Lietuvių terminologija atkurtosios nepriklausomybės pradžioje

doi.org/10.35321/term27-11 Lithuanian Terminology at the Beginning of the Restored Independence ALVYDAS UMBRASAS Institute of the Lithuanian Language ABSTRACT Dedicated to the 30th anniversary of the restoration of Lithuania’s independence, this article examines, from a terminological perspective, the beginning of independence—a significant period in Lithuanian history that began after the Soviet era—and the problems of that time. It focuses primarily on the work of the Terminology Department of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. At the beginning of independence, the Department undertook the principal tasks of terminological research and practice: it launched a scholarly journal devoted to terminology, assessed dictionaries of terms and standards from a terminological perspective, and developed the idea of a terminology database. KEYWORDS: terminology, terminological work, Terminology Department, history of terminology, Lithuania, restoration of independence ABSTRACT The article dedicated to the 30th anniversary of the restoration of the independent state of Lithuania addresses the beginning of the significant period in the history of Lithuania, i.e., the period of independence, which started after the Soviet era, and the problems of that time from the perspective of terminology. Most attention is paid to the activities of the Terminology Department at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. It is where the major scientific and practical terminology work was accomplished after the independent state of Lithuania was restored: the publishing of the journal dedicated to terminology began; dictionaries of terms and terminology standards were evaluated from the perspective of terminology; the idea of the term database was conceived and developed. KEYWORDS: terminology, terminology work, Terminology Department, history of terminology, Lithuania, restoration of independence Language is part of a state’s identity, while its terminology is an indicator of the development of the language and, consequently, of the state. Only a minority of the world’s languages have developed terminology. The guarantee of terminology development is the use of the language for the needs of the state and science. The development of the state is closely linked to termino- 258 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtosios nepriklausomybės pradžioje In the development of language, certain stages in the development of a state are often also stages in the development of terminology. Of course, unlike a state, which under certain circumstances can appear on or disappear from maps quite quickly, language is inert and changes slowly; its changes do not happen suddenly. However, changes in a state affect it over time. These changes are usually most clearly seen from the perspective of time. This year—the 30th anniversary of the restoration of Lithuania’s independence—is just such an occasion to look back a little. Thirty years is quite a long time: a person matures over that period, and perhaps a state does too. Having lived through a particular period, one is curious to recall its beginnings. The period from 1990 to 2020 is highly significant for the Lithuanian state and the Lithuanian language, and the beginning of that period is especially interesting, as it shaped subsequent processes. To mark the anniversary, it was decided to examine the beginning of independence from a terminological perspective, focusing on the first few years after independence was restored (with the first five years of independence as the main focus, but without drawing strict boundaries). Using the descriptive method, the article presents an analysis of terminological activity at the time. It aims to show the concerns and future plans for terminology at the beginning of restored independence, survey the terminological work of that period while touching on aspects of its development, and reveal the situation at the time. Terminological work and scholarship in Lithuania are closely associated with the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. Questions of terminology have been studied there since the institute was founded in 1941. In the year the Institute of the Lithuanian Language was established, a Subdivision of Practical Language and Terminology was set up within it; in 1971, a Terminology Group was established in the Dictionary Sector of the merged Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature (headed by Kazimieras Gaivenis). Before that, from 1951 to 1971, a Terminology Commission had worked there on the consideration of terms (for more, see Auksoriūtė 2005; Auksoriūtė 2014). On the eve of independence (1989), the Language Culture and Terminology Department began operating. At that time, linguists and literary scholars still belonged to a single institute, but the year independence was restored also marked the re-establishment of a separate Institute of the Lithuanian Language. In 1991, a separate Terminology Department was established there—the first independent unit created to address the needs of terminology scholarship. This article focuses specifically on the work of the Terminology Department, which grew out of the Terminology Group, since at the beginning of independence it was the principal venue for term research and management. The department’s prehistory and the circumstances of its establishment are also touched upon. The article draws primarily on unpublished archival data—as sour- Terminologija | 2020 | 27 259 ces, the protocols12 and appendices (reports, etc.) of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language’s Terminology Group, Language Culture and Terminology Department, Terminology Department, and Research Council were used. WORK DURING A PERIOD OF TRANSITION The beginning of independence was, on the one hand, a difficult period, because many things in the state had to be created or restored, but at the same time it was a romantic period, characterized by faith in a good future. The work of transforming the state begun by Sąjūdis was reflected in terminological work and, more generally, in language planning. The activities of the then Language Culture and Terminology Department were closely connected with this. After a long period of bilingualism, Lithuanian became the sole—state—language, which posed many challenges for language planning, since during the Soviet period Lithuanian had been entirely or almost entirely displaced from some fields, such as transport, industry, office administration, and especially the military. On 11 March 1990, the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania restored Lithuania’s statehood and, through the Provisional Basic Law of the Republic of Lithuania, opened the door for Lithuanian to enter various areas of state activity3. Very soon afterward, on 29–30 May, the Institute of the Lithuanian Language organized the 7th Baltic Theoretical and Methodological Seminar on Terminology and Language Culture, “The State Language and Language Normalization,” which examined issues concerning the Lithuanian language— The name of the Research Council of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language changed over time. As the sources show, at first it was called the Scientific Council of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language; later, for quite a long period, it was called simply the Council of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. This article makes no distinction between the names and refers to it as the Research Council in all cases. The text of the article indicates in parentheses which protocol is being cited. Abbreviations: KKTS—Language Culture and Terminology Department, TS—Terminology Department, MT—Research Council; the date of the meeting recorded in the protocol is also provided. I thank the director of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language, Dr. Albina Auksoriūtė, for allowing me to use the institute’s archival materials, and the institute’s archivist, Rita Maldonienė, for kindly retrieving the relevant protocols from the archive. Article 7 of that law stated: “The state language of the Republic of Lithuania is Lithuanian. The Republic of Lithuania shall ensure the use of the Lithuanian language in the activities of