Go to originalLocalized version was produced by AI. It may contain inaccuracies.
Preparing document pages…
Page 1
doi.org/10.35321/term28-08
Subordination of the Components of a Compound Term and Its Definition: A Case Study
AUŠRA RIMKUTĖ-GANUSAUSKIENĖ
Institute of the Lithuanian Language
ORCID id: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8655-7333
ABSTRACT
Every term must have a definition—the result of a constructive agreement. The content of a definition depends on the scope of the concept: when the number of its generic and distinguishing features changes (decreases or increases), the content of the definition may also change (be refined—narrowed or broadened). When specialists in a particular field formulate a definition of the same concept, they may identify different features of that concept. Such variation is determined by differences in specialists’ experience, knowledge, education, understanding of the concept, and ultimately—even their imagination. Drawing on examples, this article examines in greater detail, for the first time, the subordination between the component(s) of a compound term and its definition.
Every term must have a definition – the outcome of a constructive agreement. The content of the definition depends on the scope of the concept. After the number of basic and distinguishing features reflected by it changes (decreases or increases), the content of the definition may change as well (it may be updated, i.e. narrowed or expanded). When the definition of the same concept is being created, the professionals of a certain field may choose slightly different features to define the same concept. Such inconsistency may be determined by the difference in their experience, education, concept perception, and even imagination. Referring to specific examples, the article presents the first more in-depth analysis addressing the relationship of subordination between the constituent component(s) of a combinative term and its definition.
In the practice of compiling terminological dictionaries, various complex situations arise: for example, a concept used in the language of a particular field of human activity may have no name (term) at all, so it has to be coined or a loanword used, if one exists. Sometimes a choice must be made between a concept’s name that has already become almost established and a new one. There are also cases when it is necessary to decide on the choice of grammatical relation (agreement, government, or juxtaposition) in a compound term, and so on. In all cases, however, the content of a term in a particular field is revealed by its terminological meaning, that is, the meaning characteristic of a word in the terminology of a particular field (Kvašytė 2005: 53).
The aim of this article is to examine the subordination of the component(s) of a certain type of compound term to the definition1. The object selected is compound terms with the head components clothing and footwear, listed in the Terminology Bank of the Republic of Lithuania or found in the literature cited under “Sources”.
The article addresses the following tasks:
1) to review how definition is understood in selected works by Lithuanian and foreign linguists and what requirements are imposed on definitions;
2) to identify the more frequent types of definitions on the basis of Lithuanian and foreign linguistic literature;
3) to reveal the relationship between the choice of a compound term’s component(s) and the subordination of its definition.
The article employs analytical and comparative methods. Additional information is presented in figures.
1. THE CONCEPT OF DEFINITION
Kuris laikas terminologijoje vartojamas terminas apibrėžtis (Jakaitienė 2005: 24; 2010: 183 ir kt.), o terminas apibrėžimas pateikiamas kaip sinonimas (Kvašytė 2005: 12 ir kt.), kaip ir tarptautinis terminas definicija2 (Kvašytė 2005: 12). Kalbininkas Jonas Klimavičius pastebi, kad su „Lietuvos Respublikos terminų banko įstatymu (2003 m. gruodžio 23 d.
1 In this article, subordination is understood as dependence; cf. subordination – 1. the dependence of something on something else (TŽŽ 2007: 1049; 2013: 781). The term subordination is most often used in syntax in reference to syntactic relations “between the units of sentence structure, one of which (the dependent unit) depends on another (the main unit) and is incorporated into the sentence only through the main unit” (LKE 1999: 509; cf. Gaivenis, Keinys 1990: 160). The Lithuanian equivalent attachment is used more often instead.
2 Interestingly, the 2005 booklet Language Advice, Lexicon: Use of Loanwords, recommends using the words definition, defining in preference to definicija (KP L1 2005: 40), while the second, expanded and revised edition of the booklet, published in 2013, recommends only definition (KP L1 2013: 22).
176 Aušra Rimkutė-Ganusauskienė │ Sudėtinio termino dėmenų ir apibrėžties subordinacija: vieno atvejo analizė
Page 3
Nr. IX-1950) vietoj apibrėžimo vald ingai įsiveržė jau nuo RLŽ 1932 3213 žinoma ir nemažai vartota (S. Šalkauskio ir kt.) apibrėžtis“ (Klimavičius 2005: 248). Mokslinės lietuvių terminologijos teorijos kūrėjo Stasio Šalkauskio manymu, apibrėžimas yra „sudaiktavardintas (ad modum substantiae) veiksmo“ apibrėžti pavadinimas, o terminas apibrėžtis reiškia įvykdytą veiksmą, yra apibrėžimo išdava (Šalkauskis 1991: 204). Matyt, terminas apibrėžimas, ilgą laiką vartotas terminologų darbuose, pakeistas terminu apibrėžtis, siekiant išvengti dvireikšmiškumo – mat terminu apibrėžimas gali būti įvardijamas ir veiksmas (abstrakti reikšmė), ir veiksmo rezultatas (konkreti reikšmė). Terminologo Stasio Kein io manymu, tvarkant terminiją, „[K]onkrečios reikšmės vediniai darytini su atitinkamiems darybos būdams būdingomis priesagomis ar galūnėmis“ (Keinys 2005: 25), kaip tik todėl priesagos -tis vedinys apibrėžtis parankesnis.
