variants of endings and final elements also include variants arising from the different morphological adaptation of loanwords, for example, psichologinė analizė and psichologinis analizas, epas and eposas (Mitkevičienė 2004: 134). Researchers of variation also note that terms often differ in several, rather than just one, feature of variation, and on this basis they are divided into pure and mixed variants (Mitkevičienė 2004: 139–140; Zemlevičiūtė 2012). However, anthroponymic terms are not included when variants are classified and discussed, so typologies of variation are not applied to them either. Attempts to apply such typologies to these terms, however, raise certain questions. 4 In Lithuanian terminology studies, variants understood in this way are distinguished from different terms—synonyms—that designate the same concept (see Mitkevičienė 2004; Vaskelaitė 2022a: 90–93). Terminologija | 2023 | 30 103 For example, A. Kaulakienė, mentioning among variant terms in physics textbooks some eponymous ones, such as Džioulio dėsnis, Joulio dėsnis and Džaulio dėsnis, Crookso tamsus tarpas and Krukso tamsus tarpas, Tomsono efektas and Thomsono efektas, Leclanché elementas and Leklanšės elementas, Peltier’o efektas and Peltjė efektas, states that these terms, which make up a substantial share of variants in physics terminology, differ in the spelling of scientists’ surnames (Kaulakienė 2003: 113–114). However, the examples show that some of them, such as Peltier’o efektas and Peltjė efektas, Leclanché elementas and Leklanšės elementas, differ not only in spelling but also in endings or final elements; thus, from the perspective of the conventional typology of variation, they should probably be regarded as involving not only spelling variants but also morphological variants—in endings and final elements—and hence as mixed variants. This is also indicated by works that set out spelling norms: in discussing the spelling of foreign names, they address not only different ways of spelling a non-Lithuanian personal name (e.g., Debussy and Debiusi), but also the adaptation of a foreign name to the morphological system of Lithuanian, i.e. the addition of a Lithuanian ending (LKRS 1992: 81–88; VLKK 1997, 2016), which in some works is termed morphological adaptation (e.g., Pažūsis 2014: 71–135), and elsewhere the grammaticalization of a personal name (e.g.: VLKK 2016; Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 179). On the other hand, both different ways of spelling a non-Lithuanian personal name and morphological adaptation (grammaticalization) and its methods are discussed in works setting out spelling rules, which would indicate a close connection between the spelling of non-Lithuanian personal names and their morphological adaptation. Moreover, some of the methods of grammaticalization prescribed in normative works setting out current spelling rules are concerned solely with the difference in the use of the apostrophe. More precisely, these works prescribe as variants writing the ending after an apostrophe (e.g.: Lennon’as, Brunner’is) and attaching it directly to the final element of the foreign name (e.g.: Lennonas, Brunneris) (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 201–202). The apostrophe is discussed in a work setting out spelling rules and is described as a graphic sign (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 19), which raises the question of how personal-name terms that differ only by a graphic sign, for example, Okun’o dėsnis and Okuno dėsnis, should be classified: as variants in endings, i.e. morphological variants, or as spelling variants. However, the apostrophe has been and continues to be prescribed also in cases where a non-Lithuanian proper name ends in a silent vowel or consonant, for example, Larousse’as (pronounced Larusas), Chateaubriand’as (pron. Šatobrijanas) (LKRS 1992: 88–89); it was used in this way in the interwar period as well (Baltrušaitienė 2009: 15–20). Thus, in this case the apostrophe 104 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiškumas would also be a sign indicating certain features of pronunciation, and cases of term usage in which the personal name is written in one instance as Chateaubriand’as and in another as Chateaubriandas are likewise difficult to regard as involving only spelling or ending variants—they would also indicate differences in pronunciation. Thus, the spelling and morphological adaptation of non-Lithuanian personal names are closely connected with the phonetic level as well. Even cases in which a personal name has the same ending or final element but is itself spelled differently are difficult to regard as purely spelling, i.e. orthographic, variants. The only case that could be considered to involve differences solely in characters is transliteration, mentioned in discussions of the spelling of foreign names: “the rendering, letter by letter (or with the closest possible representation of other writing signs), in Lithuanian characters of personal names (place names) written in the characters of a non-Latin writing system” (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 180), also called transliteration or transcription (TI 1990; Pažūsis 2014: 52; Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 182). By contrast, personal names written in characters of the Latin writing system are rendered in Lithuanian using Lithuanian characters only on the basis of approximate pronunciation—they are transcribed (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 180)5. It follows that a personal name written in the original language and one rendered in Lithuanian characters according to approximate pronunciation may differ not only graphically but also phonetically. In Lionginas Pažūsis’s work Kalba ir vertimas, graphic and phonetic adaptation are mentioned (Pažūsis 2014: 51–71). However, studies of variation in non-eponymous terms also show that it is difficult to draw a boundary between spelling and phonetic variants because, as Asta Mitkevičienė notes, “phonetic differences are most often reflected in spelling” (Mitkevičienė 2004: 125). Therefore, although spelling and phonetic variants are distinguished as two separate groups of term variants, they tend to be discussed together, with this group also including some variants associated with the phonetic adaptation of a foreign word, such as impresionizmas and impresionizmas, minnezingė-rių lyrika and minesingerių lyrika (Mitkevičienė 2004: 125–133; Zemlevičiūtė 2009: 161–162). Thus, the aspects of the use of non-Lithuanian personal