state and public bodies, in educational, cultural, scientific, industrial, and other institutions, enterprises, and organizations, and the State’s care for the comprehensive development and teaching of the Lithuanian language. Conditions shall be created for the use and development of the languages of national communities as well.” As early as 18 November 1988, the Supreme Council of the Lithuanian SSR had adopted an amendment to the constitution of the time (Article 771), declaring: “The state language of the Lithuanian SSR is Lithuanian. The Lithuanian SSR shall ensure the use of the Lithuanian language in the activities of state and public bodies, in educational, cultural, scientific, industrial, and other institutions, enterprises, and organizations, and the State’s care for the comprehensive development and teaching of the Lithuanian language. Conditions shall be created for the development of other languages used in the Lithuanian SSR, and for the study and use of Russian as a means of communication among the peoples of the USSR” (St. Keinys has drawn attention to the excessive compromise embodied in this wording, based on the insistently promoted foundation of bilingualism in the languages of national minorities and Russian (Keinys 2012 [1994]: 21–22)). The use of the state language was defined in greater detail in the Law on the State Language of the Republic of Lithuania, adopted by the Seimas on 31 January 1995. 260 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtosios nepriklausomybės pradžioje Following the change in its status, publications based on seminar presentations were published4; for example, Stasys Keinys examined the links between nation, language, and state, covering historical aspects, the policy of Russification, the concept of the state language, and related issues concerning the languages of national minorities (Keinys 2012 [1994]). In the restored state, various language-related issues had to be addressed. At the meeting of the Language Culture and Terminology Section on 13 September 1990, the draft passport of a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania was discussed; the Legal Department of the Supreme Council had sent it for linguistic evaluation. The minutes show that attention was drawn to bilingualism: previously the passport had been in Lithuanian and Russian, whereas Lithuanian and English were now proposed, but the matter was set aside because examples of passports from other countries were unavailable. The spelling of surnames, given names, and patronymics prompted the most discussion (the spelling of personal names in documents continues to arouse passions even 30 years later...): some (Pranas Kniūkšta, K. Gaivenis) proposed putting the surname first, as it was officially more important; others (St. Keinys) stressed that this order was Russian, while in Lithuanian it was customary to put the given name first (and this was the proposal agreed upon). It was discussed that in Russian the given name and patronymic are inseparable, whereas in our documents the father’s name need not be given at all. It was agreed that instead of šeiminyninė padėtis, the passport should state šeiminė padėtis, or, better still, santuokos įrašai. The passport draft’s term identifikacijos numeris was discussed, and it was agreed to propose tapatybės numeris (apparently this was what the standard Lietuvos RST 1185–91, which entered into force on 1 December 1991, called asmens kodu in Asmens kodas. Sudėtis ir struktūra). At the end of the very month independence was declared (KKTS 1990 03 27), a matter was discussed that the minutes titled “The Lithuanian version of the ISO international standard prepared by the University Standardization Section” (referring to the standard later published that year, Lietuvos RST 1115–90 Terminologijos principai ir metodai); thus, important steps were taken toward the standardization of Lithuanian terms. Standards (not terminology standards) began to be prepared and published in Lithuania in 1975 (Maslauskienė 2004: 257); before independence was declared, Soviet standards (GOST) were in force in Lithuania. These included terminology standards, but they contained no Lithuanian terms (Maslauskienė 2004: 260). At the meeting in question, various comments were made on logical and linguistic aspects of the standard. For example, the need for synonyms and the relations between concepts were discussed, and Jonas Klimavičius proposed that alongside the term terminų darybą 4 Volume 31 of Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimų was dedicated to the papers of the international seminar; it appeared only in 1994, although the publication had been approved for printing as early as 1991 (MT 1991 12 13). However, the Research Council objected to publishing articles in Estonian; later, permission was given not to translate them (MT 1992 02 04). Terminologija | 2020 | 27 261 a broader term, terminų (su)darymas ar terminų kūrimas, would also be needed. Although the minutes do not name the authors, it is clear that K. Gaivenis also contributed to preparing the standard5, since the meeting decided “to approve the standard from the linguistic point of view, and for K. Gaivenis to take the comments and proposals into account.” The minutes of the Terminology Group show that at a meeting on 10 March 1989, attended by terminologists St. Keinys and K. Gaivenis, as well as Aleksandras Vanagas, then deputy director of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature, and Zigmas Zinkevičius (representative of the Language Society), A. Rėza (representative of the State Planning Committee), S. Daugėla, A. Januškis, A. Palšaitis, N. Dudlauskienė, A. Juodviršis, and B. Palaima6 (Kaunas Polytechnic Institute) (see Fig. 1), issues concerning the organization of terminology work were discussed. It was decided to prepare certain terminology standards, assign linguistic examination to the Terminology Group (noting that it needed to be expanded), and conduct subject-field examination at institutes of the Academy of Sciences and higher education institutions. Thus, the standard devoted to the principles and methods of terminology was part of this work. In reviewing the Section’s work during its first six months (KKTS 1990 06 15), P. Kniūkšta spoke about the forthcoming Kanceliarinės kalbos patarimus7 and the problems arising in their preparation, as documents and institutional names were changing; he said that he had helped the Archives Board prepare office-procedure instructions. When the Section reviewed its work during the first year of independence (KKTS 1990 12 12), K. Gaivenis said that the terminologists’ work had been more closely connected with practice. He urged the Section’s staff not to drift into a service role, but to focus on scholarly work and its prestige. He said that the value of articles in Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimų was questionable: readers were attracted by article titles rather than their content. He regretted that few articles of a practical nature were being published. Given the growing number of practical tasks, St. Keinys proposed consultations 5 The standard Lietuvos RST 1115-90 itself states that it was prepared by K. Gaivenis (topic leader), N. Dudlauskienė, L. Laužikas, E. Paukštienė, and J. Storpirštienė (first names not given). The University of Vilnius coordinated it with the Terminology Council of the Academy of Sciences, and the Department of Standardization and Quality under the Government of the Republic of Lithuania approved it by Resolution No. 3 on 1990 09 28. The standard was prepared in accordance with the corresponding international standard ISO 704-87 Terminology work – Principles and methods. The Lithuanian standard from the beginning of independence remained in force for a long time; for a period, it continued to apply even after the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) updated the standard in 2000 (ISO 704:2000) (Maslauskienė 2004: 261). A newer Lithuanian version appeared only more than a decade later—LST ISO 704:2005/P:2006 Terminologijos darbas. Principai ir metodai (identical to ISO 704:2000). Somewhat later, the original standard was updated (ISO 704:2009); in 2010 the former Lithuanian version was withdrawn and replaced by the English-language version, LST ISO 704:2010, adopted as a Lithuanian standard. It is troubling that in the ten years since then, no Lithuanian translation has appeared. 