In Regina Kvašytė’s Introductory Glossary of Terminology, a definition is described as “a comprehensive verbal description that reflects the semes of the core of a terminological meaning4 and conveys the content of a concept, revealing at a certain level of abstraction the essential features that distinguish it from related concepts” (Kvašytė 2005: 13). In the Lithuanian standard LST ISO 1087-1:2005 Terminology work. Vocabulary. Part 1. Theory and application, the term definition is defined as “a descriptive statement that defines a concept and helps distinguish it from related concepts” (TB). A similar description is given in the Terminology Handbook, intended for translators in the Lithuanian Language Department of the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Translation: a definition is “a statement describing a concept and helping to distinguish it from other concepts. It must define the concept as a unit denoting a unique combination of characteristics and a unique set of objects” (TV 2006: 16). Thus, a definition precisely states or describes a concept in a particular subject field and certain characteristics of the object denoted by it, while the concept itself is conveyed in the subject field by linguistic signs (usually terms) or non-linguistic signs (various symbols) (Fig. 1).
A similar understanding of definition is found in the teaching aid for students by Ilona Mickienė and Birutė Briaukienė, Aspects of Lithuanian Terminology. Here, however, the term defining is used. It is described as “the disclosure of a concept’s content, i.e. the identification of the essential characteristics of the things and phenomena reflected by the concept” (Mickienė, Briaukienė 2016: 18).
3 The reference is to the Russian–Lithuanian Dictionary prepared by lexicographer Jonas Baronas (Kaunas: Spindulys) – author’s note
4 Italics here and below are by the dictionary’s author, R. Kvašytė.
Terminologija | 2021 | 28 177
Page 4
Fig. 1. Relationship between object, concept, definition and term
The Dictionary of Linguistic Terms lists the term definition and its synonym of international origin, definicija, and defines it as follows: “A logical operation that reveals the essential characteristics of an object and distinguishes it from other objects related to it. A definition must be adequate, that is, there must be a relation of equivalence between the concept being defined and the defining concept. A definition must be neither too broad nor too narrow. Moreover, it must not be circular: the object being defined cannot be defined by a concept that itself becomes clear only through the very concept being defined, nor can the defining and defined concepts be identical” (Gaivenis, Keinys 1990: 22). As can be seen, the concept of definition is supplemented with practical recommendations and possible shortcomings are identified; the interdependence of the concept being defined and the defining concept is emphasized. In other words, a definition must present those characteristics that precisely reveal the content of a term (neither too broadly, nor too narrowly, etc.).
An definition is also described as a logical operation in the Universal Lithuanian Encyclopedia: “A logical operation that establishes criteria for distinguishing the object under study from other objects by indicating its specific features and the meaning of a linguistic expression used or introduced” (VLEe)5. The encyclopedia emphasizes that although every science formulates definitions of its concepts, all use the means of definition developed by logic. Thus, it is no excep-
5 See online: https://www.vle.lt/straipsnis/apibrezimas [accessed 2021-07-05].
178
Aušra Rimkutė-Ganusauskienė
Sudėtinio termino dėmenų ir apibrėžties subordinacija: vieno atvejo analizė
Page 5
tion – and the science of terminology. For this reason, let us briefly recall how the subject under discussion is understood in logic. Here, the verbal derivative –imasapibrėžimas (Latin definitio), formed with the suffix expressing the result of an action, is used and interpreted as a certain proposition, or, more precisely, a type of proposition. A proposition consists of three parts: the definiendum (Latin definiendum), the definiens (definiens), and the copula, usually expressed by words such as is, is called, means, and so on. As already mentioned, the definiendum denotes a particular object, while the definiens identifies its essential characteristics, which help establish the object’s general genus or class and at the same time distinguish it from other species of that genus or subclasses of that class (see in more detail Plečkaitis 2004: 163; Eidukienė 2009: 60; Bubelis et al. 2012: 116).
As we can see from the sources, although a definition (or definition, since the terms are used synonymously) is described in somewhat different words—sometimes as a logical operation, elsewhere as a verbal description or a proposition—all accounts state that a definition precisely denotes or describes a concept. They also all emphasize certain characteristics of a term that reveal the essence of the concept and/or describe its specificity, uniqueness, and distinctiveness within a particular subject field. Linguists agree that, in terminology, the definition of a term is not the same as the definition of an ordinary word in a dictionary: it differs first and foremost in its prescribed content and precision. Thus, the essence of a term is characterized by its relationship to the concept it denotes. When defining it, therefore, one should bear in mind that “[T]he definition of a concept should be as short and simple as possible, yet contain the essential information that distinguishes the concept” (Jakaitienė 2010: 183).
