Lietuvių terminografija: praeities bruožai, dabarties sunkumai ir uždaviniai

LITHUANIAN TERMINOLOGY AND THE PRESENT Jonas KLIMAVIČIUS Lithuanian Language Institute LITHUANIAN TERMINOLOGY: FEATURES OF THE PAST, DIFFICULTIES AND TASKS OF THE PRESENT Lithuanian terminology begins with the first Lithuanian book (1547) — Martynas Mažvydas’ Catechism (and Elementary) — outside the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, when Lithuanian was not — nowhere! — official, state, even clerical. During the university period (1579-1832) there was no university. It was only church, although not easily entered into the Church, and later pushed into it and pushed out in many places. For almost three centuries, the object of Lithuanian terminology was mainly ecclesiastical or theological and philological. An even greater Lithuanian paradox: the more systematic creation and management of scientific terminology began when the statehood was lost (1795), the university closed (1832) — in the middle of the 19th century. It coincided with the third attempt to create a common written language—now on the basis of the Žemaičių dialektas—- which was unsuccessful. Jurgis (friar Ambraziejus) Pabrėža (1771-1849), who studied at Vilnius University for two years and left it in 1794 because of the repression of the uprising, developed his scientific (and apostolic) activity in his native Samogitian region: in 1821 he wrote Dictionarium Botanicum Latino Samogiticum (Latin Samogitian botany dictionary) — 860 names, 2nd edition — 1400 names (manuscript has not survived); 1834 —Wardaa tayslyynee Augimiu —11 p., Sryje Balsenyyny Biiluu Zemayt. Lotinyynių (alphabetical Latin-Lithuanian list of plant morphology terms) —505 p.; The main one — Taysla augumynynis (1843) — 980 pages, prepared for printing, but only the part called Botanika, or Taislius auguminis, published in America in 1900, when the new written language, based on the South-West Highland dialect and the Lesser Lithuania grammar, was already formed. After the uprising of 1863, many enlightened people were exiled, the Church was restricted, the press was banned in 1864. 9 Syste, science — individual luminaries. Such was Laurynas Ivinskis (1810-1881- ), who had not yet tasted university, but himself was like a man university. He prepared 3300 pieces of mineralogy and botany systematic nomenclature Prigimtūmėnė: I —Žemiėmina, 11 —Zoliémina, atlas of fungi —226 pieces (with drawings), 0 of his all works consist of about 6 000 terms. The terminological legacy of these Žemaites has been extensively studied: Emphasis — botanists J. Dagis, K. Jankevičius, A. Lekavičius and others, linguist K. Gaivenis and others. ; "Ivanov A. A. (Ph.D.)" (in Russian). It can be summarized very briefly that Pabrėža and Ivinskis: 1) according to systematics inventorized a lot of living language names of plants, fungi, minerals, etc.; 2) created a great deal (this was required by the gaps in their collections, and even more so — systematics, extending far beyond the Lithuanian plant range) according to Lithuanian word formation tendencies (rules were not yet available) and even individual forms altogether (Ivinskis — about 1500); 3) used the borrowed money sparingly, preferring in this case the values and sequences. A part of their legacy has become, and partly still is, the living heritage of the termology. Among other scientists and linguists of the time, A. Kašarauskas (1821-1882) and K. Drasutavičius (about 1850—about 1905) are to be mentioned for their legacy of popular and scientific terminology. The national liberation movement that arose issued a secret press (Ausra, Varpas, Žemaičių ir Lietuvos apžvalga, Tévynes Sargas), which was restored in 1904. The terminology first began to emerge from tradition, work, legacy — Zolynas, published in 1906-1907 by Povilas Matulionis (1860-1932- ), who grew up with the national revival movement. Lithuanian plant dictionary and plant dictionary (about 3000 terms). As the name suggests, the works of Pabrėža and Ivinskis were used, but also live language data. However, there is already a conscious innovative concept of standardization — 4 principles, which aim to “reduce the number of contradictions; living people's language, even more often the writings in one word densely name 2-3 plants, quite different, and excessively: one plant is named several times. —In such cases I have only raised those names which are either more widely understood, or rather they express the names of the plant, or older origins, or meaning are confirmed in the languages of our neighboring nations: Latvian, Polish, Russian” (3), —the equivalents of them are given in the dictionary. In 1907, the Lithuanian Science Society was founded to promote Lithuanian science, and the subject of Lithuanian terminology was raised. The Society in 1913. 