names in Lithuanian prescribed by the normative works discussed here indicate a close connection between the orthographic, phonetic, and morphological levels, and the difficulty of drawing a clear or strict boundary between them. The sources analyzed, meanwhile, highlight that in terms involving personal names 5 “Transcription of a personal name (place name) is the rendering of a personal name (place name) from another language in Lithuanian characters according to approximate pronunciation” (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 180). Terminologija | 2023 | 30 105 the terms formed with personal names often exhibit variation both in endings or final elements and in the spelling of the personal name, or orthographic variation, as well as phonetic differences. Thus, most of the variant sets identified on the basis of macroeconomics textbooks could be described as representing mixed variation. Nevertheless, the most prominent feature of variation in these sources is the inconsistent spelling of the personal name incorporated into a term, which, as already discussed, is closely connected with phonetic differences. Therefore, the analysis of variation in personal-name terms evident in macroeconomics textbooks begins with a discussion of this variation. 2. I N C O N S I S T E N T S P E L L I N G The introduction to this article mentioned that the General Requirements for the Compilation of Terminological Dictionaries approved in 2007 stipulate that proper nouns used as components of a term, including personal names, be written in their original form. However, for example, the Explanatory English–Lithuanian Dictionary of Economic Terms, published in 2006, whose list of translators, editors, and consultants also includes the Terminology Centre of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language, shows that this principle for spelling eponymous terms had already been applied in terminography earlier. In the terms it contains, non-Lithuanian personal names used as components are written in their original form, for example: Laffer curve, Lucas critique, Herfindahl index, Marshall demand curve, Prais–Winsten transformation, Lewis, Fei and Ranis model, Heckscher–Ohlin international trade methodology (AEKŽ 2006). It should be noted, however, that in another dictionary of economic terms, a monolingual one, eponymous terms are given with transcribed personal names—that is, names rendered in Lithuanian letters according to approximate pronunciation—for example: Phillips curve, Fisher equation, Lorenz curve, Gresham’s law, Say’s law, Coase theorem, Ricardo equivalence, Heckscher–Ohlin model (Vainienė 2008). Determining the extent to which terminology dictionaries for the relevant field are consulted when macroeconomics textbooks are prepared would require a separate study, but the sources selected for this study show that they, too, tend to favor writing personal names included in terms in their original form. A tendency to render personal names written in the Latin script according to their approximate pronunciation is evident in only three of the textbooks selected for analysis, one published in 2016 and the others earlier, in 2007 and 2008. It is true that the first two use only seven eponymous terms each. Nevertheless, the tendency to render personal names in Lithuanian characters, including phonetic adaptation, is also evident in this small number of terms, of which 106 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantškumas Several terms coincide in both textbooks: Fisher hypothesis Andr 277, Jak 235, Malthusian trap Andr 303, Jak 247, Say’s law Jak 178, Phillips curve Jak 236, Andr 277, Okun’s law Jak 242, Keynesian employment theory Jak 178, Heckscher–Ohlin model Andr 318. Six times as many eponymous terms were used in the 2008 edition of Macroeconomics—43—and this sample makes the tendency toward transcription even more evident, for example: Gini coefficient Sn 569, Marshall coefficient Sn 217, Juglar cycles Sn 374, Paasche index Sn 74, Pigou effect Sn 271, Solow residual Sn 508, Lorenz curve Sn 567, Laffer curve Sn 432, Gresham’s law Sn 208, Mundell–Fleming model Sn 489. In other textbooks, the source component of these terms is written in its original form, i.e., Lorenzo curve Čieg 67, Pigou effect W 170, Laspeyres index Sk 34, Gresham’s law Sk 199, Laffer curve Gav 11, 83, Sk 11, Solow residual Čieg 367, Gini coefficient Čieg 67, Marshall coefficient Čieg 275, Juglar cycles Sk 123, 143, Kitchin cycles Gav 269, Sk 123, and the use of these different spelling conventions gives rise to terminological variants. However, such variation is also permitted by the norms for the use of non-Lithuanian personal names in Lithuanian that were in force when all the sources analyzed here were prepared. Although, as can be seen from the General Requirements for the Preparation of Terminology Dictionaries, since 2007 dictionaries of terms have prescribed original spelling, the rules for writing personal names set out in the 1992 Lithuanian Spelling and Punctuation (hereafter LKRS) provide for the use of both the authentic form, that is, the form written in the language of origin, and the transcribed form of personal names from languages using the Latin alphabet. In setting out these two methods of spelling, consideration is given to the domain in which personal names are used, as well as to readers’ age and education; thus, it is stated that in popular publications and those intended for children and young people, personal names should be adapted in view of readers’ age and education, whereas authentic forms should be used in scholarly literature, advertisements, informational publications, and specialized texts (LKRS 1992: 81). This provision is also retained, incidentally, in the new collection of spelling rules, Lithuanian Spelling: Rules, Comments, Advice: here it is stipulated that personal names in Lithuanian texts should be presented with regard to the domain and purpose of the text, as well as readers’ age and education (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 180–181). However, when domains of use are listed, educational publications such as university textbooks are mentioned neither in the new spelling-rules publication nor in the publication summarizing the spelling rules in force when the textbooks were published—the LKRS—and this may be a factor, Terminologija | 2023 | 30 107 contributing to divergent tendencies in the spelling of eponymous terms in macroeconomics textbooks. On the one hand, university textbooks can be considered close to