6 The minutes give only the first initials of people’s given names; the article follows the same practice. 7 The title was modeled on Kalbos praktikos patarimų; the publication was conceived during the Soviet period, its preparation was completed in 1992, and it was published in 1993. It quickly sold out and was reprinted several times thereafter (Kniūkšta 2018: 27–28). 262 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtos nepriklausomybės pradžioje Fig. 1. Minutes of the Terminology Group meeting on 10 March 1989 Terminologija | 2020 | 27 263 and charge for editing; he even considered whether it might be worth setting up some kind of language services cooperative (this was the time when cooperatives were being established...), since a research institution should not become, as he put it, “a maid to those who do not know the language” (a year later, J. Klimavičius also considered that a “language services firm” should be established to translate terms and help with practical work (TS 1992 12 21)). One of the more significant works undertaken by terminologists in the joint department at the very beginning of independence was a collaboratively prepared book of terminology corrections. It was prepared by K. Gaivenis, Angelė Kaulakienė, St. Keinys, and J. Klimavičius, with Auksė Montvilienė assisting in collecting the material. Corrections were compiled from their own professional practice and gathered from Kalbos kultūros, Mūsų kalbos, G imtosios kalbos and other publications. The work was completed in 1991, and on 29 April its final (second) version, entitled Terminologijos patarimai, was submitted for consideration at a meeting of the Language Culture and Terminology Department (KKTS 1991 04 29). As the minutes show, most of the material was collected by A. Kaulakienė and K. Gaivenis; the entire preparation took three years and involved numerous terminologists’ meetings. According to K. Gaivenis, the corrections in the first prepared version (which the terminologists discussed separately from the department as a whole) were less strict, whereas in the second version they were made stricter and more terminological, with an effort to include as few synonyms as possible. K. Gaivenis proposed publishing the work and preparing a second edition twice as large three years later, which “we could enter into a computer.” When the publication was approved for printing by the Institute’s Academic Council, it was also suggested that, once supplemented, it “could even be used to establish a bank of incorrect terms alongside a bank of correct terms” (MT 1991 05 08). When the publication was discussed both in the department and at the Academic Council, its title Terminologijos patarimai was debated (apparently, it was modeled on Kalbos praktikos patarimų), and it was proposed that it be changed. Suggested titles included Terminologijos žodynėlis (Kazys Ulvydas) and Terminai – blogi ir geri (Vytautas Ambrazas). Ultimately, the more fitting title Terminologijos taisymai was chosen, and the publication was printed in 1992 (TT). According to the preface, the collection contains about 3,500 “corrections that fall more squarely within the competence of terminologists.” The Academic Council recommended that the publication be approved by the Terminology Council operating under the Academy of Sciences, but this was not done (at that time, there was already discussion about the existence and necessity of this council⁸ (TS 8 In some minutes it is called the Terminologijos t a r y b a, and in others the Terminologijos k o m i s i j a, although apparently the same body is meant. The Terminology Council under the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences was established in 1971, replacing the Terminology Commission that had operated at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature (a Terminology Group was established at the institute that same year). The council comprised 23 prominent specialists in various fields of science and technology. It was chaired by academician Vytautas Mažiulis, its deputy chair was Jonas Kruopas (after his death, St. Keinys), and its secretary was K. Gaivenis (Auksoriūtė 2005: 12). 264 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtosios nepriklausomybės pradžioje 1991 12 23; MT 1991 06 25; MT 1991 09 27)). Overall, the publication played an important role in practical language work and was useful to editors and others responsible for terminology. No newer, expanded editions appeared (it cannot be ruled out that this was partly due to the difficulty of reconciling the contributors’ positions on corrections). ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TERMINOLOGY DEPARTMENT The Language Culture and Terminology Department, established in 19899, existed only briefly. Political circumstances were probably the cause. After independence was restored, the role of the Lithuanian language and the need to study and standardize various language issues grew considerably. On 8 May 1991, the Academic Council of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language approved the reorganization of the Language Culture and Terminology Department and decided to establish two departments in its place—the Language Culture Department and the Terminology Department. Among the reasons cited by the institute’s director, A. Vanagas, was the need to strengthen work on language culture and terminology creation, since Lithuanian was now the state language (MT 1991 05 08). It should be noted that the Language Culture and Terminology Department was not a unified entity: work was carried out in groups. As mentioned, the Terminology Group had operated in the Institute’s Dictionary Section since 1971; the minutes show that a Terminology Group also operated within the Language Culture and Terminology Department, and indicate that it was headed by10 K. Gaivenis (the department’s other groups were headed by P. Kniūkšta and Simas Karaliūnas). Since the department’s work was organized in groups, dividing up the staff during its reorganization should not have been difficult. A few days after the Academic Council’s decision, Lietuvos aidas (1991 05 14) announced a competition for the heads of the new departments—the Language Culture Department and the Terminology Department. There was one candidate for each post: P. Kniūkšta and St. Keinys, respectively (the latter had headed the Department of Contemporary Lithuanian Literary Language since 1987 and the Language Culture and Terminology Department since 1989). At the competition on 25 June, the Academic Council elected P. Kniūkšta as head of the Language Culture Department by secret ballot, but did not elect St. Keinys as head of the Terminology Department. It announced— 9 Incidentally, some of the minutes’ headings (1990 03 27; 1990 09 13; 1990 11 15) identify the body as the Terminologijos ir kalbos kultūros skyrius (with the fields in the opposite order). This discrepancy may be viewed as a sign of internal competition. 10 At K. Gaivenis’s appraisal in the department (KKTS 1991 03 13), it was stated that he headed the Terminology Group; the directorate was asked to reappoint him as a senior research fellow, with the possibility of promotion to principal research fellow if circumstances allowed (in rank, this position lay between senior and chief research fellow; such positions no longer exist, and a research fellow is now called a researcher). Terminologija | 2020 | 27 265 Repeated elections for the head of the Terminology Department were held (Lietuvos aidas 1991 08 16). K. Gaivenis is now a candidate for the position, and on September 27 he is elected head. After the Department of Language Culture and Terminology was divided into two departments, the Terminology Department was assigned 11 staff members (out of 21), a postgraduate student, and two more employees were hired immediately; thus the department comprised: Dr.11 K. Gaivenis (head), senior research fellow habil. Dr. S. Karaliūnas, senior research fellows Dr. A. Kaulakienė and Dr. St. Keinys, research fellow J. Klimavičius, junior research fellows A. Auksoriūtė, Nijolė Banevičienė, Gina Kavaliūnaitė, Adelė Noreikaitė, Rosita Medišauskienė, and Audronė Šalkauskaitė, senior laboratory assistants Jolanta Gaivenytė and