Terms in Texts and the Challenge for Terminology Management

1 5Te minologija | 2015 | 22 Te ms in Tex s and he Challenge o Te minology Managemen KLAUS-DIRK SCHMITZ CologneUni e si yo AppliedSciences KEYWORDS: e minology managemen , e m ex ac ion, concep o ien a ion, e m au onomy, e minological en y, synonymy, ambigui y 1. BASiC THeOReTiCAL FOUNDATiONS Te minology is de ined as he “se o designa ions belonging o one special language” (iSO 1087–1:2000). This in e na ional de ini ion e e s mo e o he ep esen a ion pa o special language communica ion and igno es he concep ual iew behind he designa ions. A mo e comp e- hensi e de ini ion is gi en in he Ge man e minology s anda d DiN 2342:2011 whe e “ e minology is he se o in en o y o concep s and hei ep esen a ions in a speci ic subjec ield”. This de ini ion no only includes he concep as an impo an aspec o e minology; i also shows a b oade iew o he concep ep esen a ion side o e minology by no limi ing i o e ms o o he language- ela ed designa ions and by includ- ing symbols, icons, ges u es o any o he mul imedia ep esen a ions. in o de o explain he ela ion be ween concep and e m, e minol- ogy heo is s and esea che s adap ed he so-called “semio ic iangle” in oduced by he Ame ican linguis s C. K. Ogden and i. A. Richa ds (Ogden, Richa ds 1923: 11) o explain he ela ionship be ween concep s and e ms (Figu e 1). The iangle has unde gone a long his o y o mod- i ica ions and in e p e a ions, and has also been a acked om se e al qua e s as an o e -simpli ica ion o mis ep esen a ion o he complex ela ionships ha exis be ween concep s and e ms. Despi e he c i icisms ha ha e been le eled agains he iangle, i ’s simplici y makes i an excellen ool o illus a ing concep - e m ela ionships o people who a e jus beginning o iden i y e ms in ex s and o c ea e e minological da a en ies o documen hem. O he and mo e complex models a e desc ibed in A n z, Pich , Schmi z (2014: 41 .). 1 6 Klaus-Di k Schmi z | Te msinTex sand heChallenge | o Te minologyManagemen Figu e 1. Te minological iangle (based on Ogden, Richa ds 1923) Concep s a e “cogni i e ep esen a i es” (“gedankliche Ve e e ” (Fel- be , Budin 1989: 69)) o objec s, ha a ise ou o he ac ha humans ecognize he common cha ac e is ics ha exis in a majo i y o indi- idual objec s o he same ype, and hen s o e hese cha ac e is ics and use hem o impose o de on he wo ld o objec s, in o de o achie e mu ual unde s anding when hey communica e wi h o he people. iSO 1087–1:2000 de ines a concep as a “uni o knowledge c ea ed by a unique combina ion o cha ac e is ics” and DiN 2342:2011 desc ibes a concep again mo e explici ly as a “uni o hinking made up o cha ac- e is ics ha a e de i ed by ca ego izing objec s ha ing a numbe o iden- ical p ope ies.” Bo h s anda ds s a e in a no e ha concep s a e no necessa ily bound o speci ic languages, bu he cul u al, social and echnical backg ound o he human beings who gene a e he concep s and he en i onmen s in which he concep s a e used a ec he way hey mani es hemsel es in any gi en si ua ion. Regional di e ences wi hin a language communi y (e.g. Ge many and Aus ia) may lead o di e en concep ual o ien a ions o he same e m, whe eas one cul u al communi y whe e di e en lan- guages a e spoken (e.g. Swi ze land) may alloca e he iden ical concep ep esen ed by se e al e ms in di e en languages. Since concep s a e men al o cogni i e ep esen a ions, we need de ini- ions o explain and desc ibe concep s. in mos cases, de ini ions e e o o he concep s (e.g. he supe o dina e concep ) and men ion speci ic cha - ac e is ics ha a e unique and ypical o he concep o be de ined. On he basis o de ini ions and concep cha ac e is ics, i is possible o ela e 1 7Te minologija | 2015 | 22 concep s o each o he and o cons uc e minological concep sys ems, axonomies, on ologies, o o he knowledge o ganiza ion sys ems (SKOS). These concep sys ems ep esen he knowledge o a domain o sub-domain in a sys ema ic way. The e m is de ined in iSO 1087–1:2000 as a “ e bal designa ion o a gene al concep in a speci ic subjec ield” o in DiN 2342:2011 as a “designa ion o a de ined concep in a special language by a linguis ic exp ession.” The e m se