scholarly literature in style; on the other hand, they can also be regarded as publications intended for young people. The tendency evident in several textbooks to use terms with a transcribed form of the personal name may also be attributable to a fairly old tradition in Lithuanian of transcribing non-Lithuanian personal names, as suggested by the 1986 publication Writing Non-Lithuanian Proper Names in the “Lithuanian Soviet Encyclopedia”, which provides detailed rules for transcribing foreign names (LTE 1986). Nevertheless, even in those macroeconomics textbooks where there is a clear tendency to write the eponymic component of a term using the original script, exceptions are made for certain terms. For instance, in the 1994 edition of a textbook, which uses Pigou effect W 170, Barro theory W 336, Engel’s laws W 395, Ricardo equivalence theorem W 412, Malthus problem W 402, Gramm–Rudman Act W 196, Humphrey–Hawkins Act W 266, and so on, the eponymic components of certain terms are graphically and phonetically adapted: Gresham’s law W 44, Phillips curve W 248, Fisher equation W 396, Say’s law W 170, Keynesian economic theory W 399. Such exceptions, applied only to certain terms, also occur in the 2017 edition of Vilnius University’s Macroeconomics: although it uses Paasche method Gav 25, Laspeyres price index Gav 25, Juglar cycles Gav 269, Harrod model Gav 263, Solow model Gav 17, Keynesian cross Gav 65, F. Modigliani life-cycle theory Gav 50, I. Fisher’s theory of consumption expenditure Gav 52, and so on, the personal names forming other terms are given in transcribed form: Phillips curve Gav 244, Gresham’s law Gav 118, Wagner’s law Gav 74, Ricardian equivalence Gav 97 (cf. Ricardo equivalence Sk 100), and so on. However, such an exception is also provided for in the rules for writing non-Lithuanian personal names. In the 1992 edition of LKRS, after listing the domains in which personal names written in the original language⁶ and transliterated personal names are used, it is stated that traditional forms of personal names and place names must be retained, e.g.: Finland, Sweden, Charlemagne, Peter the Great (LKRS 1992: 81). It is true that the term traditional form is not explained in greater detail in LKRS. The same exception was already provided for in the aforementioned 1986 publication, Writing Non-Lithuanian Proper Names in the “Lithuanian Soviet Encyclopedia”, where traditional names are explained as 6 In addition to the term original form of a personal name, the term authentic form is also used here (LKRS 1992: 81). 108 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiskumas tikrinius vardus, kurių lietuviškoji forma turi vartojimo tradiciją (LTE 1986: 5). Išimtis numatoma ir tiesiogiai į terminijos tvarkybą orientuotuose Terminių žodynų rengimo bendruosiuose reikalavimuose: teigiant, kad pirmenybė teiktina originalioms terminų dėmenimis einančių tikrinių vardų formoms, juose paminima, kad išimtis darytina tradiciniams atvejams. Tiesa, pasakymas tradiciniai atvejai čia plačiau neaiškinamas. Tradicinėms formoms numatoma išimtis ir naujajame rašybos normų rinkinyje, kuris išleistas jau vėliau nei šiai analizei pasirinkti vadovėliai, čia teigiant, kad savitos, nusistovėjusios tradicinės asmenvardžių ir vietovardžių formos vartojamos visais atvejais – tiek laisvuosiuose, tiek dalykiniuose tekstuose (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 181). Čia terminas tradicinis asmenvardis jau apibrėžiamas – tai „savita forma lietuvių kalboje nusistovėjęs kitos kalbos (šalies) asmenvardis“ (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 180). Since macroeconomics textbooks not only explain concepts but also indicate the circumstances in which various terms arose, they provide information about the emergence of one or another eponymous term, as well as about the people whose names form part of these terms. For example, when explaining the law that one textbook calls Grešemo dėsniu and another Grešamo dėsniu, it is stated that the law was formulated by Queen Elizabeth’s finance minister Thomas Gresham’as W 44; the dates of his life given in parentheses next to his surname (1519–1579) show that the term must have originated a very long time ago and have a tradition of use. The date given in the explanation of the term Fišerio lygtis likewise shows that its tradition of use must be old: “<...> the equality is called the Fisher equation, in honor of the famous American economist Irving Fišeris (Fisher, Irving, 1867–1947)” Sn 450. The term Filipso kreivė should also have a relatively long tradition of use, although, as noted, Alban Phillips examined the relationship between unemployment and inflation later than Irving Fisher, in a 1958 paper (Sn 438). The fact that textbooks give the secondary constituents of precisely these terms in transliterated form would allow them to be seen as exceptions to the traditional forms. Nevertheless, fluctuations also occur in the use of terms incorporating the surnames of the creators of macroeconomic theories and models developed in the twentieth century. Although the names of theories and models created or developed in the second half of the century tend to be written with the original form of the personal name retained, as in Harrodo modelis Gav 263, R. Solow ekonomikos plėtros faktorinis modelis Gav 253 or Solow modelis Gav 263, Sk 193, R. Lucaso gamybos funkcija Sk 131, when writing the names of theories created or developed in the early or middle part of the century Terminologija | 2023 | 30 109 there is variation. For example, terms formed with the surname of the English scholar John M. Keynes, considered a founder of macroeconomics, who developed his principal theory in a book published in 1936, are also written inconsistently. More than one form of the terms formed with his name is used in textbooks: one writes Keinso (ekonominė) teorija Dril 73, W 399, elsewhere Keyneso teorija Gav 170, Sk 130; in one place Keyneso likvidumo pirmenybės teorija Sk 206, elsewhere Keinso likvidumo pirmenybės teorija Gav 116, and so on. Such variation suggests that the concept of a traditional form can be problematic. Perhaps for this reason, one textbook makes no exceptions: nearly all the eponymous terms used in it have a personal name written in its original language, that is, Phillipso kreivė Čieg 68, Fisherio lygtis Čieg 67, Fisherio ryšys Čieg 318. This tendency, evident only in this textbook, also increases the number of variant sets associated with inconsistent ways of writing personal names. In this context, the few instances in