10 At the meeting on June 12 (25) Kazys Grinius (1866-1950) read a report on Lithuanian terminology of botany organography, which was printed in 1914 in Lietuvių tauta (also released as a separate print). Here, even more clearly than P. Matulionis said, the most important requirement of the term science — non-synonymousness (the other side — unambiguousness). The Society also had the aim of publishing textbooks, which was even more important. And more quickly it was necessary to create and standardize terms. In July 1911, from the resort of Bad Elster, Jonas Jablonskis wrote to Jonas Basanavičius: “It seems to me that the Scientific Society, among other things, should work out terminology for literature: it is necessary for all branches of science. In the end, the terminology society will not work, of course, but it should bring a lot of light, uniformity to that mixture of terms that we now see in our literature" (Jablonskis 1985: 71)". In the aftermath of World War II, Voronezh was a Lithuanian terminology workshop — Pranas Mašiotas, Marcelinas Šikšnys, Zigmas Žemaitis, Konstantinas Šakenis, who used to meet here with Jonas Jablonskis, together — specialists in the subject and a linguist — created, discussed and approved mathematics, physics, and chemistry terms. Jablonski was then a very experienced terminologist, a prolific creator of innovations, with a successful method (casting as people cast). The principle of purity in Jablonski- ’s concept of terminology is essential, unfortunately, later and now it is either ignored, forgotten, or profaned by unsuccessful innovations. The result of the deliberations in Voronezh was the creation of a school of terminology (and procedure) and two dictionaries, published in Kaunas, the provisional capital of the newly established Lithuanian state: M. Šikšnis’s Dictionary of Arithmetic and Algebra Terms (1919, 47 p.) and Z. Žemaitis’s Collection of Terms in Geometry and Trigonometry (1920, 99 p.). The Lithuanian-Russian and Russian-Lithuanian Military Dictionary (106 p.), published by the Ministry of National Defence in 1919, is known to have been prepared by Petro Rusecko. In 1920, the idea of an encyclopedia arose on both sides of the Atlantic. Very characteristic is the opinion of Kazimieras Būga (in a letter to Klcopas Jurgelionis dated 9 (22) April 1911): “I think we need a completely different encyclopedia: Lituanologijos enc. <...>. The Lithuanianology encyclopedia should include everything that concerns Lithuania in the broadest sense” (Būga 1961: 928). 11 i Jurgis Elison Zoologijos sistematikos terminų žodynėlis (144 p.) (its author published in 1932 an attempted Lithuanian zoology technical dictionary — separate print from Archivum Philologicum, 1932, vol. 3, pp. 126—167). In 1920, A. Maciejauskas published the Technical Dictionary (141 p.), prepared with the assistance of the Ministry of Transport Terminology Commission; In the conversation, it was said that the advice of Jon Jablonski was used. Jablonskis himself evaluated the dictionary very critically: “<...>: not everything that is easy to write is easy to correct” (Jablonskis 1935: 287), and about his role, having unexpectedly learned, he explained: “This is how it has been: two years ago, engineer A. Maciejauskas had come to me once or twice and asked my opinion about a few words (terms) he needed; for those few words I told him my opinion and that's it; that he would say in the dictionary that he used my “advice”, I didn’t hear about that at the time; that he was writing a dictionary for technicians, I didn’t know at that time either” (Jablonskis 1935: 287). From my own sad experience I can add that similar jokes are still being thrown at linguists... On March 14, 1921, a Terminology Commission was established at the Ministry of Education. Both Jablonski and Buga participated in her work. However, the work was not easy, not smooth, because there were no more