Giedrė Šilinskaitė, and postgraduate student Vilija Drėgūnienė. When the departments were divided, S. Karaliūnas’s request to be assigned to the Terminology Department was approved, although it was said that, given his research area, he could join the Department of the History of Language (MT 1991 09 27) (at the same time, the Sociolinguistics Group he had headed was disbanded; it had been established “for circumstantial reasons,” and he was the only one left in the group). As can be seen, the department was quite large and had a substantial number of both experienced and young specialists12. FUTURE PLANS The report from the Terminology Department’s first year of operation (TS 1991 12 23; the first page of the minutes of the meeting at which the report was discussed is shown in Fig. 2) indicates that the department inherited from its predecessor the topic “Linguistic Research into Lithuanian Terminology and the Organization and Standardization of Scientific and Industrial Terms” (only S. Karaliūnas worked independently; his research was unrelated to this topic). It was noted that ties with Eastern scientific institutions had almost entirely ceased, while ties with Western institutions had not yet been established. The report states that practical work on the organization and standardization of terms was more intensive than the study of terminological problems. Work was underway on dictionaries in preparation (e.g., geology, geodesy, physics, chemistry); regret was also expressed that the publication prospects for terminological dictionaries were poor, since more than 10 substantial terminological dictionaries had been completed (e.g., mathematics, trade, psychology, construction, zoology), but no one wanted to publish them. That year, work on the standardization of terms was described as “difficult”: “The Quality and Standardization Depart- 11 Academic degrees are presented here as they were treated after nostrification in 1993. 12 Of the department’s original specialists, only Dr. A. Auksoriūtė works at the present-day Terminology Centre, which was established in 2003 in place of the Terminology Department. She is now the Centre’s chief research fellow and director of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. 266 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtosios nepriklausomybės pradžioje Fig. 2. Opening of the minutes of the Terminology Department meeting of December 23, 1991 Terminologija | 2020 | 27 267 tment, having received no funding, did not prepare national standards, but some factories prepared local terminology standards needed for the transition to record-keeping in Lithuanian” (terminologists advised the specialists preparing those company standards). In the department’s first report, its head, K. Gaivenis, feared that practical work might overshadow theoretical work and also expressed concern about the future: “The importance of our department to the science of terminology has been and will be directly proportional to the qualifications of its staff. If the qualifications of our young people are no better than, or even lower than, those of ordinary publishing-house editors, nobody will need us. We will not be able to do a good job of organizing terminology. Therefore, it is very important to do good theoretical work in terminology as well as practical work.” The department was described self-critically as follows: “In today’s sea of publications, the popularization of language and terminology is, unfortunately, obscure and limited. Many suggestions are received, but few people write. Fewer still write well, on relevant topics, and in an engaging way.” Young people in particular were encouraged to learn to write popular science articles. The report noted that J. Klimavičius did the most to popularize language studies and terminology through articles in periodicals and radio broadcasts. At the time, there were proposals for terminologists to prepare a state terminology programme (proposed by the institute’s director, A. Vanagas; TS 1991 12 23; MT 1992 01 16), but the 1991 report of the Terminology Department shows that there were also doubts about this: such a programme should be the responsibility of the state, not of a single research institution. In the report, K. Gaivenis wrote about how terminology work should be improved: “In our opinion, it [terminology work] should be carried out by four Lithuanian institutions: 1) the Institute of the Lithuanian Language (research into theoretical problems of terminology and linguistic assessment of all terminological texts); 2) “Mokslo”13 or another state publishing house (organizing the preparation and publication of terminological dictionaries); 3) the Department of Quality and Standards (preparation and publication of terminology standards); and 4) the Institute of Informatics and Mathematics (creation and operation of a terminology bank). If all these institutions worked and cooperated harmoniously, terminology work should improve substantially” (TS 1991 12 23). These were the plans for the more distant future (from today’s perspective, they can be said to have been logical and far-sighted), while for the immediate future—the year 1992—in addition to the customary objectives for theoretical and practical work, two new issues were raised: 1) the expressed need to publish an entirely new work prepared by the department— 13 In 1992, the Mokslo publishing house was merged with the State Publishing House of Encyclopedias and renamed the Science and Encyclopedias Publishing House (from 1997, the Institute of Science and Encyclopedias Publishing; from 2010, the Science and Encyclopedias Publishing Centre) (VLEe: “Mokslas”). This institution functioned more as a publisher than as an organizer of terminological dictionary preparation. 268 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtos nepriklausomybės pradžioje journal Terminology (5 author’s sheets in extent), which in content should differ from Language Culture (for this purpose, a new editorial board needs to be formed and a decision made on the publication’s character and its relationship with Language Culture); 2) an initiative was expressed to establish a Terminology Commission at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language, which would organize its work and meetings differently from the now-defunct Terminology Council at the Academy of Sciences. It was planned that the commission’s members would be of two kinds—permanent members and paid consultants. The latter (specialists in various fields) would not attend meetings; they would express their opinions in writing or orally. The Institute of the Lithuanian Language’s Scientific Council also discussed the need for a system of terminology approval, and that the commission approving terms should have the same powers as the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language14 (MT 1991 06 25). The plans for this commission remained just plans, and the Terminology Council at the Academy of Sciences quietly ceased to exist (the exact date when its activity ended15 is apparently unknown). TERMINOLOGY JOURNAL In 1992, progress toward a journal devoted to terminology came only in small steps. That year, the Terminology Department was preparing the 65th issue of Language Culture (this was already the journal’s third issue devoted to terminology matters). At the end of the year, during discussion of that issue, it was said that the department was experiencing difficulties preparing issues of Language Culture, since terminologists prepared the entire issue while the publication’s editor came from another department. K. Gaivenis said that he would not agree to publish Language Culture the following year (TS 1992 12 21). One may surmise that there were difficulties coordinating with P. Kniūkšta, editor of Language Culture. At the beginning of 1993, the Terminology Department agreed that a fully independent publication, Terminology, separate from Language Culture, was needed, and decided to ask the Institute’s Scientific Council to approve it (TS 1993 01 11). The Scientific Council discussed the terminologists’ wish to publish a separate publication. There were doubts about its narrow readership—only specialists in a restricted field would be interested in a terminology publication, whereas the field of language culture is broader, and more readers could be expected 14 On 20 June 1990, the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language was established under the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania (A. Vanagas was then head of both this commission and the Institute of the Lithuanian Language); before that, the aforementioned commission had operated as a public organization under the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences. 