which a personal name is written in transliterated form would more likely indicate an oversight than variation. Thus, this textbook consistently uses Fisherio lygtis, Fisherio ryšys, but on the single occasion that the term Fišerio indeksas Čieg 81 is used, the same surname is given in transliterated form. In two textbooks that show the opposite tendency—writing terms with a transliterated personal name—there is also one exception. This concerns the surname of an American scholar, used to form the terms Okuno dėsnis Andr 259, Sn 404 and Okuno koeficientas Andr 259, which is written in its original form (cf. the term Okun’s law given here). The fact that a third textbook with the same tendency writes Oukeno dėsnis Jak 242 suggests that the surname was probably considered non-English in the other two textbooks, and that its spelling may reflect the adaptation of a surname thought to be of non-English origin. Inconsistent phonetic adaptation across texts is also evident in the spelling of Greshamo dėsnis Sk 199, formed with the surname of finance minister Thomas Gresham (1519–1579): one textbook writes Grešamo dėsnis Sn 208, another Grešemo dėsnis W 44. It is thus clear that the variation in terms apparent from spelling differences in the textbooks results both from the different ways chosen to write the personal name serving as the term’s secondary constituent, and from exceptions applied to certain personal names and the associated fluctuations. Isolated instances of such variation result from oversight or uncertainties concerning the phonetic adaptation of a personal name. In all, this variation is represented by 38 variant sets, most of which are further expanded by other variants discussed below. 110 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiškumas 3. INCONSISTENT MORPHOLOGICAL FORMATION The cases of variation discussed so far already show that in the sources analyzed, there is a tendency to use eponymous terms by adapting the personal name to the morphological system of Lithuanian, that is, by adding a Lithuanian ending. As stipulated by the rules for writing non-Lithuanian personal names that were in force when all these textbooks were published, set out in LKRS (1992: 81–89), and also by the updated spelling rules (see Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 179–206), endings are added in the textbooks both to transliterated personal names and to those written in the original script, e.g.: Fišerio lygtis and Fisherio lygtis, Filipso kreivė and Phillipso kreivė, Grešamo, Grešėmo ir Greshamo dėsnis. The examples cited also show that endings are usually added directly to the personal name. An attempt to write them after an apostrophe is made in the 1994 edition of the textbook: Okun’o dėsnis W 118, Malthus’o problema W 315, A. Laffer’io kreivė W 200, Humphrey–Hawkins’o įstatymas W 266. If such a term is also used in other textbooks, instances of its use that appear to differ only in the apostrophe result: Okun’o dėsnis W 118 and Okuno dėsnis Andr 259, Čieg 127, Gav 209, Sk 177, Sn 404; Malthus’o problema W 315 and Malthuso problema Andr 304; A. Laffer’io kreivė W 200 and Laferio kreivė Dril 142. Other eponymous terms in the 1994 textbook are given with transliterated personal names, with the ending added directly, without an apostrophe, as the rules prescribe: Grešamo dėsnis W 44, Filipso kreivė W 248, Fišerio lygtis W 396, Lorenso kreivė W 402. In other textbooks, too, only certain terms are written with an apostrophe: Say’aus dėsnis Čieg 26, Dril 72, Hume’o mechanizmas Čieg 90, Ramsey’aus–Casso–Koopmanso modelis Čieg 365. Admittedly, the latter two occur in only one textbook and are not variant forms. However, the rules for writing non-Lithuanian personal names also prescribe apostrophes only for certain names. As discussed in Part 1 of this article, LKRS stipulates that an apostrophe is to be written when a non-Lithuanian proper name ends in a silent vowel or a silent consonant (LKRS 1992). The instances of apostrophe use found in the textbooks may reflect the application of this exception. However, it is not easy to determine when a vowel or consonant in a non-Lithuanian personal name ending in a consonant is silent; doing so also requires knowledge of the name’s origin. Thus, the variants occurring in the 1994 textbook—namely, Okun’o dėsnis W 118 and Okuno dėsnis W 406, A. Laffer’io kreivė W 200 and Lafero kreivė W 401—may have arisen because of such uncertainties. As the writing examples analyzed in the previous section already indicate a general tendency in macroeconomics textbooks to use terms with one or Terminologija | 2023 | 30 111 A Lithuanian ending added in another way is also treated as an exception for some personal names in this respect. For example, the following terms are used without a Lithuanian ending: Gini coefficient Čieg 67, Barro theory W 336, Ricardo–Barro theorem Čieg 203, Pigou effect Čieg 79, W. W. Rostow model Gav 263, F. Modigliani life-cycle theory Gav 50, Solow paradox of thrift Čieg 394, Solow residual Čieg 367, Solow economic development model Sk 195. However, this exception also accords with the rules for writing non-Lithuanian personal names in Lithuanian, which also provide for their morphological inflection. The rules in force when the textbooks were being prepared, set out in LKRS, stipulate that endings are not added to proper names from other languages that end in a stem vowel or diphthong, such as Dombey, Fanny, Manzoni, Spandau, or that end in a stressed vowel, e.g. Meillet, Camus (LKRS 1992: 89). Moreover, these rules already provided for morphological variants, stating that endings may be added when necessary to personal names ending in a stem vowel or diphthong—in which case they are written after an apostrophe. Thus, the morphological variants found in the textbooks for the term formed with the personal name Paashe, Paasche (price) index Sk 157 and Paashe’o index Sk 34, may reflect the variation provided for by these rules. Only a few cases of variation relating to the morphological inflection of personal names that do not comply with the rules for writing non-Lithuanian personal names in force when the textbooks were published occur in the textbooks. For instance, terms formed with the personal name Solow are used without a Lithuanian ending, as the rules prescribe, but a term formed with this personal name in one textbook indicates that an ending is added—not after an apostrophe, as stipulated by LKRS, but directly: Solowo growth model Sk 11. In another case, a personal name to which, under the rules, writing without an ending should not apply is written without an ending: J. R. Hicks model Čieg 284 (cf. J. Hickso model Sk 250). Several cases of variation involving endings and word-final forms point to uncertainties that arise when morphologically adapting a personal name, particularly in marking palatalization: Lafero curve Sn 263, W 200, Laffer’io curve W 200 and Laferio curve Dril 142; Mundelo and Flemingo model Gav 286 and Mundelio and Flemingo model Gav 286. 