International Scientific Conference

From Word to Dictionary

ANITA BUTĀNE

LU Institute of Latvian Language

AUŠRA RIMKUTĖ

Institute of the Lithuanian Language

On 22–23 February 2010, an international scientific conference No vārda līdz vārdnīcai (From Word to Dictionary) was held in Riga to commemorate the 137th anniversary of the birth of linguist Jānis Endzelīns. The Institute of Latvian Language of the University of Latvia’s agency, the University of Latvia Institute of Latvian Language, organizes a conference dedicated to the academician every year. The conference focused mainly on lexicography and terminography, with participants sharing their experience in compiling dictionaries. Papers were presented in Latvian, Lithuanian, and Russian. A collection of the conference abstracts was published.

The conference was opened by Mārcis Auziņš (Mārcis Auziņš), Rector of the University of Latvia, who delivered a welcoming address. Ilga Jansone (Ilga Jansone), Director of the Institute of Latvian Language, surveyed works on Latvian linguistics published in 2009 and presented the latest dictionaries.

Sarma Klavinios’s (Sarma Kļaviņa, Riga) presentation focused on the manuscript Latvian Language Dictionary by Kārlis Mīlenbahs, which was edited and supplemented by Janis Endzelins.

Ieva Zuicena (Riga) spoke about the contributions to Latvian linguistics made by Laimduots Ceplītis (Laimdots Ceplītis, 1930–1992), corresponding member of the Latvian Academy of Sciences and professor, and briefly discussed his most important works. The linguist devoted most of his years of scholarly work—no fewer than 28—to lexicography and the first large dictionary of the Latvian language. Until his death, he was the editor-in-chief of the Dictionary of Standard Latvian (Latviešu literārās valodas vārdnīcas) (from the first to the eighth volume). The speaker also provided information on how the dictionary was compiled, its structure, and its quality.

178

A. Butāne, A. Rimkutė | Tarptautinė mokslinė konferencija No vārda līdz...

Renatė Silinia-Pinikė (Renātė Siliņa-Piņķe, Riga) discussed the names of Vidzeme peasants in the first half of the 17th century. The papers by Gita Elksnytė (Gita Elksnīte, Liepāja) and Elga Skrūzmanė (Elga Skrūzmane, Riga) focused on the language of 17th-century writings, recorded in G. Mancelis’s (G. Mancelis) dictionary “Lettus” (1638) and the sermon collection “Postilla” (1654). Mirosław Jankowiak (Mirosław Jankowiak, Warsaw) examined the vocabulary of the work Ekspedycyja inflantska 1621 roku by the Pole Jan Kunowski.

Lienė Markus-Narvila (Liene Markus-Narvila, Liepāja) discussed what types of dialect dictionaries have been published in Latvia. She regretted that there are not many of them and that they are not comprehensive, and acknowledged that work on them should be undertaken in the near future; for example, it would be possible to compile dictionaries of family language, urban speech, and so on. According to the presenter, sociolinguists should also be interested in this. Brigita Bušmanė (Brigita Bušmane, Riga) also spoke on dialect-related issues.

Ilze Štrausa (Ilze Štrausa, Riga), Dacė Strelėvica-Uošinia (Dace Strelēvica-Ošiņa, Riga), Vineta Ernstsonė (Vineta Ernstsone, Riga), Maija Brėdė (Maija Brēde, Riga), and Daiga Straupeniecė (Daiga Straupeniece, Liepāja) examined various other aspects of the Latvian language. Baiba Bankava and Ojārs Bušs (Ojārs Bušs, Riga) presented a paper on eponyms. Ilga Migla’s (Ilga Migla, Riga) paper examined phraseological expressions, comparisons, and proverbs found in dictionaries from different periods, containing the words koks “tree” and zars “branch.” Laimdota Uolderė (Laimdota Oldere, Riga) discussed the semantics of the adjective labs “good,” while Arija Uozuola (Ārija Ozola, Riga) analyzed the adjective dižs “great.” In her paper, Anitra Ruožė (Anitra Roze, Riga) examined the semantics and use in Latvian of the words bēš, blonds, brunets, šatens, which denote a particular shade of brown. Vineta Puorinia (Vineta Poriņa, Riga) explored issues of bilingualism in Latvia in the first decade of the 21st century, while Janis Sylis (Jānis Sīlis, Ventspils), emphasizing the need for knowledge of English as a lingua franca, discussed the challenges of compiling Latvian-English phrasebooks in the 21st century. The presenter also mentioned the growing influence of English on Latvian, especially at the beginning of the 21st century.

A joint paper by Viesturs Šulcs (Viesturs Šulcs, Riga) and Inesė Ėdelmanė (Inese Ēdelmane, Riga) discussed the Latvian national botanical nomenclature database—its structure, elements, and scope. According to the presenters, such a botanical nomenclature database facilitates the analysis of terms.