es as he ep esen a ion o he concep and we can w i e i down, say i ou loud and use i o communica ion. We use he wo d “designa ion” as a supe o dina e concep when we alk abou e ms because he e a e also o he ways o ep esen concep s, e.g. ones ha a en’ necessa ily made up o wo ds, such as symbols, o mulas, pic- og ams, ges u es, e c. Some e ms consis o mo e han one wo d. These e ms a e called mul i-wo d e ms o compounds, e.g. “p in e wi h single-shee eed.” The way wo ds combine o o m e ms a ies om language o language. When dealing wi h e ms, he linguis ic side o e minology wo k comes in o he game. We ha e seen ha he e m is he e bal ep esen a ion o he concep . in special o echnical language, i is highly desi able ha his ela ionship be unambiguous, e en wi hou con ex ual e e ence, which means ha one e m should be assigned o one concep , c ea ing a condi ion called uni ocali y. When his condi ion p e ails, he meaning o e ms is com- ple ely clea , e en i he e m appea s wi hou any explana o y con ex . O cou se, his ideal si ua ion is di icul o achie e o en o ce. Two p ob- lems in ol ing e m-concep assignmen ecu equen ly, e en in echni- cal and scien i ic ex s: Synonymy exis s i wo o mo e e ms in a gi en language ep esen he same concep . Thus a synonym is a e m used o designa e he same concep as ano he e m. e en hough synonymy can comp omise com- munica ion be ween expe s, i occu s qui e equen ly in p ac ice. This can happen especially in subjec ields whe e many objec s and concep s a e s ill unde going de elopmen . in hese kinds o dynamic ields, com- pe ing e ms a e used in pa allel un il unambiguous e ms a e g adually es ablished, ei he h ough a na u al selec ion p ocess o by conscious s anda diza ion. e en when people a e qui e awa e o hese p oblems, a ian s can emain in use o long pe iods o ime, based on such ac o s 1 8 Klaus-Di k Schmi z | Te msinTex sand heChallenge | o Te minologyManagemen as na u al egional a ia ion o , qui e in en ionally, company o p oduc - speci ic e o s o use e minological di e ences as one means o posi ion- ing a p oduc in he ma ke . Homonymy in ol es he opposi e si ua ion om synonymy: he e a e m o se e al e ms ha ha e he same ex e nal o m e e o se e al concep s1. iSO 1087:2000 de ines homonymy as a ela ion be ween des- igna ions and concep s in a gi en language in which one designa ion ep esen s wo o mo e un ela ed concep s. Homonyms pose huge p ob- lems o echnical communica ion. As a consequence, expe s a e con- s an ly s i ing o a oid homonyms in echnical subjec ields. Ne e he- less, when new concep s e ol e, people like o o m new e ms o hem by combining amilia exis ing e ms o by adop ing es ablished e ms om gene al language (e.g. mouse o a compu e inpu de ice) o om o he ela ed subjec ields (e.g. i us om medicine o malwa e). 2. CONCePT-ORieNTeD TeRMiNOLOGy MANAGeMeNT The esul s o any kind o e minological wo k ha e o be s o ed oday in e minological da abases ( e m bases) o e minology managemen sys ems. Al hough he access o and he e ie al o he con en o he e m bases will happen in mos cases ia he (sea ch) e m, he o ganiza- ional p inciple o his e minological know ledge esou ce has o be he concep . This is he basic di e ence be ween a lexicog aphical en y in a dic ion- a y o lexicon and a e minological en y in a e m base o e minology managemen sys em. While igu e 2 shows he undamen al s uc u e o a dic iona y en y (e.g. Wik iona y) whe e he wo d ( e m) is he basis o o ganizing he linguis ic in o ma ion, igu e 2 shows he s uc u e o a p esc ip i e e minological en y in a e m base (e.g. Wikipedia) wi h he main ocus on he concep . Figu e 3 also demons a es he p esc ip i e app oach o e minology managemen implemen ed by s anda dizing o ganiza ions and companies o es ablish a consis en and unambiguous co po a e language; only one e m o each concep is he p e e ed e m and o he e ms o he same concep a e admi ed o dep eca ed. 1 The di e ence be ween homonymy and polysemy will no be discussed he e; i is i ele an o compu - e ized e minology managemen and he e o e o his pape . 