4. OTHER CASES Other types of variation, beyond those already discussed, occur only sporadically in the textbooks. The analysis conducted so far has already shown that these sources 112 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantškumas are characterized above all by terms formed with a single personal name from another language, specifically a surname, and by the features of variation already discussed in connection with them. Across all the textbooks, these terms total 85, but the sources analyzed also use 11 terms formed with two surnames. Some occur in just one textbook, such as Humphrey–Hawkins’o Act W 266, Gramm–Rudman Act W 194, 196, 197, Reiganas–Tečer model Sn 31, Ricardo–Barro theorem Čieg 90, J. M. Keyneso income–expenditure model Sk 50, Solow–Swano model Čieg 377, and have no variants. Several terms formed with two personal names are used more widely, highlighting not only variation related to how the personal name is written, but also variation that could be described as relating to the way the components of a term are joined. In one case, the components are joined by the conjunction and, and in another by a dash or hyphen, e.g. Hekšerio and Olino model Andr 318, Hekšerio – Olino model Čieg 79; Baumolio and Tobino model Gav 133, Baumolio–Tobino model Sk 209; Mundelo and Flemingo model Gav 286, Mundello–Flemingo model Sk 265, Mandelo–Flemingo model Sn 489. These few cases, together with the spelling of terms formed with two surnames that have no variants (e.g. Humphrey–Hawkins’o Act W 266, Gramm–Rudman Act W 194, 196, 197, but Solow–Swano model Čieg 377, Ramsey’aus–Casso–Koopmanso model Čieg 365), show that a fact established on the basis of terminology in other fields (e.g. Gaivenis 2002: 38; Druktein is 2015) can also be confirmed on the basis of the terminology examined here: it too presents uncertainties about the use of hyphens and dashes. As the examples show, in some cases these uncertainties are avoided by choosing to join the components of a term with the conjunction and. On the other hand, attention has repeatedly been drawn to ambiguities in codified norms governing the use of dashes and hyphens (Keinys 2005; Gud zinevičiūtė 2012), as well as to unclear norms concerning the use of hyphens between proper names (Vaskelaitė 2022b: 106–109). Only in the new compendium of spelling rules, Lietuvių kalbos rašyba: taisyklės, komentarai, patarimai, published later than the sources analyzed here—in 2022—is a clearer distinction drawn between the dash and the hyphen (Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 230–242). As has already been noted, this work discusses not only the hyphen as a punctuation mark but also the range dash, thus treating the latter as a punctuation mark. Before this clarification, however, term variants involving the use of a dash or a hyphen could presumably also have been regarded as punctuation variants (Vaskelaitė 2022b: 107–108). Terminologija | 2023 | 30 113 The typology of term variation used in Lithuanian terminological studies does not include punctuation variants, but the material examined highlights several cases that could be considered such variants. For example, in the 2006 textbook, the personal name forming part of a term is occasionally set in italics, as in Lafero curve Sk 11, Gav 11, Solowo growth model Sk 11, Keyneso cross Sk 11, Laspeyres price index Sk 157, Tobino q Sk 737, a practice that would correspond to marking a foreign-language element in a text. It is true that this means of marking is prescribed for foreign common words or expressions and for foreign (or Lithuanian) symbolic names, but not for personal names. Nevertheless, clearer formulations on its application have appeared only recently (e.g. Linkevičienė 2013: 56; ESIV 2014: 38; Vladarskienė, Zemlevičiūtė 2022: 177), so variation found in a textbook from an earlier period may be related to ambiguities in codification. Only one textbook uses two terms formed with three surnames, namely Ramsey’aus–Casso–Koopmanso model Čieg 365 and Diamondo–Mortenseno–Pissarideso model Čieg 154. One of these is used only once and therefore cannot have variants. But alongside the second, a term with an abbreviation is also used several times—DMP model Čieg 154, 155. Although abbreviations are not discussed as term variants in Lithuanian terminology, drawing on variation studies conducted abroad (e.g. León–Araúz, Cabezas–García 2020), abbreviations or terms formed with them could also be considered term variants. In any case, this type of variation could be examined more broadly on the basis of other sources; such shortening is not characteristic of the personal-name terms in the sources analyzed here. However, other ways of shortening occur in the sources examined. For example, a term is shortened by omitting its non-personal-name component or components. Thus, the same textbook uses both Harrodo–Domaro economic growth model Čieg 388 and Harrodo–Domaro model Čieg 379; and both Solow economic development model Sk 193 and Solow model Sk 194. However, forms produced by this kind of shortening are not generally considered term variants—A. Mitkevičienė (2015a) has discussed both these forms and the so-called long and short forms as features of the textual use of terms 7 Since examples in this article are set in italics, italics used in the textbooks are indicated by setting the relevant word in roman type. 114 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiškumas characteristic cases. Only two instances of so-called long and short forms of personal-name terms occur in the sources examined: short-run Phillips curve Gav 244, Sk 176, Sn 322 and short-term Phillips curve Jak 238, long-run Phillips curve Sk 180, Sn 441 and long-term Phillips curve Jak 238. However, neither the textual use of the terms nor their variability has been assessed with regard to cases involving abbreviation of the personal-name component of a term, and such cases abound in the sources examined. Although, as the examples already given show, macroeconomics textbooks mainly use terms formed with a surname alone, some