15 In his overview of terminography, J. Klimavičius cites the harmonization of the standard Lietuvos RST 1115-90 Principles and Methods of Terminology as perhaps the Terminology Council’s final task. It is true that his article also mentions an entry in V. Gudelis’s 1993 Dictionary of Sea-Coast Research Terms stating that it was approved by the Terminology Council (Klimavičius 2003: 21, 25), but, of course, a long interval may separate discussion and publication. For example, the Dictionary of Mathematical Terms prepared by a group of authors (led by J. Kubilius) appeared in 1994, although the Terminology Council had approved it back in 1989. Terminologija | 2020 | 27 269 more readers. Some were doubtful and proposed that terminologists continue to publish separate issues of Language Culture with subtitles (e.g., Terminology), and that separate editorial boards be formed for this purpose; but K. Gaivenis defended his position, saying it would be difficult to coordinate two editorial boards, and that the aim was for specialists from various fields to contribute to the new publication. A. Vanagas supported the terminologists: “The Terminology Department needs to be given a ‘chance’ if they are so determined” (MT 1993 01 12). After discussion, it was agreed that a separate publication, Terminology, would be published alongside Language Culture, and its editorial board was approved: K. Gaivenis, A. Kaulakienė, St. Keinys (editor-in-chief), J. Klimavičius, R. Miliūnaitė (the members were proposed by the Terminology Department) (MT 1993 01 12). Soon the first issue was ready, and at the end of 1993 it was discussed at a meeting of the Terminology Department (TS 1993 12 08). It is true that the journal’s title, although seemingly already approved, underwent changes. As can be understood from the minutes (TS 1993 12 08), the first issue submitted for discussion had been titled by its editor Furrows of Terminology, but K. Gaivenis, A. Kaulakienė, and J. Klimavičius proposed at the meeting that it be called Terminology. No resolution was recorded in the minutes; apparently opinions remained divided. The publication was submitted to the Scientific Council for approval under the title Terms and Texts, and no discussion of the title was recorded at the council meeting; the publication was approved for printing (MT 1993 12 16). It was also listed in the Terminology Department’s 1993 report under the title Terms and Texts. At the beginning of 1994, K. Gaivenis informed the Scientific Council that the publication’s editor, St. Keinys, wished the earlier title Furrows of Terminology to be retained. The minutes record that some council members had doubts about this title, but left the matter for the editor to decide (MT 1994 02 01). The first issue, which appeared in 1994, was indeed titled Furrows of Terminology, but at the end of the same year the question of the title was revisited. In November, the Scientific Council decided to change the title from Furrows of Terminology to Terminology and approved a new editorial board: St. Keinys (editor-in-chief), K. Gaivenis (deputy editor-in-chief), A. Kaulakienė, J. Klimavičius, Algirdas Smilgevičius, Antanas Buračas (MT 1994 11 18). After the title was changed, St. Keinys left the editorial board (TS 1994 12 09). It was decided not to expand the editorial board approved three weeks earlier; the former editor was no longer on it, and K. Gaivenis was appointed editor-in-chief from among the already approved members, with J. Klimavičius as his deputy (MT 1994 12 12). These are the editorial board members we find listed in the second issue— 270 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtosios nepriklausomybės pradžioje the journal, which appeared in 1995, but when it was considered (TS 1995 05 08) and approved for publication by the Research Council (MT 1995 05 05), there were again discussions about the title and suggestions that perhaps the title of the first issue should be retained; in the end, however, the title Terminologija was settled on. The first editor of Terminologijos, St. Keinys, supported the concept of a publication that was half scholarly and half popular science, seeking to cover as many practical terminological issues as possible (TS 1993 12 08). Later, the focus shifted more toward a scholarly character (TS 1994 12 09), and efforts were made to have the publication included in the list of prestigious publications (TS 1995 12 19). Discussions also linked the change of title to scholarly status (MT 1995 05 05). The Research Council of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language also discussed appealing to the Research Council of Lithuania regarding prestigious status for the Terminologijos publication (MT 1996 02 20; MT 1996 12 30). This was achieved after several years: from 2001, Terminologija was included in the list of Lithuanian scholarly publications whose published research articles are recognized for the awarding of a research degree (Auksoriūtė 2005: 13). There was even some consideration of publishing two issues of the journal per year (TS 1995 12 19), but there were not enough resources, and the publication’s print run gradually declined. The first issue was printed in 2,000 copies, but since not all copies were sold, a considerably smaller print run was planned for the next issue (MT 1995 05 05) (700 copies of the second issue were printed, and 500 of the third). The declining print run partly correlates with the refinement of the publication’s purpose—its increasing focus on scholarly use (the rising cost of printing may also have contributed; on the other hand, declining print runs seem to have been characteristic of other scholarly journals as well). Nevertheless, it is gratifying that, over time and despite changes in staff, the journal 16has endured (this article is published in the journal’s 27th issue), gradually gaining strength and expanding in content (covering topics from the history of terminology to various contemporary issues), in length17, in accessibility (it can now be read online http://journals.lki.lt/terminologija)), and in the diversity of its authors—from the 13th issue onward it has been an international journal, publishing articles not only in Lithuanian, but also in English and Russian. 16K. Gaivenis was the responsible editor of Terminologijos until 2000 (issues 2–7); from 2001 to 2008 (issues 8–15), the journal was edited by J. Klimavičius, and since 2009 (from issue 16), A. Auksoriūtė has been the editor-in-chief. 17The smallest issue—the 4th (1997)—was only 97 pages long; the largest—the 16th (2009)—was three times as large, at 309 pages. If we divide all the journal issues published to date, in chronological order, into three groups, their average lengths are approximately 130, 230, and 260 pages, respectively. The trend is clear. It should also be borne in mind that from issue 13 onward the journal has been in a larger format (up to issue 12, the journal published an average of 7 main articles, with abstracts in a foreign language; from issue 13 onward, it has published an average of 11 main articles). Terminologija | 2020 | 27 271 PRACTICAL WORK IN TERMINOLOGY Research and practical work in the field of terminology have always gone hand in hand. As can be seen from the protocols and reports of the Terminology Department at the beginning of independence, the relationship between scholarly and practical work was often discussed, and criticism was directed at oneself and the established system for devoting too much attention to the latter at the expense of the former. More than one terminologist, including St. Keinys and A. Kaulakienė, said that three quarters of their time had to be devoted to practical work (TS 1993 12 13; TS 1994 12 12). For more than a decade, it had been established practice for terminologists in the Terminology Department (formerly the Terminology Group) to assist in preparing