Terminologija | 2010 | 17 179

Juris Baldunčikas (Juris Baldunčiks, Ventspils) noted that life without the internet is becoming increasingly inconceivable; therefore, an electronic lexicographic resource is needed, one that would provide not only word definitions but also comprehensive linguistic information. According to the presenter, such a Latvian-language database (Leksipēdija) could be created on the Vikipedijos model (applying the principle of democratic collaboration and ensuring scholarly oversight). In his paper, Eduardas Cauna (Eduards Cauna, Riga) emphasized that journalists, translators, editors, and proofreaders often face the problem that there is no single electronic resource they can consult, where they can find the word they need, check its spelling, find synonyms and equivalents in other languages, and communicate with other language users and specialists. A prototype for such a dictionary is Leksikonas (www.leksikons.lv).

Mario Baltinio’s (Māris Baltiņš, Riga) paper focused on the history of Latvian terminology at the beginning of the 20th century. The presenter noted that in the spring of 1915, because of the war, a large part of the Latvian people left their homeland—the nation’s intellectuals withdrew from Riga to Moscow and St. Petersburg. Many cultural workers published their work in the newspaper Dzimtenes Atbalss (Tēvynes aidas), which was published in Moscow (1915–1918). This newspaper, important to the Latvian people, featured discussions about the need for their own terminology, especially in education, so that Latvian-language terms would be used. These discussions prepared the public ideologically for the establishment of the Terminology Commission in 1919.

Academician Valentina Skujina (Valentīna Skujiņa, Riga) discussed the concept and use of neologisms in 21st-century articles. She defined what a neologism is and discussed the synonymous term neologizmas.

A considerable group of linguists from the Institute of the Lithuanian Language also attended the conference. Professor Grasil da Blažienė reviewed the material on Old Prussian names in the work Senprūšu valoda. Ievads, gramatika un leksika (1943) by the Latvian linguist J. Endzelīns.

Danutė Liutkevičienė presented a paper on the Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos žodyną being compiled by the Lexicography Centre of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. This dictionary will be a prescriptive publication intended for the public, whose main aim is to reflect the correct use of words in contemporary standard language. The dictionary’s compilers seek the greatest possible degree of systematicity. Following the traditions of compiling dictionaries of contemporary Lithuanian, they strive to Bendrinės

180

A. Butāne, A. Rimkute | Tarptautinė mokslinė konferencija No vārda līdz...

the Lithuanian Dictionary gradually modernize its compilation and orient it toward contemporary lexicography in other languages. The database for this dictionary is also nearing completion.

Vilija Sakalauskienė discussed dictionaries of Lithuanian dialects and the principles guiding their compilation. According to the scholar, the main aim of compiling dialect dictionaries is to record the word stock of the older generation, enabling a thorough study of dialect vocabulary, the presentation of its system, and an account of how dialect words function. Thus, the principal source for a local-dialect dictionary should be living speech and dialect material; in particular cases, when documenting features of peripheral, disappearing dialects, printed texts may be used. Works of fiction should not serve as sources for a dialect dictionary.

Rima Bacevičiūtė also spoke about dialect dictionaries. Her presentation focused mainly on the principles and problems involved in presenting phonetic features in dialect dictionaries (vowel quantity, qualitative vowel variants, positional variants of diphthongs, consonant palatalization, coarticulation processes, and prosodic elements). Having reviewed how these features are represented in dictionaries, the linguist concluded that authors present them with varying degrees of detail, a difference determined mainly by factors related to dialect structure, the purpose and intended audience of the text, as well as practical printing constraints.

In his presentation The East Aukštaitian Manuscript Dictionary (RtŽ) as a Lexical Source for the Academic Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language, Vidmantas Kuprevičius examined questions concerning the meaning and origin of some words that entered the Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language from the East Aukštaitian Manuscript Dictionary.

Aušra Rimkutė gave a presentation on religious terms in priest Juozas Laukaitis’s Little Catechism for Children. The three editions of this catechism use not only Lithuanian religious terms but also loanwords. Most religious terms in the catechisms are used synonymously, with preference generally given to the Lithuanian term.

Regina Kvašytė (Šiauliai), drawing on Lithuanian and Latvian, explained what non-equivalent vocabulary is, often simply called national realia. According to the speaker, these are unique elements of material and spiritual culture characteristic of a particular nation, country, or world region, most often lacking equivalents in other cultures and languages. Interestingly, this layer of vocabulary is distinctive and not equally well known even to speakers of the language itself.

Terminologija | 2010 | 17

181

During the two-day conference, most of the discussion focused on lexicographic issues in Lithuanian and Latvian, experiences in compiling dictionaries—especially dialect dictionaries—and computer-based terminology management; various databases were also presented. The language problems of the 21st century were not forgotten either.

The next conference, dedicated to academician Jānis Endzelīns, will take place in 2011.

Received 2010–09–14

Anita Butāne LMA Terminology Commission, LU Latvian Language Institute Email: [email protected]

Aušra Rimkutė Institute of the Lithuanian Language P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius Email: [email protected]

182

A. Butāne, A. Rimkutė | Tarptautinė mokslinė konferencija No vārda līdz...