The book Empfehlungen für die Terminologiearbeit states that a term is described according to its content or field of application (use) by means of a definition, which distinguishes it from other terms (EFT 2018: 44). Some take a somewhat broader view, arguing that a term’s definition “is only one of the elements of the meaning of a term and is not necessarily complete or independent” (Sager 1990: 45). This view is apparently based on the assumption that individual terms are connected to one another by certain relations and form terminological systems within a given subject field; if the understanding of a term changes (as the scope of the concept expands or contracts), or even if the terminological system requires it, definitions can be supplemented or changed. Moreover, it is likely that definitions do not always record all the most important distinguishing characteristics of a concept, since this depends in part on its creator—the subject-field specialist—and on that person’s experience, understanding of the subject being named, and knowledge.
Terminologija | 2021 | 28
179
Page 6
Fig. 2. The subordination relationship between a term component(s) and a definition
In summary, a definition helps reveal the content of a concept within a particular subject field. How the concept is defined—that is, which essential characteristics are listed in the definition—depends fundamentally on how its content and scope are understood: the more essential characteristics of an object are known, the more precisely and comprehensively the concept’s content can be defined. The diagram in Figure 1 shows that an object, concept, term, and definition within a particular subject field are connected by certain subordination relationships and depend on one another (see Fig. 2): when one element changes, the others change as well.
2. T Y P E S O F D E F I N I T I O N S
Definitions in terminology vary. Some authors distinguish several dozen types; for example, as noted in an article by Julia Eduardovna Mueller, Helmut Mönke distinguishes as many as 70 (Mueller 2016: 41). Several dozen are also listed in VLEe: ostensive, nominal, semantic, syntactic, operational, contextual, descriptive definition, definition by genus and specific difference, nominal definition, and others. It should be noted, however, that these are described as definitions in the science of logic.
The Lithuanian terminologist Kazimieras Gaivenis notes in the book Lietuvių terminologija: teorijos ir tvarkybos metmenys that the Polish terminologist Stanisław Gajda uses 11 types of definitions to define and explain concepts in the language of science, some of which may have several subtypes: explanatory, comparative, classical, genetic (or origin-based), operational, primary (or protodefinitional), inductive and recursive, ostensive, nomina
180
Aušra Rimkutė-Ganusauskienė
Sudėtinio termino dėmenų ir apibrėžties subordinacija: vieno atvejo analizė
Page 7
liosios ir realiosios, kontekstinės ir leksikografinės (Gaivenis 2002: 132–133). Pats kalbininkas, bene daugiausia iš visų Lietuvos terminologų nagrinėjęs terminų apibrėžtis, skiria šešis nevienodo produktyvumo apibrėžčių tipus: „1) pilnuosius apibrėžimus (artimus loginiams apibrėžimams, vadinamiems definitio per genus proximum et differentiam specificam), kai pirmoje apibrėžimo dalyje nurodoma termin nės sąvokos artimiausia giminė, o antroje – rūšinis skirtumas; 2) sinoniminius apibrėžimus, kai sudėtinis terminas aiškinamas vienu ar keliais tapačios arba labai artimos reikšmės atitikmenimis; 3) išvardijamuosius apibrėžimus, kai išskaičiuojami daiktai ar reiškiniai, priklausantys apibrėžiamai termininei sąvokai; 4) palyginamuosius apibrėžimus, kai po santrumpos plg. dedamas vienas žodis arba sudėtinis terminas, kuris atskirai yra apibrėžiamas, panaudojant bet kurį kitą apibrėžimo tipą; 5) nepilnuosius apibrėžimus, kurie gali neturėti loginio apibrėžimo formos ir nurodyti tik vieną kurią terminės sąvokos ar realijos ypatybę – paskirtį, kilmę, pavidalą ir pan.; 6) nuorodinius apibrėžimus, kai nurodomi mokslinei komunikacijai teiktini norminiai terminai vietoje siaurai vartojamų profesionalizmų ar netaisyklingų ir pasenusių terminų“ (Gaivenis 2004: 114–115). K. Gaivenis šiuos apibrėžčių tipus išskyrė išnagrinėjęs visų tipų sudėtinių terminų pateikimą pokario metais išleistuose terminų žodynuose.
As can already be understood, the type of definition essentially depends on the basis for classification chosen by the scholar. In other sources, Lithuanian texts generally distinguish intensional and extensional definitions (Gaivenis 2002: 30; cf. Celiešienė, Džežulskienė 2008: 45; EFT 2018: 44–45; ISO 1087: 2019)6. An intensional definition (English intensional definition) is understood as a definition that identifies “the nearest already defined or generally known generic concept7, and the characteristics describing the specific differences of the concept” (Kvašytė 2005: 13; cf. Gaivenis 2002: 30), while an extensional definition (English extensional definition) is one “that lists specific concepts belonging to the same level of abstraction or the constituent parts of a whole” (ibid.; cf. Gaivenis 2002: 17, 30; see also ISO 1087: 2019)8. K. Gaivenis
6 As noted earlier, K. Gaivenis called these definitions full definitions.
7 Here and elsewhere, the quotation is reproduced with the dictionary author R. Kvašytė’s emphasis.
8 The 2019 international standard ISO 1087: 2019, Terminology work and terminology science – Vocabulary (not translated into Lithuanian), distinguishes two types of extensional definitions: a generic extensional definition (English generic extensional definition) and a partitive extensional definition (English partitive extensional definition).