various terminology dictionaries; at the beginning of independence, their workload increased further as more dictionaries and glossaries began to be prepared. At that time, the Terminology Department was the main body responsible for approving terminology dictionaries (as already mentioned, the Terminology Council formerly attached to the Academy of Sciences was no longer active)—various dictionaries of the period contain differently worded statements that the dictionary had been reviewed by the Terminology Department (before the Department was established, by the Terminology Group). Department staff took part in various temporary working groups (terminology commissions), most often those preparing terminology dictionaries. As stated in the 1993 report (TS 1993 12 13), these groups met regularly, once or twice a week, to consider each term individually. In 1993, J. Klimavičius attended meetings of the commission preparing an aviation terminology dictionary; St. Keinys, those of the library science and bibliography commission; A. Kaulakienė, those on informatics, computer technology, and physics; and A. Auksoriūtė, those on botany. In addition, reviews of terminology dictionaries were prepared (for example, in 1993, large dictionaries of sociology and road transport terminology, and smaller dictionaries of firefighting and informatics terminology, were reviewed). Much time was devoted to work on terminology standards. Under an agreement with the then Lithuanian Standards Service, linguistic evaluations of terminology standards began in 1992 (that year, a commission to evaluate terminology standards was approved in the Department, comprising K. Gaivenis, A. Kaulakienė, St. Keinys, and J. Klimavičius). According to the report, at the end of 1993 terminology standards were discussed and checked (and sometimes also marked for stress) two or three times a week for three months (September–November). It was said that nearly all Department staff had evaluated terminology standards, and that during 1994 as many as 40 terminology standards were checked and marked for stress (TS 1994 12 22). K. Gaivenis noted in 1994, however, that this work would have to be organized differently, since by then a dozen or so terminology committees had been set up for standardization, and they were expected to prepare more standards than the terminologists could approve. 272 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtos nepriklausomybės pradžioje K. Gaivenis nevertheless thought it inadvisable to abandon the evaluation of terminology standards, since the work had already begun and was useful not only to specialists in other fields but also to young terminologists (TS 1994 12 22). In general, the need to train researchers was emphasized, since at that time none of the terminologists was enrolled in doctoral studies18. The Terminology Department’s 1993 report set out the following plans: 1) in the future, all practical terminological work should be based primarily on conducting terminological evaluations, covering not only terminology standards but also dictionaries; 2) as the volume of practical work increased, priority should be given to work for state institutions and enterprises (since funding came from the state); 3) practical work would run smoothly only if it took up about half of a researcher’s working time and did not overshadow scholarly work. Although a great deal of work was being done, attention was drawn to the fact that dictionaries were being published without terminologists’ review. A. Vanagas, director of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language, said at the time that terminology work was becoming haphazard and uncontrolled, and that the Terminology Department should therefore take on a coordinating role (TS 1994 12 22). Because the volume of practical work had increased, in 1994 it was suggested that terminology dictionaries could be approved not only by the Terminology Department but also by the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language; at the same time, however, there were concerns that this might lead to even more discussions (TS 1995 12 19). In 1996, the Terminology Department was still evaluating terminology dictionaries and standards, but it was already clear that this function was being taken over by the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language (TS 1996 12 13)—that very year, the 1996–2005 Programme for the Use and Development of the State Language came into operation, encouraging the preparation and publication of terminology dictionaries through its funding. The requirement that published terminology dictionaries, as well as terminology standards, be coordinated with the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language was established by resolutions of that institution (Resolution No. 59 of January 30, 1997, On the Approval of Terminology Dictionaries, and Resolution No. 69 of January 29, 1998, On the Rules for the Approval of Terminology Standards). The terminologists of the Terminology Department, of course, continued working on terminology dictionaries and standards, but now did so on commission from the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language (while also serving on that institution’s Terminology Subcommission). 18J. Klimavičius defended his dissertation in 1993, and among the Department’s younger staff members, A. Auksoriūtė was the first to enter doctoral studies in 1995 (supervised by St. Keinys, she defended her dissertation in 2000), along with G. Kavaliaunaitė (although the latter’s dissertation was not in the field of terminology, and she soon left the Terminology Department). Terminologija | 2020 | 27 273 TERMINOLOGY DATABASE Nowadays, information technologies are inseparable from the preparation and publication of terminological dictionaries. The computerisation of philological research (at the time referred to as the automation of scientific research) began back in the 1990s at the then Institute of Mathematics and Cybernetics (after independence was restored, it was renamed the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics19). In 1988, A. Vanagas, then deputy director of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature, began speaking about computerising terminological data and the need for a terminology bank (he soon became director of the re-established Institute of the Lithuanian Language); he also had ideas for a broad terminology programme (Urnežūtė 2002: 20–21). It is clear that, at the beginning of independence, terminologists had no reservations about a terminological data bank; this was supported by St. Keinys, head of the Department of Language Culture and Terminology (MT 1991 06 25), who had already stated at the time that “people have been talking about it for a long time, but nothing is being done” (TS 1991 12 23). Focused discussions began in the newly established Department of Terminology: in the spring of 1992, the department held a meeting devoted exclusively to the creation of a terminology bank, attended also by employees of the Laboratory of Scientific Research Automation at the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, Valentinas Černiauskas (head of the laboratory) and Vida Žilinskienė (TS 1992 05 11). The meeting discussed a terminology bank needed not only by specialists but by society as a whole, considered the selection of possible sources and the need to computerise them according to a common structure, and resolved to “create a universal terminology database (bank) intended for the general user” (TS 1992 05 11). It was agreed to build the database on the basis of terminological dictionaries (starting with technical and physics terms), and later to supplement it with terms from encyclopaedias, the Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian (which was already being computerised at the time), Terminology Corrections, and other sources. In 1993, the same participants (joined by Gediminas Daugėla from the editorial office of Science and Technology) met again to discuss the work of creating the terminology bank and the problems that had arisen (TS 1993 06 24). They discussed the “structure of the term card”, that is, the structure of a term entry, and agreed that terms should be marked for stress, indicate whether they were normative, and include certain grammatical parameters and classification features (generic, specific, subordinate), among other things. It was decided that the structure of the term entry would follow the Lithuanian standard RST 1115-90 Principles and Methods of Terminology. 