1 9Te minologija | 2015 | 22 Figu e 2. S uc u e o a lexicog aphical en y Figu e 3. S uc u e o a (p esc ip i e) e minological en y As de ined in iSO 1087-1:2000 and e lec ed in he e minological me- a model in iSO 16642:2003, a e minological en y has o con ain all e minological da a ela ed o one concep . The e o e, e minological da- a modeling has o e lec he p inciple o concep o ien a ion (see igu e 3), hus allowing o he main enance no only o all concep - ela - ed in o ma ion bu also o all e ms in all languages wi h all e m- ela ed in o ma ion wi hin one e minological en y. Te minological en ies de- signed acco ding o he p inciple o e m o ien a ion (see igu e 2), which we e y o en ind in bilingual glossa ies o dic iona ies, a e no app op i- a e o me iculous e minology managemen and will lead e y soon o inconsis en e minology collec ions ha a e no e y use ul, especially i mul ilingual e minology managemen is equi ed. i LSP lexicog aph- ical p oduc s – especially in p in ed o m – ha e o be c ea ed, a e m- o ien ed alphabe ical iew can be gene a ed om a concep -o ien ed 2 0 Klaus-Di k Schmi z | Te msinTex sand heChallenge | o Te minologyManagemen e minological da a base, since only he concep ual o ganiza ion can gua - an ee an adequa e collec ion, p ocessing, e ision and p epa a ion o he domain-speci ic e ms. in addi ion – no in opposi ion – o concep o ien a ion, he second impo an p inciple o e minological managemen is e m au onomy. Te m au onomy gua an ees ha all e ms including synonyms, abb e i- a ed o ms and spelling a ian s can be documen ed wi h all necessa y e m- ela ed da a ca ego ies such as g amma , s yle, geog aphical es ic- ion o con ex . This app oach can be ealized by designing he da a model in a way ha allows he use o c ea e an unlimi ed numbe o e m sec ions o e m blocks con aining indi idual e ms and all addi- ional da a ca ego ies desc ibing he e m and i s use. Te m au onomy is ep esen ed in he e minological me a model (iSO 16642:2003) by he ac ha each e m sec ion is only allowed o ha e exac ly one e m. Se e al e ms in one language o he same concep (synonymous designa ions) will be o ganized by using se e al e m sec- ions each con aining exac ly one e m and addi ional da a ca ego ies documen ing his e m. in applica ion scena ios whe e he e minology managemen sys em plays he ole o he e minological knowledge base o a numbe o applica ions and p og ams, e m au onomy is eally es- sen ial; e.g. a quali y con ol p og am ha checks he co ec use o e ms in ex s, has o ha e access o he e m base whe e p e e ed, admi ed and dep eca ed e ms a e s o ed in he same e minological en y (see igu e 3), bu in di e en e m sec ions. The p inciples o concep o ien a ion and e m au onomy a e e lec ed in he model o a e minological en y shown in igu e 4. Te minology managemen p og ams designed acco ding o his model a e able o gi e a wa ning when he use ies o en e in o ma ion ela ed o only one concep in o di e en e minological en ies (see Schmi z 2011: 242 .). Concep o ien a ion and e m au onomy a e p e equisi es o domain- o company-speci ic e minological da a collec ions (see also Schmi z, S aub 2010: 38 .). Synonymous e ms such as USBs ick, USBmemo y s ick, USB lashd i e, USBmemo ykey, memo ys ick, pend i e, humbd i e, o only key as a sho o m, a e s o ed in one e minological en y wi h only one english de ini ion and concep ela ions o o he concep en ies; each e m can be documen ed wi h a ibu es speci ying ha e.g. USB lashd i e is he p e e ed e m o documen a ion and USBkey o p oduc labelling, and all o he e ms shall no be used wi hin any docu- 2 1Te minologija | 2015 | 22 men s o his company. Because o he concep o ien a ion, any use consul ing he e m base sea ching o e.g. pend i e will ind he concep en y (wi h he de ini ion), will see ha pend i e is no he ecommend- ed e m, and will ind he p e e ed e m USB lashd i e. On he o he hand, sea ching o key will esul in se e al hi s in he same da abase, because he e m key is a designa ion o se e al concep s (homonym o polysemous wo d, e.g. key as pa o he keyboa d) and he e o e s o ed in se e al en ies wi h di e en de ini ions and concep ela ions. 3. TeRMS iN TeXTS Al hough e ms in e minology managemen sys ems a e o ganized in concep -o ien ed en ies, hey a e used in echnical documen s as