Terminologija | 2021 | 28
181
Page 8
According to him, “[I]ntensional definitions are usually classical definitions definitio per genus proximum et differentiam specificam. In these definitions, the specific difference may consist of not just one but several characteristics. This is because there are cases in which it is impossible to find the one characteristic that distinguishes the object being defined from all other objects and essentially reveals its content” (Gaivenis 2002: 30).
Not all types of definition are equally important in practical terminological work. For example, Reiner Arntz, Heribert Picht and Felix Mayer describe two of the most common types in their book Einführung in die Terminologiearbeit:
1) content definitions (cf. German Inhaltsdefinition, English analytical definition, intensional definition, generic definition) convey the content of a term, that is, the specific characteristics or properties that can be attributed to the subject being defined. Essentially, these are the same as what Lithuanian terminology considers the aforementioned intensional definition, since they draw on what is already known and identify certain necessary (but not all!) characteristics of the concept being defined, which help to fit the term into the existing terminology system;
2) extension definitions (cf. German Umfangsdefinition, German extensionale Definition, English extensional definition) help describe a term by identifying characteristics belonging to the same level of abstraction or the constituent parts of the concept as a whole. Thus, the authors distinguish here the extensional definition described in Lithuanian terminological literature and emphasize that the extension of a term can be specified in various ways, for example by listing individual objects or phenomena that constitute the terminological concept being defined, or by describing them using certain symbols, formulas, numbers, and other social signs of concepts (Arntz et al. 2004: 62–66).
According to these authors, content and extension definitions help reveal hierarchical relations among concepts, and either the content or the extension parameter may suffice to define terms, although in some cases a concept’s extension and content are related. R. Arntz, H. Picht and F. Mayer justify choosing such definitions on the grounds of their applicability in practical terminological work. It may be agreed that this is especially relevant to specialists in a particular subject area who seek to define terms precisely.
Juan C. Sager emphasizes that in practice-oriented terminological work, all kinds of definitions can be developed, even if they do not meet the strict requirements for the content of a classical definition (Sager 1990: 42). Here, it would probably be appropriate to
182
Aušra Rimkutė-Ganुसauskienė
Sudėtinio termino dėmenų ir apibrėžties subordinacija: vieno atvejo analizė
Page 9
It should not be forgotten that classifications of any kind are often based simply on differing authors’ viewpoints and, as already mentioned, on differing grounds for classification.
The Russian terminologist Sergei Shelov devotes particular attention to the definitions of terms, their types, and the requirements they must meet. In his 2003 monograph Термин. Терминологичность. Терминологические определения, he writes that the purpose of a definition is neither to confirm nor to describe, but to establish and define an object, thereby distinguishing it from others (Шелов 2003: 33). Drawing primarily on logic, the linguist divides definitions into five groups:
1) classificatory definitions (Russian родовидовые, классифицирующие определения), which distinguish a generic concept and its specific feature (Шелов 2003: 37). These definitions are divided into partitive and totative ones;
2) enumerative definitions (Russian перечислительные определения), in which the content of a term is revealed by listing the elements belonging to it (Шелов 2003: 45);
3) contextual definitions (Russian контекстуальные определения), in which the meaning of a term is explained by listing all the contexts in which it occurs (Шелов 2003: 51);
4) operational definitions (Russian операциональные определения), which reflect a particular operational activity. They are characteristic of the physical and mathematical sciences (Шелов 2003: 62);
5) monomorphic and polymorphic definitions (Russian мономорфные и полиморфные определения). Monomorphic definitions are characterized by the clear and strictly specified content of the term being defined, whereas polymorphic definitions allow a freer interpretation of the concept’s semantics and are imprecise; therefore, they are not recommended in normative terminography (Шелов 2003: 67). In the author’s opinion, this system of definitions also has inaccuracies (ibid.).
In conclusion, it should be emphasized that, for a definition to state, identify, or describe a concept precisely, it should reveal certain features of the concept being named that help highlight its differences from other concepts and show certain semantic relations. From what has been said, there can probably be no doubt that not only terms but also definitions help ensure subject-field communication that is reliable and understood in the same way by everyone. Moreover, as Figure 1 shows, the term and the definition are inter-
Terminologija | 2021 | 28
183
Page 10
… subordinative relations—what is revealed in the definition determines the term, and conversely, the choice of a particular term or its component(s) also determines the content of the definition. However, in practical terminological work, it should be borne in mind that in some cases “not just one, but even several definitions of terms may be correct” (Gaivenis 2002: 19). Thus, when evaluating a term (including its quality), it is always important to evaluate the quality of its definition as well, that is, whether it meets the requirements.