textbooks show a clear tendency to use terms that also include the first letter of a given name (or several given names). For example, in a Vilnius University textbook published in 2006, we find I. Fisher's intertemporal budget constraint of the consumer Sk 54, I. Fisher's theory of intertemporal choice Sk 54, I. Modigliani's life-cycle theory Sk 59, J. A. Hobson's theory Sk 123, J. M. Keynes's consumption function Sk 50, 52, J. M. Keynes's income-expenditure model Sk 50, W. D. Nordhaus and J. Tobin's index Čieg 72, R. Lucas's production function Sk 131, A. Spiethoff's hypothesis Sk 124, A. Aftalion's hypothesis Sk 123, J. Hicks's model Sk 250, E. S. Phelps's rule Čieg 377, T. Malthus's theory Čieg 362, although the other terms used here do not include the first letter of a given name (cf. Wagner's law Sk 83, Ricardian equivalence Sk 100, Kitchin cycles Sk 123, Juglar cycles Sk 143, Okun's law Sk 177, Phillips curve Sk 177). Many terms with the first letter of a given name also appear in the Vilnius University textbook published in 2017, which, as can be seen, was prepared on the basis of the earlier one. They are also numerous in the 2008 edition of the Kaunas University of Technology textbook, for example: J. Neumann's model Sn 370, H. Daly and J. Cobb's index of sustainable economic welfare Sn 347, J. M. Keynes's model Sn 324, A. Laffer's curve Sn 432, I. Fisher's equation Sn 450, I. Fisher effect Sn 450, J. M. Keynes's cross Sk 249. Thus, textbooks exhibit such orthographic inconsistencies as Laffer curve and A. Laffer's curve, Fisher equation and I. Fisher's equation, Keynesian model and J. M. Keynes's model, Keynesian cross and J. M. Keynes's cross, and so on; these raise the question of how such cases should be assessed from the perspective of terminological variation. It also occurs that a phrase containing a full name or several names is used as the designation of a theory, model, phenomenon, equation, or the like, for example: “The best-known representatives of this neo-Keynesian theory are the American economists Evesey David Domar (Domar, Evesey David, b. 1914), Ray Forbs Harrod (Harrod, Ray, Forbs, 1980–1978), and Robert Terminologija | 2023 | 30 115 Mertono Solou (Solo, Robert Merton, g. 1924) ekonominio augimo modeliai“ Sn 57; „Šalia labiausiai žinomų ekonominės pusiausvyros modelių būtina pažymėti ir JAV ekonomisto Džeži Neimano (Neyman Jerzy, 1903–1957) augančios ekonomikos pusiausvyros modelį“ Sn 369. Vis dėlto tokie atvejai reti, o vardo raidės vartojimo atvejų pasitaiko dažnai, pvz.: „Tai vadinama I. Fišerio poveikiu (Fisher effect)“ Sn 450; „Apatinė A. Laferio kreivės dalis rodo priešingą situaciją <...>“ W 200; „Ilgojo laikotarpio pusiausvyros pinigų rinkoje sąlygas išreiškia M. Fridmeno lygtis, pavadinta žymaus amerikiečių ekonomisto garbei <...>“ Sn 274; „M. Friedmano nuolatinių pajamų teorija papildo F. Modigliani gyvenimo ciklo teoriją“ Čieg 50. This tendency can be explained by the influence of context. Textbooks not only use personal-name terms, but also describe the circumstances of their emergence, identifying the person after whom a particular thing is named; when identifying that person, they give both the surname and the given name, which is later abbreviated to the first letter only. Thus, context may also explain some instances of terms being used with an initial, for example: “The theory of long waves was first substantiated by the Russian economist Nikolai Kondratiev (1892–1938) in his article ‘Long Waves in Economic Life’ (1926). Based on information about changes in the prices of consumer goods in France, Great Britain, the USA, and Germany, N. Kondratiev hypothesized that industrial development is cyclical. J. Schumpeter confirmed the Russian scholar's concept by naming the long waves the N. Kondratiev cycle. Since 1930, long waves have been known in the economic literature as the Kondratiev cycle” Gav 284. On the other hand, although the surname is usually used with an initial, there are also instances where it appears alone, which could be regarded as oversights, for example: “I. Fisher believed that the velocity of money was more or less constant in the short run” Sn 205 and “Fisher was the first to formulate the equation of exchange” Sn 204. Thus, the term with an initial used in such a context, I. Fisher's equation of exchange (“This makes it possible to rearrange I. Fisher's equation of exchange into the quantity theory of money”), could also be regarded as the result of an oversight. On the other hand, this latter example may also reveal the circumstances in which a personal-name term is formed in a macroeconomics textbook. If this is indeed the case, it would then be possible to investigate further how much the personal-name terms in macroeconomics textbooks are adopted from foreign publications and how much are coined by textbook authors. All of them, as became clear from this article 116 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiškumas the examples analyzed here, are formed with a non-Lithuanian personal name (since the laws, theories, models, equations, etc. discussed in them were developed by non-Lithuanians), but the context highlighted here suggests that Lithuanian textbook authors may also have contributed to the emergence of personal-name terms. This assumption is also supported by the differing quantitative data on personal-name terms in the textbooks examined, mentioned at the beginning of the article: in certain textbooks, or with respect to certain personal-name terms, it may be possible to avoid naming the person or persons associated with a particular phenomenon while still not using a personal-name term, for example, as follows: “According to the prevailing approaches in economic theory, several principal consumption models are distinguished: <...> Permanent income hypothesis (Milton Friedman, 1957). <...> Life-cycle hypothesis (Franco Modigliani and Richard Brumberg, 1954) <...