elemen s o he linguis ic su ace o he ex . Depending on he mo phological and syn ac ical ea u es o a gi en language, e ms appea in in ec ed o m indica ing e.g. plu al, geni i e, o pas ense. The connec ion om a e m in a documen o he co esponding concep can only be es ablished by he eade comp ehending he message o he ex and g asping he mean- ing behind he e m. Figu e 4. Model o he e minological en y e lec ing concep o ien a ion and e m au onomy 2 2 Klaus-Di k Schmi z | Te msinTex sand heChallenge | o Te minologyManagemen in special o echnical communica ion, i is highly ecommended o use only one e m o a single concep (no synonyms) and o use only e ms ha a e no ambiguous and do no ep esen wo o mo e concep s (no homonyms). Bu his is no always easy o achie e and he wo ld is ull o documen s ha do no mee he equi emen s o a consis en and uni ocal usage o e minology. Figu e 5 shows a sample documen wi h 6 e ms, some o hem a e mul i-wo d e ms, ha (may) ep esen he same concep . Fo unde s anding he message o he ex , he eade has o cope wi h he ques ion, i all e ms ep esen he same concep o ha e di e en meanings. Some non-expe s in he domain he documen deals wi h may be con used, emba assed, o e en o e s ained. Figu e 5. Sample documen wi h e ms ha may ep esen he same concep Bu no only human eade s o echnical documen s will ha e p oblems o deal wi h ex s con aining synonymous and homonymous e ms. Compu e - assis ed ex p ocessing ools will ha e simila o e en mo e p oblems. in many o ganiza ional en i onmen s and applica ion scena ios o e - minology wo k, he ex ac ion o e minology om exis ing ex ual ma- e ial is ecommended. Typical scena ios a e he p epa a o y e minology wo k o la ge ansla ion p ojec s wi h se e al ansla o s, be o e he ansla ion s a s and each ansla o has o do (p obably he same) ad-hoc e minology wo k, and he ini ial eeding o a new e m base wi h com- 2 3Te minologija | 2015 | 22 pany o subjec speci ic e minology in o de o iden i y he basic neces- sa y se o concep s and e ms. Te minology ex ac ion comp ises asks o ex ac ing e minological in o ma ion, mainly e ms i sel , om ex ual ma e ial. Tex ual ma e ial can be a se o monolingual documen s, a pai o pa allel ex s ei he p oduced in bo h languages, a sou ce language ex oge he wi h i s ansla ion, o a ex co pus wi h a s uc u ed and sys ema ically col- lec ed se o sen ences. Human e m ex ac ion by domain expe s o expe ienced e minolo- gis s is he mos ime consuming and expensi e me hod, bu p obably leads o he bes esul s. Compu e -assis ed e m ex ac ion p og ams can handle ex s in (almos ) all languages i hey use only s a is ical me hods. i hei e m iden i ica ion algo i hm is based on linguis ic me hods, he esul s o e m ex ac ion will be much be e , especially o mul i-wo d e ms and ph ases, bu (comme cial) linguis ic-based e m ex ac ion ools a e only a ailable o “majo ” languages such as english, F ench, Ge man, Spanish and ew o he s. Te m ex ac ion ools o e common unc ionali ies known om con- co dance p og ams (e.g. Wo dSmi h): hey iden i y he wo ds o a ex- ual documen , c ea e wo d equency s a is ics, display a KWiC index (Key Wo d in Con ex ), and display he esul s so ed in alphabe ic o de o by equency. Since wo ds appea in ex s in in lec ed o ms, linguis ic- based e m ex ac ion ools can educe he ex o m o a wo d o i s basic canonical o m; his is needed o eal wo d s a is ics and eliable e m candida e lis s, bu equi es linguis ic knowledge abou he mo phol- ogy o he espec i e language. Since e minology is always ela ed o domain-speci ic language, e m ex ac ion ools should be able o il e ou and igno e unc ion wo ds (e.g. a icles, conjunc ions, p eposi ions e c.) as well as gene al language wo ds; o his ea u e, mos o he ools use so-called s op wo d lis s ha a e language dependen and can be complemen ed by he use . Bu some- imes i is no so easy o decide i a wo d is a gene al language wo d o a special language e m. Al hough e m ex ac ion ools may be e y help ul in speci ic applica- ion scena ios, he ollowing issues ha e o be aken in o accoun : • The esul o a e m ex ac ion p ocess is a lis o e m candida es; his lis mus be checked and “cleaned” by a e minologis .