3. REQUIREMENTS FOR DEFINITIONS
In the standard of the Republic of Lithuania LRST 1115–90 Principles of Terminology and
methods, four requirements to be observed when formulating a definition are distinguished: 1) the definition must reflect the essential characteristics of the concept; 2) adequacy; 3) systematicity; and 4) brevity (Noreikaitė 1994: 99)9. Although this standard is no longer in force, the international requirements discussed in it (it is a translated international standard) indicate which requirements specialists writing definitions were obliged to observe.
Julia Eduardovna Mueller distinguishes the following requirements for definitions: a definition should be as concise as possible, while covering all the essential and distinctive characteristics of a concept; it should reveal the place of the defined term in the system of concepts; it should use familiar, already-defined terms; and terms should not be explained using synonyms or words that are essentially identical (Mueller 2016: 44–46).
S. Shelov distinguishes seven logical and linguistic requirements for a term definition: 1) the definition must be proportionate, that is, the extent of the definiendum and definiens must be equal; 2) the nearest genus and species must be identified in the definition; 3) the specificity of the specific difference must be demonstrated; 4) a vicious circle is undesirable in a system of definitions; 5) logically contradictory definitions are unsuitable; 6) the definition must be precise and clear; 7) negative definitions should be avoided (Шелов 2003: 204–205).
Most foreign terminologists identify very similar requirements for the content of definitions and note that definitions should be regularly
9The rules for writing definitions have been described in somewhat greater detail in the textbook by Vilija Celiešienė and Judita Džežulskienė, Fundamentals of Professional Language. It distinguishes the principles of adequacy (the term must describe the concept), systematicity (the characteristics of a concept must reveal its links with other concepts or its differences), conciseness (complex explanations are presented as notes), preservation of the subject domain, and modifiability (Celiešienė, Džežulskienė 2008: 46). The authors describe the principles for writing definitions on the basis of examples from explanatory terminological dictionaries; therefore, the stated rules for writing definitions may not be suitable in every case.
184
Aušra Rimkutė-Ganusauskienė
Sudėtinio termino dėmenų ir apibrėžties subordinacija: vieno atvejo analizė
Page 11
atnaujinti, nes jų turinys, laikui bėgant, gali kisti (Arntz ir kt. 2004: 14).
In practical terminographic work, definitions are usually formulated by specialists, who are consulted by terminologists when necessary. Terminology dictionaries strive not only to ensure that terms form certain systems (this is an obvious logical feature of definitions), but also that their definitions are consistent. Of course, when specialists write definitions, problems may arise because of the definition prototypes they have, their understanding of the concept, and their knowledge. These factors may also explain why definitions of the same term in a particular field differ across sources. Which definition is precise and comprehensive may become the subject of scholarly debate. Some foreign sources emphasize that if specialists have formulated a precise and clear definition of a field-specific term, and it has been approved and published in a terminographic source or database for that field, it should be used rather than replaced with a new one (Oberholzer 2002: 16).
One thing is clear: a particular concept must be defined according to only one category, and the most reliable criterion for systematizing and grouping concepts by category is their content. The linguistic requirements for definitions must also be borne in mind, such as correctness, systematicity, economy, currency, and so on.
4. CASE STUDY
Not only specialists in a particular subject or field but also terminologists quite often face the question of not only how to define terms—that is, how to write a clear, precise, and systematic definition—but also which term or term component to choose so that it most accurately reveals all the intended aspects of a concept, defines the scope of the concept denoted by the head component, and specifies its content. Nearly a year and a half ago, I came across the manuscript of a sports terminology dictionary in preparation. Since there are many different sports, many specialists are involved in writing the dictionary. Doubts arose in cases where representatives of different sports used different names for clothing terms used in sport, especially those containing the components clothing and shoes, so it was decided to examine terms already approved and included in terminology dictionaries, along with their definitions.
The Terminology Bank of the Republic of Lithuania10 lists the following compound terms from the field of sport with clothing as the head component:
10 For more information about the Terminology Bank and the terms published in it, see Alvydas Umbrasas’s article “The Terminology Bank of the Republic of Lithuania: 10 Years after the Adoption of the Law,” published in issue 20 of the journal Terminologija (pp. 96–122).
Terminologija | 2021 | 28
185
Page 12
gymnastics clothing – sports clothes and shoes worn during gymnastics (AATŽ 2014);
golf clothing – clothes, footwear, and headwear for playing golf (AATŽ 2014);
skiing clothing – clothes, footwear, and headwear for skiing (AATŽ 2014);
tennis clothing – clothes, footwear, and headwear intended to be worn when playing lawn tennis (AATŽ 2014).