>” Andr 180–181. However, this question raised by the use of personal-name terms should be investigated separately, since it is not solely a question of their variation. CONCLUSIONS The discussion of variation in personal-name terms used in macroeconomics textbooks for higher education shows that it is primarily associated with the spelling and morphological adaptation of personal names. The most characteristic variation in these sources results from differences in how personal names are written: in some textbooks, a personal name is written in its original form, while in others it is written using Lithuanian letters, in the latter case being adapted according to approximate pronunciation. The norms for writing non-Lithuanian personal names in Lithuanian also allow for different ways of writing them. They also provide an exception for traditional forms of personal names, and the sources examined reveal cases of variation that may be related to the application of this exception, as well as to uncertainty about what constitutes a traditional form. Macroeconomics textbook terminology shows a clear tendency to adapt non-Lithuanian personal names to the morphological system of Lithuanian by adding a Lithuanian ending; the exceptions that occur reflect exceptions provided for in the codified norms for writing non-Lithuanian personal names in Lithuanian. Some variants found in macroeconomics textbooks are associated with uncertainty in the phonetic adaptation of personal names. Although the causes of variation in personal-name terms should be studied separately, drawing on sources beyond the field of macroeconomics, the present analysis Terminologija | 2023 | 30 117 Material showing the correspondence between tendencies in the use of eponymous terms and the rules for writing non-Lithuanian personal names would suggest that one possible reason is variation implied by the codification of spelling norms. The sources examined contain few other cases of variation, and those that do occur suggest that uncertainties also arise in macroeconomic terminology regarding the use of the dash and hyphen. The analysis of the use of eponymous terms presented here not only reveals the types or features of variation most characteristic of macroeconomics textbooks, but also raises questions about the typology of variation. It also identifies cases that have not been assessed from the perspective of variation and, more broadly, encourages the study of eponymous terms in greater depth and from various perspectives. ŠALTINIAI Andr – Andriušaitienė Daiva, Drejeris Rolandas, Jakutis Algirdas, Petraškevičius Vladislavas, Stepanovas Artūras 2016: Ekonomikos teorija: vadovėlis, Vilnius: Vilniaus Gedimino technikos universiteto leidykla „Technika“. Čieg – Čiegis Remigijus 2012: Makroekonomika: Vilniaus universiteto vadovėlis, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla. Dril – Drilingas Boleslovas, Čiburienė Jadvyga, Snieška Vytautas 1997: Makroekonomikos pagrindai: vadovėlis neekonominių specialybių studentams, Kaunas: Technologija. Gav – Gavelis Vytautas, Gylys Povilas, Mačiekus Venantas, Minkevicienė Neringa, Paliulytė Regina, Ulvidienė Erstida, Urbšienė Laima 2017: Makroekonomika: Vilniaus universiteto vadovėlis, elektroninė knyga, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla. Jak – Jakutis Algirdas, Petraškevičius Vladislavas, Stepanovas Artūras, Šeškutė Laima, Zaicev Stepan 2007: Ekonomikos teorija: vadovėlis, šeštasis pataisytas ir papildytas leidimas, Vilnius: Eugrimas. Sk – Skominas Vytautas, sud., 2006: Makroekonomika: vadovėlis, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla. Sn – Snieška Vytautas, Baumilienė Valerija, Bernaton (sic)ytė Dalia, Čiburienė Jadvyga, Juozapavičienė Aldona ir kt. 2008: Makroekonomika: vadovėlis ekonominių specialybių studentams, trečiasis pataisytas ir papildytas leidimas, Kaunas: Technologija. W – Wonnacott Paul, Wonnacott Ronald 1994: Makroekonomika, Kaunas: Litterae universitatis. LITERATŪRA AEKŽ – Aiškinamasis ekonomikos anglų–lietuvių kalbų žodynas, sudarė W. Pearce, Vilnius: TEV, 2006. Ambrazas Vytautas 2008: Svetimų tikrinių vardų rašymas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Baltrušaitienė Indrė 2009: Svetimvardžių rašymo tradicijos formavimasis Lietuvoje: magistro darbas, Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas. Barankin Benjamin, Metelitsa Andrei I., Lin Andrew N. 2004: Stedman’s Illustrated Dictionary of Dermatology Eponyms, Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. Becker Christopher J., McDermott Mollie, London Zachary N. 2021: Declining Use of Neurological Eponyms in Cases Where a Non-eponymous Alternative Exists. – Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery 200, 1–6 Prieiga internete: https://medicine.umich.edu/sites/default/files/content/downloads/Eponym%20Study.pdf. Cappuzzo Barbara 2008: Eponyms or Descriptive Equivalent Terms? The Question of Scientific Accuracy in Medical Discourse. Prieiga internete: https://core.ac.uk/display/53253513. 118 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiškumas Čepienė Nijolė 1995: Lietuvių kalbos germanizmai ir jų fonetinė adaptacija: disertacija, Kaunas: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas. Daukšas Kazys, Barkauskas Jurgis, Daukšas Vitas ir kt. 2003: Chemijos terminų aiškinamasis žodynas, 2-asis patais. ir papild. leid., Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. Dyda Anna, Pronińska Aleksandra 2021: Lessico medico italiano e polacco a confronto: il caso dei sintagmi terminologici di tipo malattia di banti/choroba bantiego. – Romanica Cracoviensia 1, 43–53. Drukteinė Albinas 2015: Ortografiniai įjereivystės terminų variantai: didžiosios raidės, brukšnelis, kabutės. – Kalbos praktikos problemos 14, 6–14. Duque-Parra Jorge Eduardo, Llano-Idarraga J. Oskar, Duque-Parra Carlos Alberto 2006: Reflections on Eponyms in Neuroscience Terminology. – The Anatomical Record, Part B: The New Anatomist 289(6), 219–224. ESIV – Europos Sąjungos institucijų vertimo į lietuvių kalbą vadovas, Liuksemburgas, 2014. Firkin Barry G., Whithworth Judith A. 2001: Dictionary of Medical Eponyms, London: Informa Healthcare. Gaivenis Kazimieras 1994: Tarptautinių terminologijos principų taikymas mūsų terminijai. