Liudmila Mockienė FORMATION OF TERMINOLOGY OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IN ENGLISH, LITHUANIAN AND RUSSIAN (FORMATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW TERMS IN ENGLISH, LITHUANIAN AND RUSSIAN). Doctoral dissertation. Vilnius: Mykolas Romeris University, 2016, 212 pp.

SIGITA RACKEVIČIENĖ

Mykolo Romerio universitetas

On 25 March 2016, Liudmila Mockienė defended her doctoral dissertation at Mykolas Romeris University, Formation of Terminology of Constitutional Law in English, Lithuanian and Russian (Formation of Constitutional Law Terms in English, Lithuanian and Russian) (supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sigita Rackevičienė).

In her dissertation, L. Mockienė described and compared the linguistic means used to create terms for constitutional legal acts in English, Lithuanian and Russian. A total of 1,825 terms were investigated, selected from constitutional law sources: 660 English, 626 Lithuanian and 539 Russian terms. The dissertation consists of an introduction, three main parts (devoted to the theoretical foundation of the research, a description of the research methodology, and a description of the analysis of the terms), conclusions, a bibliography, lists of the terms analyzed (a list of English terms, a list of Lithuanian terms and their English translations, and a list of Russian terms and their English translations), and summaries in English and Lithuanian.

The introduction defines the dissertation’s scholarly novelty, value, relevance and the practical application of its results. The author emphasizes that the dissertation is signific-

256

Sigita Rackevičienė

ant in several respects: “First, the research developed a methodology for comparing linguistic means of terminology formation across several languages. It helps reveal traditions, principles and criteria for term formation in different languages. This methodology can also be used for comparative term analysis in other languages. Second, the research offers term creators insights into term-formation trends in three languages and a wealth of important information that may suggest ways to create new terms and improve those already in use” (p. 196). The dissertation’s author entered the terms selected for the research into a database created for the purposes of the study and grouped them according to various criteria. The author states that this database “can serve as a basis for compiling a constitutional law glossary (no dictionaries of this kind exist in either Lithuanian or English) and for conducting other future research. The syntactic patterns of multiword terms described in the study can be used in automatic term-search system software” (p. 198).

The first main part analyzes the works of English, Lithuanian and Russian terminologists and their classifications of term-formation means; the second part presents the principles for selecting terms for the dissertation and the methodology used to investigate them; and the third part provides a detailed analysis of English, Lithuanian and Russian terms. The first chapter of the third part analyzes and compares the ratio of one-word and multiword terms in constitutional legal acts in English, Lithuanian and Russian. The second chapter examines the one-word terms in each language, dividing them into three groups: terms formed from internal resources, terms formed from external sources, and hybrid terms formed by combining elements from internal and external sources. Terms formed from internal resources are further classified by word-formation method, terms formed from external sources by their source language, and hybrid terms by the origin of their elements. The third chapter examines the multiword terms in each language, dividing them into three groups: two-word terms, three-word terms, and terms consisting of four or more words. First, the terms in each group are classified by the origin of their constituent elements; they are then grouped according to the position of dependent elements (before or after the head element) and by syntactic pattern. The types of terms identified in each chapter are described in detail and illustrated with examples; the quantitative findings are presented in 18 charts.

The conclusions highlight differences in the formation of constitutional law terms in English, Lithuanian and Russian. In conducting the research, the author found that English

Terminologija | 2016 | 23

257

The creators of constitutional law terminology are more open to the influence of foreign languages and, when creating terms, most often rely on external sources, whereas Lithuanian and Russian term creators are more inclined to protect their own languages and make maximum use of their linguistic resources. The author also found that English-language creators of constitutional law terms follow the principle of user convenience and create shorter terms with simpler structures, while Lithuanian and Russian term creators give priority to the principle of precision and create longer, structurally more complex terms that also reveal the main features of the content of the concept being named. The dissertation research showed that the terminology of the languages studied also has important similarities: many multi-word constitutional law terms in all three languages consist of two words; thus, all three languages adhere to the principle of linguistic economy and strive not to create terms longer than two words. In summarizing the research findings, the author states that the aim of reconciling the principles of user convenience and precision “would make it possible to create a term of optimal length: short enough to be convenient for the user and long enough to reflect the content of the concept as fully as possible” (p. 209).

L. Mockienė’s dissertation Formation of Terminology of Constitutional Law in English, Lithuanian and Russian (Konstitucinės teisės terminų daryba anglų, lietuvių ir rusų kalbose) makes a significant contribution to terminology research in Lithuania, laying the foundations for comparative studies of the formation of legal terminology in several languages. The results of the dissertation are important for terminology researchers, creators and editors, as well as specialists in other fields—translators of legal acts, professional language instructors, and users of legal terminology in both the public and private sectors.

Received 2016-06-30

Sigita Rackevičienė Mykolo Romerio universitetas Ateities g. 20, LT-08303 Vilnius E. paštas [email protected]

258 Sigita Rackevičienė