As the definitions show, they can be regarded as enumerative, since they state what constitutes the defined terminological concept—in this case, clothes, footwear, and headwear. In defining gymnastics clothing, the description is further specified: not just any items, but sports clothes and shoes. It should also be noted that the words used in the definitions—clothes, footwear, headwear, sports clothes, shoes—can also be found in clothing terminology dictionaries, for example, Stanislovas Algimantas Ratautas, Eugenija Strazdienė, and Ada Gulbinienė’s Explanatory Dictionary of Clothing Terms (2014) or Juozas Prčiauskas’s Clothing Dictionary (2002). The logical center of all the terms presented is the head component clothing. The question naturally arises whether the modifiers gymnastics, golf, skiing, tennis, which name a particular sport or sports game and carry a certain sense of purpose, were chosen deliberately. Might it be more accurate to say gymnasts’, golfers’, skiers’, or tennis players’ clothing, that is, to use modifiers naming the people for whom the clothing is intended? Such thoughts probably arise because dictionaries already published also contain compound terms whose modifiers are plural genitives denoting the people who wear the footwear being defined (motorcyclist, parachutist):
motorcyclists’ boots – boots intended for motorcycle sport and riding motorcycles, usually with straps over the instep and ankle, joined over the instep and heel by a metal ring (AATŽ 2014);
parachutists’ boots – boots worn by parachutists for parachute jumps, part of a parachutist’s clothing (AATŽ 2014).
In addition to those already mentioned, there are specific terms whose modifiers denote a sport and whose definitions are worded much more broadly; compare:
boxing shoes – shoes with high- or low-laced uppers, and lightweight leather or other-material soles with good shock absorption and anti-friction properties, for boxers (AATŽ 2014);
field hockey shoes – shoes worn when playing field hockey, characterized by greater protective and cushioning capacity and a greater number of studs on the sole (AATŽ 2014).
186
Aušra Rimkutė-Ganusauskienė
Sudėtinio termino dėmenų ir apibrėžties subordinacija: vieno atvejo analizė
Page 13
As can be seen from the examples of clothing terms presented in the Terminų bankas, in both cases the distinguishing features of the objects being defined are such characteristics as with ankle tops, with particular soles, made of leather, that is, certain shoe parts, the material from which they are made, and so on. In addition to all this, some definitions also mention purpose: for playing field hockey, intended for motor sports and riding a motorcycle, for parachute jumping. Thus, all the definitions first indicate the concept’s nearest genus and then describe its distinguishing feature, most often more than one. The terms expressing affiliation, motorcyclists’ boots and parachutists’ boots, are more interesting grammatically—the dependent components of the terms are expressed in the plural. One may ask whether such terminological plural forms are justified and necessary. Might the singular suffice after all? The generalizing plural seems more precise here, since the type of footwear is named in general terms, indicating affiliation with motorcyclists, parachutists, without referring to any particular motorcyclist or parachutist. However, the singular would also be perfectly suitable here, especially if the person’s designation were likewise mentioned in the singular in the definitions.
Thus, why do compound terms with the head components clothing and boots in some cases name a type characterized by purpose, and in others one characterized by affiliation? What does this depend on? One might guess that the specialists’ choice was determined by the definition, more precisely, by the features selected as essential and as distinguishing a particular concept from others. A terminologist would seem to have no formal grounds for criticism here, except for one thing: definitions of similar types of concepts are based on different principles and, when placed together in one explanatory terminology dictionary, will not form a clear system. However, one might also consider that the head components of the terms discussed differ in the scope of their meaning, since the component clothing denotes not only certain garments but also equipment specially made for athletes in a particular sport, that is, gear, whereas the component boots denotes only a specific type of footwear; this is precisely why differences in expression arise. It may also be considered that the logical imperfections and inconsistencies discussed arise from shortcomings in the definitions and from the experience and knowledge of specialists in different sports, as well as from terminographic work being carried out separately—that is, without seeing the system as a whole.
Let us examine one more case—fishermen’s boots, fishing boots, angling boots, fishery boots, or boots for fishing? That is, how should one name boots,
Terminologija | 2021 | 28
187
Page 14
intended to be worn by fishers while fishing. Although the Explanatory Dictionary of Clothing Terms contains the term fishermen’s boots11:
waterproof boots intended for anglers and fishers (AATŽ 2014),
but why could such boots not be called something else, for example, TB fishing boots, cf. riding boots (AATŽ 2014), and cf. TB riding trousers, if this footwear is intended to be worn while performing a particular activity? Or could the dependent component of the compound term be the genitive of a concrete rather than an abstract noun, fishing, cf. hiking boots (AATŽ 2014)? In terminology, dependent components in the dative case are rarely used. In this instance, in the phrase boots for fishing, the component for fishing could be replaced by the more usual genitive form, fishing. Fishing boots would also be possible: the dependent component fishing would express association with the action or process denoted by the base word (fishing), or a connection with it. As the dictionary definition shows, it describes the purpose (intended for anglers and fishers) and an essential feature (waterproof). Doubts about the dependent component of the compound term under discussion also arise because the definition mentions anglers and fishers, whereas the term itself refers only to fishers. So, are fishers and anglers the same? In the latest normative Dictionary of Standard Lithuanian, the word žvejys is defined as “a person who fishes”; in the academic Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language, the word meškeriotojas means “one who fishes with a rod.” Both an angler and a fisher can catch fish with a fishing rod. However, the concept žvejys is understood much more broadly, depending on the field in which it needs to be defined.