19 It is now the Vilnius University Institute of Data Science and Digital Technologies. 274 Alvydas Umbrasas | Lietuvių terminologija atkurtosios nepriklausomybės pradžioje It is clear that K. Gaivenis was interested20 in how similar work was being done abroad, what had been accomplished at other institutions in Lithuania, and what kind of terminology bank would be most suitable for us. He presented his review and ideas in an article (Gaivenis 1993: 8–11), where he forward-lookingly argued that the functions of a terminology bank should include the inventorying of Lithuanian terminology, the exchange of information with other terminology banks, and so on. A tangible impetus came when, on the basis of all the discussions and the above-mentioned article, the Department of Terminology drew up a Programme for the Development of a Terminology Bank (see Fig. 3), approved in 1995 by the Academic Council of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language (MT 1995 03 15). The programme set out the objectives, database sources (consideration was given to collecting not only terminographic but also terminological bibliographic data), and term-search criteria. The funding issue was resolved when, in 1996, the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language began supporting the work carried out at the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics under the 1996–2005 Programme for the Use and Development of the State Language. Terminologists contributed as consultants on content selection and structure, and on the term-search system21. However, owing to technological obstacles (the software environment was initially not suitable for the Lithuanian language, fonts were lacking, and so forth) and the database’s complex structure, which was partly oriented towards research needs, the work was completed only in 200322. A total of 27 selected, high-quality terminological dictionaries published between 1965 and 2003 and covering various fields were included in the Lithuanian terminology database of the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, otherwise known as the Lithuanian Terminology Bank23. The foundations for digitising terminological data in Lithuania were laid in the development of this database. The database’s capabilities essentially 20 It should be noted that terminologists did not have computers for a long time. It was specifically in the context of the terminology database—the creation of a “computerised fund” of terms, in the words of V. Ambrazas, who attended the meeting—that the need for a computer in the Department of Terminology was first discussed in 1994 (the issue was raised by G. Kavaliūnaitė) (TS 1994 12 12). However, as can be seen from the Department of Terminology’s 1997 report, the department received its first computer only in 1997; its software was set up with the help not only of the institute’s own staff but also of the creators of the terminology database working at the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics. 21 It was once suggested that the Laboratory of Scientific Research Automation at the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, which had also developed digital terminological dictionaries and the terminology bank, should be transferred to the Institute of the Lithuanian Language (MT 2000 05 23). 22 Initially (while the terminology bank development programme was still under consideration), it was thought that within three years the terminology database could be made available to the public with data from at least 10 terminological dictionaries, after which the data would be supplemented gradually (MT 1995 03 15). 23 Although the database is technologically obsolete today, it can still be used if the necessary software is installed. For more information, see Meškauskienė 2005 and www.terminynas.lt (this address provides links to the software and a list of the database’s terminographic sources). Some of the data from this database were later transferred to other databases, for example, the Terminology Bank of the Republic of Lithuania and the Integrated System of Lithuanian Language and Writing Resources, Raštija.lt. Terminologija | 2020 | 27 275 Fig. 3. First page of the terminology bank development program (1995) 276 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtosios nepriklausomybės pradžioje remained unused, and its relevance declined when, on the basis of the Law on the Terminology Bank of the Republic of Lithuania, adopted at the end of 2003, the Terminology Bank of the Republic of Lithuania began to be developed24 (populated since 2005). Established at the initiative of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language, this bank is primarily intended for administrative purposes—it is a state information system for managing the terms used in legislation—but it also covers scientific terminology and contains extensive data from terminology dictionaries (for more, see Umbrasas 2013, as well as http://terminai.vlkk.lt). CONCLUSIONS The restoration of Lithuania’s independence in 1990 had a significant impact on various areas of state activity. As Lithuanian became the state language, it gradually began to permeate public life throughout the country, including areas from which it had been almost entirely excluded during the Soviet period. The field of terminology faced many challenges, since the change in the state system and the opening of borders made it necessary to name concepts that had not previously been relevant. As the capacities of the Lithuanian language grew, so did the need for terminology management. From its establishment in 1941, the Institute of the Lithuanian Language had devoted attention to the study and management of terms, and the restoration of independence created favorable conditions for further concentrating terminologists’ efforts there: in 1991, an independent Department of Terminology was established, headed by K. Gaivenis. Previously, terminologists had worked within other departments, forming the Terminology Group (from 1971); from 1989 to 1991, that group was part of the Department of Language Culture and Terminology, headed by St. Keinys. Working in groups preparing terminology dictionaries had long been familiar work for terminologists, and as terminography expanded at the beginning of independence, even more attention had to be devoted to this activity—especially since the work of the Terminology Council, which had operated under the Academy of Sciences since 1971, had quietly faded away, making the Department of Terminology the principal body approving terminology dictionaries. The standardization of terminology also became an issue: already during the Sąjūdis period, it had been decided to prepare Lithuanian terminology standards. In the first years of independence, the then Department of Standardization and Quality adopted the standard Lietuvos RST 1115-90 Terminology Principles and Methods (aligned with the corresponding international standard ISO 704-87), in whose preparation the Department of Terminology participated. From 1992, the department 24To avoid confusing the two databases, a successful name, Terminology Bank, was devised for the database of the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, which had previously usually been called a Terminology Bank. Terminologija | 2020 | 27 277 linguistic evaluations of terminology standards began, involving nearly all department staff. There was so much practical work that concerns arose that it was beginning to overshadow research, even though the latter should be more important for a research institution. Alongside the establishment of the Department of Terminology came the idea of starting an independent journal devoted exclusively to terminology, Terminology (previously, this field had been represented by occasional issues of Language Culture and Questions of Lithuanian Linguistics). Its editorial board was approved at the very beginning of 1993, but the vision for the publication was still evolving. The first editor-in-chief, St. Keinys, favored the concept of a publication that was half scholarly and