INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR PROBLEMS AND TASKS OF ESTONIAN, LATVIAN AND LITHUANIAN TERMINOLOGY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

On October 5–6 this year, an international seminar organized by the Terminology Centre, Problems and Tasks of Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian Terminology in the European Union, took place at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. Guests came not only from the Baltic countries, but also from Austria, Hungary and Russia. There was no shortage of presentations from important Lithuanian institutions either—the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language, the Lithuanian Standards Board, and the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics.

After Jolanta Zabarskaitė, director of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language, had delivered words of welcome, the seminar was opened by Christian Galinski, director of the International Information Centre for Terminology (INFOTERM), with a presentation on UNESCO Guidelines for Terminology Policies, focusing more specifically on language affected by globalization; the development and implementation of various terminology policies; and terminology planning at national, regional or local levels in intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations, large institutions and organizations (including international companies).

On behalf of Valentīna Skujiņa, head of the Terminology Department at the Latvian Language Institute, some of the key points of the presentation The Situation and Prospects of Latvian Terminology were presented by Ilze Ilzina, a researcher from Riga.

The topic of Hije Tamm, a terminologist at the Estonian Centre of Legal Language, was Organizing Translation-Oriented Terminology Work in Tallinn, Luxembourg and Brussels after Accession to the EU. According to the speaker, the founders of the Estonian Legal Translation Centre understood very well the importance of terminology work for translation after Estonia joined the EU, and therefore a great deal had already been accomplished at the very outset. After some deliberation, it was concluded that, whether or not the EU supports the terminology work of new member states, responsibility for it rests first and foremost with the country in which that terminology is used.

Hungarian scholar János Pusztay (Berzsenyi Daniel College), in his presentation Terminology Development in Central Europe in View of EU Terminology, discussed the development of Hungarian terminology—a fairly spontaneous process and largely the result of translators’ day-to-day work. This activity requires a comprehensive and well-considered language policy, as well as the establishment of appropriate institutions. Many EU member states already have institutions for terminology development and research, whereas in Hungary this remains to be done.

186

The topic of the presentation by Russian linguists Vladimir Leichik (Pushkin State Russian Language Institute) and Sergei Shelov (Scientific Terminology Committee, Russian Foundation for the Humanities) was Russian Terminology: Situation and Prospects. In their country, according to S. Shelov, terminology has entered the new century renewed and optimistic. Assessing its further development over the coming decades, one can expect Russian terminologists to strengthen ties with colleagues abroad, especially those in Central and Northern European countries. As a scholarly discipline, terminology in Russia should in the future move from describing facts to explaining them, formulating general principles governing term formation and functioning, and providing scientifically grounded decisions and recommendations for practical work.

Albina Auksoriūtė, head of the Terminology Centre, in her presentation Terminology Work at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language discussed the centre’s areas of activity and spoke about the workload involved in practical terminology work for its staff. She also mentioned the Lithuanian scholarly journal Terminologija, whose articles reflect the theory and practice of the field. In 2002, work began on creating a computerized database, Lithuanian Term Synonymy, and six months later, another, Lithuanian Equivalents of International Terms. The latter database receives support from the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language. The head spoke about the terminologists’ initiative to start creating an electronic term bank, whose development was taken up by the Research Automation Laboratory of the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics.

The electronic terminology database was presented in greater detail by Snieguolė Meškauskienė, representing the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics. The need for a Lithuanian-language terminology database was first raised as early as 1988 by Aleksandras Vanagas, then director of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language. According to the speaker, the database is populated with data from the best-prepared terminology dictionaries in various fields, and for the past five years we have had the data in electronic form.

Representatives of the Latvian Translation and Terminology Centre, Māris Baltiņš, Ilze Dika and Inese Treimane, delivered presentations and discussed and assessed the “challenges after May 1” facing their Translation and Terminology Centre (TTC). Latvian colleagues said that the biggest problem at present is the terminology used in EU legal acts being translated—how to ensure that these terms are suitable for users in their own country. There are concerns about legal terminology, which is influenced by the EU terminology system and its understanding. This newly emerged situation brings long-standing problems into sharper focus and brings errors to light.

187

Nijolė Dudlauskienė, representative of the Lithuanian Standards Department, discussed the department’s work on developing technical terms in her paper Standardization of Lithuanian Technical Terms. She considered how to find ways to ensure that the required terms are standardized and made accessible to the public. Lithuanian terminologists should be given the opportunity to participate in international terminological activities and to represent Lithuania’s interests. According to the speaker, the consistent creation, refinement, and use of Lithuanian technical terms must be ensured in both legislation and Lithuanian standards and other documents being prepared.

The paper The Lithuanian Term Bank – A New Tool for Terminology Management was delivered by Audra Ivanauskienė, representative of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language. As Lithuania became an EU member and translations of various documents were being prepared, it became important to create a freely and readily accessible resource covering various fields; consequently, at the end of 2003, the Law on the Term Bank of the Republic of Lithuania was adopted. Specialists and language users will be able to use this bank freely. According to the speaker, the Term Bank should encourage the public to submit suggestions more actively or take part in discussions about new terms emerging and terms already in use.

The second day of the seminar was devoted to lectures on terminology. In his lecture Standardization of Terminology, Christian Galinski presented diagrams and identified types of terminology standards: systematic terminological dictionaries, monolingual and multilingual dictionaries, technical dictionaries, nomenclatures, graphic symbols, illustrations, drawings, formulas, and so on.

Ilze Ulzina spoke about the flow of terms from the EU in English, for example, the term euro, whose declension (the Latvian form eiras or eiro) is something to be aimed for. I. Ilzina mentioned that when people are informed about new coinages, which are published in the press, broadcast on television, and so on, and discussed at various meetings, new terms are either approved or rejected. This takes a great deal of time, since opinions differ and are sometimes contradictory.

The lecture Terms, Terminologicality and Term Definitions (Seven Steps into Terminology Theory) was delivered by Sergejus Šelovas. The main topics reviewed were: what types of term definitions are used; whether a definition of a word (or phrase) is always necessary; what the semantic and conceptual structures of terminology are and how they differ; what the characteristics of conceptual terminology structures are; and so on.

188

Latvian representative Dana Reizniece and co-authors Jānis Silis (Ventspils University College), Ilze Ilziņa, and Juris Borzovs (Riga Institute of Information Technology) stated in their paper To Use or Not to Use Metaphors in Latvian Information and Communication Technology Terminology that metaphorical terms are a terminological phenomenon that will certainly become even more common and important in English. Metaphors abound in Internet terminology. The theme of travel stands out here, for example: highway “highway; information channel,” map “map; plan; diagram,” and so on. It is very important to establish a clear system to help manage English metaphorical terms entering Latvian and to adopt only the best.

At the end, Stasys Keinys, a researcher at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language, reviewed the development, state, and role of Lithuanian terminology at the beginning of the third millennium: over the 20th century, the place and role of terminology in the language system, language use, and social life changed—the scope of terminology expanded, and people’s education changed, leading to greater familiarity with and use of terms in everyday speech. In summing up the seminar, the terminologist stressed that efforts must be made, and hope maintained, so that Lithuanian terminology will be protected and cherished, while retaining its Lithuanian spirit.

Solvita LABANAUSKIENĖ

Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius E. paštas [email protected]

Received 2004-11-01

189