Apparently, when creating terms, specialists should nevertheless take content—that is, terminological meaning—as their starting point, and should reflect in the definition, with justification, the essential and distinguishing features of the concept being named. Logic and the semantic content of the term should not be overlooked either. Essentially, the choice of a component in a compound term depends on the content and scope of the definition. Conversely, the choice of component(s) in a compound term determines the definition, since one generally assesses whether the term and definition are compatible, whether the definition is too broad or too narrow, whether there is a vicious circle, and so on. Thus, a definition cannot exist separately from a term, nor a term separately from a definition, and neither can exist separately from the author of the definition and term. Consequently, a definition and a term (whether the term is simple or compound) are related to each other by relations of subordination (see Fig. 2): each determines the other and depends on the other.
11In Terminology Corrections, instead of the foreignisms bachilai, bachilos, the term fisher’s boots is proposed (TT 1992: 21).
188
Aušra Rimkutė-Ganusauskienė
Sudėtinio termino dėmenų ir apibrėžties subordinacija: vieno atvejo analizė
Page 15
CONCLUSIONS
1. A term must have a definition. The content of a definition depends on the scope of a concept: when the number of general and distinguishing features by which it is named changes (decreases or increases), the content of the definition may also change (be refined—narrowed or expanded). When defining the same concept, specialists may record different features of that concept. Such variation is determined by differences in specialists’ experience, subject-area knowledge, education, and understanding of the concept. Thus, a definition is the result of a constructive agreement.
2. Different classifications of definitions can be found in the scholarly literature, and these essentially depend on the chosen basis for classification, the authors’ experience and conception, as well as the subject area. Definitions have received little attention in Lithuanian terminology. Terminologist K. Gaivenis devoted the most attention to them. Essentially, all classifications are based on the concepts of intension and extension, as well as on the results of practical work—the definitions of terms published in terminographic sources.
3. The expression of the specifying component(s) of a complex term clearly depends on the content of the definition, which is formulated by a specialist in a particular subject area. Thus, the choice of which component to use depends on the specialist’s conception of the term being named—whether they wish to distinguish a particular field or branch, or to name a person, and so on. In such cases, a terminologist advising a specialist compiling a terminology dictionary must acknowledge that one of the principal requirements has not been breached: a definition must be complete, clear, objective, and unambiguous, and the scope of the concept being defined must equal the scope of the defining concept. Thus, a term and its definition are related by bidirectional subordination: the choice of a simple term or of the components of a complex term depends on the content and scope of the definition, and vice versa.
ŠALTINIAI
AATŽ – Stanislovas Algimantas Ratautas, Eugenija Strazdienė, Ada Gulbinienė, Aiškinamasis aprangos terminų žodynas: daugiau nei 6000 terminų lietuvių, anglų, obkiečių, prancūzų ir rusų kalbomis, Kaunas: Technologija, 2014.
Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, vyr. red. D. Liutkevičienė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Prieiga internete: https://ekalba.lt/bendrines-lietuviu-kalbos-zodynas/.
Lietuvių kalbos žodynas, vyr. red. G. Naktinienė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Prieiga internete: https://ekalba.lt/lietuviu-kalbos-zodynas/.
Priešniauskas Juozas 2002: Aprangos žodynas, Vilnius: Apvašris.
TB – Valstybinės lietuvių kalbos komisijos Lietuvos Respublikos terminų bankas, 2005–2020. Prieiga internete: http://terminai.vlkk.lt/.
Terminologija | 2021 | 28
189
Page 16
LITERATŪRA
Arntz Reiner, Picht Heribert, Mayer Felix 2004: Einführung in die Terminologiearbeit, Georg Olms Verlag AG Hildesheim.
Bubelis Rimgaudas, Jakimenko Virginija, Valatka Vytis 2012: Logika. II dalis. Silogistika, klasių logika, daugiareiškė, modalinė, normų logika, nededukciniai samprotavimai, Vilnius: Mykolo Romerio universitetas.
Celišienė Vilija, Džėžulskienė Judita 2008: Profesinės kalbos pagrindai, Kaunas: Technologija.
EFT – Empfehlungen für die Terminologiearbeit, Bern, 2018. Prieiga internete: http://www.cotsoes.org/sites/default/files/KUEDES_Empfehlungen_fuer_die_Terminologiearbeit_Bern_2018.pdf [žiūrėta 2021-05-13].
Eidukienė Dalia 2009: Logika, Vilnius: Paranama.
Gaivenis Kazimieras 2002: Lietuvių terminologija: teorijos ir tvarkybos metmenys, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla.
Gaivenis Kazimieras 2004: Sudėtinių terminų pateikimas ir aiškinimas terminų žodynuose. – Terminologijos istorijos ir dabarties problemos: straipsnių rinkinys Kazimierui Gaiveniui atminti, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla.
Gaivenis Kazimieras, Keinys Stasys 1990: Kalbotyros terminų žodynas, Kaunas: Šviesa.
ISO 1087: 2019 (en) Terminology work and terminology science – Vocabulary. Prieiga internete: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:62330:en [žiūrėta 2021-07-05].
Jakaitienė Evalda 2005: Leksikografija, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.