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 31, 11–17. Gaivenis Kazimieras 2002: Lietuvių terminologija: teorijos ir tvarkybos metmenys, Vilnius: LKI leidykla. Gudelienė 2016: Tikrinių vardų galūnių adaptavimo ypatumai Simono Daukanto ir Simono Stanevičiaus Epitome Historiae Sacrae vertimuose. – Lituanistica 62(1), 38–44. Gudzinevičiūtė Ona Laima 2012: Keli probleminiai rašybos ir skyrybos ženklų vartojimo atvejai. – Kalbos kultūra 85, 121–135. Kasradze Mindia, Kasradze David 2015: Traumatologijos ir ortopedijos eponimai: simptomai ir sindromai, Klaipėda: Klaipėdos universiteto leidykla. Kaulakienė Angelė 2003: Lietuviškų fizikos vadovėlių elektros ir magnetizmo terminai. – Terminologija 10, 107–116. Kaulakienė Angelė 2014: Iš matematikos ir fizikos terminų vartosenos. – Terminologija. Terminografija. Terminija, Vilnius: Technika, 58–61. Kavaliauskas Paulius, Krupickaitė Dovilė, Kynė Genovaitė 2021: Aiškinamasis geografijos terminų žodynas, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla. Keinys Stasys 2005: Brūkšnio ir brūkšnelio vartojimas. – Kalbos kultūra 78, 183–190. Kevlian Andrew, Logie Sarah, Hage Robert 2023: Debating Eponyms: History of Ear and Eye Anatomical Eponyms. – Translational Research in Anatomy 32, 1–13. Kitkauskienė Laimutė 2011: Eponiminiai architektūros, meno ir statybos terminai lietuvių kalboje. – Santalka: Filologija, Edukologija 19(1), 48–58. Kniūkšta Pranas 2004: Įstaigų, įmonių ir organizacijų pavadinimai. Darbyos ir vartosenos aptarimai, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla. Kucharz Eugeniusz Jóźi 2020: Medical Eponyms from Linguistic and Historical Points of View. – Reumatologia 58(4), 258–260. León-Araúz Pilar, Cabezas-García Melania 2020: Term and Translation Variation of Multi-word Terms. – Análisis multidisciplinar del fenómeno de la variación fraseológica en traducción e interpretación / Multidisciplinary Analysis of the Phenomenon of Phraseological Variation in Translation and Interpreting, 210–247. Linkevičienė Nijolė 2013: Redagavimo pradmenys, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla. LKRS – Lietuvių kalbos rašyba ir skyryba, 2-asis patais. fotograf. leid., Vilnius: Mokslas, 1992. LTE – Neteitybiškų tikrinių vardų rašymas „Lietuviškojoje tarybinėje enciklopedijoje“, Vilnius: Vyriausioji enciklopedijų redakcija, 1986. Mikelionienė Jurgita 2017: Tarptautinių terminų apeliatyvacijos aspektai. – Terminologija 24, 127–144. Mitkevičienė Asta 2004: V. Dubo visuotinės literatūros vadovėlio terminų variantai. – Terminologija 11, 94–144. Mitkevičienė Asta 2015a: Kai kurie terminų sinonimijos aspektai. – Terminologija 22, 39–60. Mitkevičienė Asta 2018: Lietuvos Nepriklausomybės Akto signataras Kazys Bizauskas ir lietuvių literatūros mokslo terminija. – Terminologija 25, 201–234. Palenskis Vilius, Valiukėnas Vytautas, Žalkauskas Valerijonas, Žilinskas Pranas Juozas 2007: Fizikos terminų žodynas: lietuvių, anglų, prancūzų, vokiečių ir rusų kalbomis, 2-asis patais. ir papild. leid., Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. Pažūsis Lionginas 2014: Kalba ir vertimas, Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas. Terminologija | 2023 | 30 119 Stunžinas Robertas 2008: Variantiniai statybos liaudies terminai Lietuvių kalbos žodyne. – Terminologija 15, 111–130. TI – Pavardžių, vardų ir vietovardžių transkripcijos iš rusų kalbos į lietuvių kalbą ir iš lietuvių kalbos į rusų kalbą instrukcija, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1990. TŽR – Terminų žodynų rengimo bendrieji reikalavimai (patvirtinta Valstybinės lietuvių kalbos komisijos 2007 m. gruodžio 20 d. posėdžio protokoliniu nutarimu), 2007. Prieiga internete: https://www.vlkk.lt/aktualiosios-temos/terminija/terminu-zodynu-rengimo-bendrieji-reikalavimai. Ulky­tė Rūta 2016: Tikriniai vardai ir eponimai chemijos terminijoje: baigiamasis magistro darbas, Kaunas: Kauno technologijos universitetas. Vainienė Rūta 2008: Ekonomikos terminų žodynas, 2-oji laida, Vilnius: Tyto alba. Vaskelaitė Ramunė 2022a: Makroekonomikos terminija: sinonimijos priežastys: mokslo studija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Vaskelaitė Ramunė 2022b: Rašybos variantiškumo astrologijos terminijoje priežastys. – Terminologija 29, 95–119. Vladarskienė Rasuolė, Zemlevičiūtė Palmira 2022: Lietuvių kalbos rašyba: taisyklės, komentarai, patarimai, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. VLKK 1997: Valstybinės lietuvių kalbos komisijos nutarimas „Dėl lietuvių kalbos rašybos ir skyrybos“ (1997 m. birželio 19 d., Nr. 60). Prieiga internete: https://e-seimas.lrs.lt. VLKK 2016: Protokolinis nutarimas dėl rekomendacijos „Dėl autentiškų asmenvardžių gramatinimo“ (2016 m. gegužės 26 d., Nr. Pn-3). Prieiga internete: http://www.vlkk.lt/vlkk-nutarimai/protokoliniai-nutarimai/rekomendacija-del_autentisku-asmenvardziu-gramatinimo. Whitworth Judith A. 2007: Should Eponyms Be Abandoned? No. – BMJ 335, 425. Woywodt Alexander, Matteson Eric 2007: Should Eponyms Be Abandoned? Yes. – BMJ 335, 424. Zemlevičiūtė Palmira 2003: Antano Vileišio (1856–1919) medicinos mokslo darbai ir jų terminija. – Terminologija 10, 84–106. Zemlevičiūtė Palmira 2009: „Varpo“ medicinos straipsnių terminai. – Terminologija 16, 92–108. Zemlevičiūtė Palmira 2011: „Keleivio“ straipsnių apie sveikatą terminai. – Terminologija 18, 92–108. Zemlevičiūtė Palmira 2012: Morfologiniai anatomijos terminų variantai XVII–XVIII a. lietuvių leksikografijoje. – Terminologija 19, 105–124. Zemlevičiūtė Palmira 2018: Medicinos terminija prieš 100 metų. – Terminologija 25, 147–200. VARIATION OF MACROECONOMIC TERMS WITH A PERSONAL NAME Summary Although terms formed with a personal name, usually a surname, are used in a variety of fields, they are not widely studied in terminology works. This leads to various uncertainties both in the use of these terms and in their terminological evaluation. Here, using macroeconomics textbooks for higher education as a source, the variation inherent in these terms, referred to in the article as ‘personal name terms’, is researched. Although macroeconomics textbooks contain a varying number of terms with personal names, all of these terms are composed with a non-Lithuanian personal name, and the totality of such terms shows that their variation is in some way related to the peculiarities of the use of a non-Lithuanian personal name. It is mainly a mixed type of variation, involving the orthographic, phonetic, and morphological levels. The most striking feature of variation is the different ways in which a proper name is spelled, which is determined by the application of different spelling methods, by exceptions made for certain terms, and by individual cases of oversight. Another feature of the variation of the terms under considerations is related to the unequal morphological adaptation of non-Lithuanian personal names, which is obvious from its ending. 120 Ramunė Vaskelaitė | Asmenvardinių makroekonomikos terminų variantiškumas However, the analysis of the terms also reveals term differences which are not assessed from the point of view of variation. Although most of the terms are composed of a single personal name, i. e., a surname, it is also quite common in macroeconomic textbooks to use the name of a theory, model, etc. as a term that has both a surname and the first letter of a first name. Having noted such cases, the paper calls for a separate study. Gauta 2023-12-11 Ramunė Vaskelaitė Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius E. paštas [email protected] Terminologija | 2023 | 30 121