half popular science (perhaps this is why the first issue of the journal was titled Furrows of Terminology); later, under K. Gaivenis’s editorship, it moved in a more scholarly direction and eventually became the principal platform for terminologists. From the very beginning of independence, the need for computer technologies in terminology work was recognized. In 1992, the Department of Terminology, together with staff of the then Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, began discussing the idea of a terminology database and agreed to pool their efforts to develop a terminology bank for the public. By 1993, decisions had been made about various aspects of the structure of a terminology entry, while further details concerning the database’s structure and scope were set out in the Terminology Bank Development Program prepared by the Department of Terminology in 1995. The terminology database developed at the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, with terminologists’ advice and funding from the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language, was later named Terminology of the Lithuanian Language and became publicly accessible only in the twenty-first century. Its data and the work invested by its developers proved useful in creating later terminology databases, including the current Terminology Bank of the Republic of Lithuania. During the first few years after the restoration of independence, considerable progress was made in terminology, both in terminology management and in research (an example combining scholarship and practice is the booklet Terminology Corrections (1992), prepared by terminologists at the very beginning of the restored state’s existence). Essentially, the Department of Terminology then gave impetus to the evaluation of terminology dictionaries and standards, a task later taken over by the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language; laid the conceptual foundations for computerized terminology databases in Lithuania; and created an environment for the development of Lithuanian terminology science. 278 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtosios nepriklausomybės pradžioje LITERATŪRA Auksoriūtė Albina 2005: Terminologijos darbas Lietuvių kalbos institute. – Pabaltijo tautų terminologijos problemos ir Europos Sąjunga: straipsnių rinkinys, atsak. red., sud. A. Auksoriūtė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla, 11–20. Auksoriūtė Albina 2014: Terminologijos komisijos (1945–1971) veiklos apžvalga. – Terminologija 21, 192–208. Gaivenis Kazimieras 1993: Keletas pastabų dėl terminijos ugdymo. – Kalbos kultūra 65, 4–11. Keinys Stasys 2012 [1994]: Lietuvos valstybė, tauta ir kalba. – Keinys St. Lietuvių terminologijos raida, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla, 19–28. Klimavičius Jonas 2003: Lietuvių terminografija: praeities bruožai, dabarties sunkumai ir uždaviniai. – Terminologija 10, 9–32. Kniūkšta Pranas 2018: Iš administracinės kalbos darbų patirties. – Gimtoji kalba 10, 27–29. Lietuvos RST 1115–90 Terminologijos principai ir metodai. Maslauskienė Renata 2004: Terminų standartizavimas. – Terminologijos istorijos ir dabarties problemos: straipsnių rinkinys: Kazimierui Gaiveniui atminti, sud. A. Auksoriūtė, atsak. red. St. Keinys, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla, 256–270. Meškauskienė Snieguolė 2005: Matematikos ir informatikos instituto lietuvių kalbos terminų bazė (Lietuvių kalbos termynas). – Pabaltijo tautų terminologijos problemos ir Europos Sąjunga: straipsnių rinkinys, atsak. red., sud. A. Auksoriūtė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla, 89–96. TT – Terminologijos taisymai, par. K. Gaivenis, A. Kaulakienė, St. Keinys, J. Klimavičius, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1992. Umbrasas Alvydas 2013: Lietuvos Respublikos terminų bankas: 10 metų po įstatymo priėmimo. – Terminologija 20, 96–122. Urnežiūtė Rita 2002: Rengiamas kompiuterinis terminų bankas [pokalbis su dr. V. Černiausku]. – Gimtoji kalba 7–8, 20–24. VLEe – Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras, 2001–2020. Prieiga internete: https://www.vle.lt [žiūrėta 2020-09-07]. LITHUANIAN TERMINOLOGY AFTER THE RESTORATION OF THE INDEPENDENT STATE OF LITHUANIA S u m m a r y The article is dedicated to the 30th anniversary of the restoration of the independent state of Lithuania. It addresses the terminology work accomplished in Lithuania after the restoration of independent Lithuania (with the focus on the first five years). After the independent state of Lithuania was re-established on 11 March 1990, a number of terminological problems came to the fore, as the Lithuanian language was nearly pushed away from certain domains during the Soviet period; terminology was not developed in certain other fields; dictionaries of terms were lacking. The status of Lithuanian as the official language increased the need for the management and research of terms. Political circumstances determined that a separate Terminology Department led by Kazimieras Gaivenis was founded at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language in 1991 (before this date terminologists worked as part of the Terminology Group within other departments). The article focuses on the activities of this department. It sheds light on the circumstances of its establishment, major work, the problems of that time and the plans created for the future. It was common practice for terminologists to work within the working groups compiling the dictionaries of terms during the Soviet era as well; however, as terminography was growing after the restoration of independence, even more attention had to be paid to this activity, because the Terminology Department became the main body of Terminologija | 2020 | 27 279 approval of the dictionaries of terms. What is more, the issues of standardization of terms had to be solved – it was decided to prepare Lithuanian terminology standards; in 1990, the standardization authority of that time adopted Lithuanian Standard RST 1115-90 Terminologijos principai ir metodai (it was harmonised with the respective international standard ISO 704-87 Terminology work – Principles and methods); the Terminology Department also contributed to its development. Starting from 1992, the linguistic expertise of terminology standards was organised at the department. There was so much practical work to do that it was already worried that it would soon overshadow scientific work. The establishment of the Terminology Department gave rise to the idea to publish Terminologija, an independent research journal dedicated to terminology exclusively. Its first editorial board was approved at the start of 1993, but the vision of the publication was not yet completely clear; the first editor-in-chief, Stasys Keinys, favoured the concept of the journal which would be written in half-scientific and half-popular-science style; however, later, with Kazimieras Gaivenis as the editor-in-chief, the journal took the direction of science. Right from the start of independence, the inclusion of computer technologies in terminology work was on the agenda; it was in 1992 when the idea of the term database was first conceived at the Terminology Department in collaboration with the workers of the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics of that time, and it was agreed to jointly create the term bank intended for public use. A decision on various term-entry composition related issues was made as soon as 1993; even more aspects pertaining to the composition and scope of the database were provided for in the Program on the Development of the Term Bank developed at the Terminology Department in 1995. Advised by terminologists and financed by the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language, the first large-scope database of Lithuanian terms was created at the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics (it was made public in the 21st century). The experience gained in the process aided the authors in creating other term databases, including the contemporary Term Bank of the Republic of Lithuania. Gauta 2020-09-07 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius E. paštas [email protected] 280 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių terminologija atkurtosios nepriklausomybės pradžioje