Jakaitienė Evalda 2010: Leksikologija: studijų knyga, antr. pakart. leid., Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla.
Keinys Stasys 2005: Priesaginė lietuviškų terminų daryba. – Dabartinė lietuvių terminologija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 21–76.
Klimavičius Jonas 2005: Kazimieras Gaivenis. Lietuvių terminologija: teorijos ir tvarkybos metmenys [rec.]. – Leksikologijos ir terminologijos darbai: norma ir istorija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 246–258.
KP L1 – Kalbos patarimai 4: kn. Leksika 1: skolinių vartojimas (L1), sud. D. Mikulėnienė, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2005.
KP L1 – Kalbos patarimai 4: kn. Leksika 1: skolinių vartojimas (L1), sud. D. Mikulėnienė, A. Dilytė, antras patais. ir papild. leid., Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2013.
Kvašytė Regina 2005: Mokomasis terminologijos žodynėlis, Šiauliai: VŠĮ Šiaulių universiteto leidykla.
LKE – Lietuvių kalbos enciklopedija, par. K. Morkūnas, red. V. Ambrazas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 1999.
LST ISO 1087-1:2005 Terminologijos darbas. Aiškinamasis žodynas. 1 dalis. Teorija ir taikymas (tapatus ISO 1087-1:2000).
Mickienė Ilona, Briaukienė Birutė 2016: Lietuvių terminologijos apsek tai: metodinė mokomoji knyga, Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas. Prieiga internete: https://www.knf.vu.lt/dokumentai/failai/katedru/lietuviu/Lietuvi%C5%b3_terminologijos_apsektai_2016.pdf [žiūrėta 2021-04-01].
Mueller Julia Eduardovna 2016: Prinzipien, Arten und Charakteristika von Definitionen in der deutschen und englischen Logistikterminologie. – Филологические науки в МГИМО 7, 39–49. Prieiga internete: https://philnauki.mgimo.ru/jour/article/view/117/118 [žiūrėta 2021-07-01].
Noreikaitė Adelė 1994: Lietuvos Respublikos standartas „Terminologijos principai ir metodai“. – Terminologija 1, 99–100.
Plečkaitis Romanas 2004: Logikos pagrindai, Vilnius: Tyto Alba.
Sager Juan C. 1990: A Practical Course in Terminology Processing, Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Šalkauskis Stasys 1991: Raštai II: filosofijos ir pedagogikos terminija, Vilnius: Mintis.
TT – Kazimieras Gaivenis, Angelė Kaulakienė, Stasys Keinys, Jonas Klimavičius, Terminologijos taisymai, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1992.
TV – Terminologijos vadovėlis Europos Komisijos Vertimo raštu generalinio direktorato Lietuvių kalbos departamento vertėjams, Liuksemburgas, 2006. Prieiga internete: http://www.laraneda.lt/failai/terminology_guidelines_lt.pdf [žiūrėta 2021-05-12].
TŽŽ – Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, red. A. Kaulakienė, Vilnius: Alma littera, 2013.
TŽŽ – Valerija Vaitkevičiūtė, Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, 4-as patais. ir papild. leidimas, Vilnius: Žodynas, 2007.
VLEe – Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija, e. variantas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras, 2001–2020. Prieiga internete: www.vle.lt.
Шелов Сергей Дмитриевич 2003: Термин. Терминологичность. Терминологические определения, Москва.
190
Aušra Rimkutė-Ganusauskienė
Sudėtinio termino dėmenų ir apibrėžties subordinacija: vieno atvejo analizė
Page 17
SUBORDINATION BETWEEN COMPONENTS AND DEFINITION OF A COMBINATIVE TERM: CASE STUDY
Summary
As it is generally known, the content of the term is revealed by the definition of the terminological meaning, the content of which essentially depends on the scope of the concept. If the number of the basic and distinguishing features reflected by the concept changes (decreases or increases), the content of the definition may be further updated (narrowed or expanded). The professionals of a certain field may choose slightly different features of the concept to define the same concept. Such inconsistency may be determined by the difference in their experience, perception of the concept, professional knowledge, and even imagination. We may say that the definition of a certain term is the outcome of a constructive agreement, and there are cases where several definitions (rather than one) revealing the basic and distinguishing features of the concept devised by the professionals of a certain field may be considered correct and appropriate.
The article analyses two-word terms with the head component apranga and batai found in the Term Bank of the Republic of Lithuania: gimnastikos apranga, golfo apranga, slidinėjimo apranga, teniso apranga and motociklininkų batai, parašiutininkų batai, bokso batai, žolės riedulio batai, etc. It is discussed why in some cases the combinative terms with apranga and batai as head components indicate aspect with the shade of purpose and in other cases with the shade of belonging. The analysis of the examples entails a conclusion that the expression of the aspectual component(s) of the combinative term obviously depends on the content of the definition created by a professional of a certain field. It means that the way a professional conceives the specific term determines which element is chosen for use. Therefore, the term and its definition are linked by bidirectional relations of subordination, i.e. the selection of constituent components for a one-word or combinative term depends on the content and scope of the definition, and vice versa.