qualified linguists, and the unqualified Commissioners lacked at least the principles of terminology and the general theory of language, the understanding of the principles of standardization and the realization that they lacked it. And most likely, this manifested itself in excessive unprofessional purism, ignorant innovations (this thing even Jablonski with his authority and scholarship could not stop, he did not oppose him adequately and Boga, in general, as shown by his review of the Dictionary of Zoological Systematic Terms, did not like borrowing). In 1925, Jablonskis wrote: “The Commission will be broken or somewhat out of track” (Rygiškių Jonas 1935: 308). He also critically evaluated the booklet Įvardžiai arba terminai, priimti terminologijos komisijos (1924, 144 p.) —akcizo, teisės, kelių ir kt. (Rygiškių Jonas 1935: 322-324), carelessly prepared by the secretary of the Terminology Commission Antanas Vireliūnas. During all this ugly history, which is not forgotten even today, A. Vireliūnas (?)’s good term pronoun (:įvardyti) almost disappeared (after all, used by foreign Lithuanian terminographers B. Stundžys, P. Mažeika; V. Vintartas — even pronounology), his work now mentions perhaps only local history. After Jablonski- ’s withdrawal, the Commission was reorganized on March 25, 1925, and J. Balčikonis, J. Talmantas, K. Alminauskis, A. Salys, P. Skardžius were included in it, but after Jablonski- ’s resignation from 12 the chairmanship in June 1926 it was disbanded. The activities of the Lithuanian Language Society’s Terminology Commission (Section) in the 1930s were more successful: in 1938, the General Terminology of Philosophy was published (deliberated, supplemented and adopted by the Lithuanian Language Society’s Terminology Section, prepared by Prof. St. Šalkauskis, 1660 terms in Lithuanian, French, German and Russian, as well as explanations with examples- ); Šalkauskas also prepared the General Terminology of Pedagogy (1600 terms, of which 600 were from the BFT), but it was not completed and published. The Botanical Dictionary Commission, headed by L. Vailionis, drafted and considered (initially P. Matulionis also participated in the meetings- ), prepared and published in 1938 the work Lithuanian Botanical Dictionary with the advice of P. Skardžys and J. Balčikonis. Part 1. Plant nomenclature, botanical pharmacognoziné nomenclature and plant systematics, ed. J. Dagys (589 p.). The dictionary consists of about 3300 normative terms in Latin, Lithuanian, German, Russian, Polish and Latvian languages with Lithuanian synonyms and variants of the living language and scripts, a Lithuanian-Latin dictionary, a dictionary of Latin adjective species names. Thus, the LBŽ is a capital dictionary of not only scientific, but also popular terminology — a thesaurus. The systematic evaluation of all the plant names collected at that time was a considerable (although insufficient) stimulus for the editors of the academic Lithuanian language dictionary. During this period, the need for terminology grew rapidly, many collections of terms were published in magazines and newspapers (Švietimo darbas, Lietuvos mokykla, Kosmos, Logos, Ateitis, Teisė, Lietuva, Lietuvis, etc.), dictionaries of terms and dictionaries were prepared or are being prepared more (law, railway, etc.), but until the loss of statehood again (1940) it was not time. Nevertheless, the inflexibility of ministerial commissions is striking, and university commissions have not yet manifested themselves, although terminology work has been done at Vytautas Magnus University. The organized and productive work of the Terminology Commission of the Lithuanian Language Society is noteworthy. The most positive thing is that Jablonski- ’s system of organized preparation, consideration and approval of terms has been consolidated and even institutionalized, although without Jablonski- ’s (or other linguists’) hand, institutionalization would have become a machine without engine. 13 From the fertile years 1938 to 1954, when the Dictionary of Legal Terms (240 p., 2072 basic + 3870 generic terms) was published, compiled by A. Žiurlis (also from the interwar work), approved by the Terminology Commission of the Lithuanian Language and Literature Institute of the Lithuanian SSR Academy of Sciences, there is a huge gap in terminology, in which only the small 1949 Russian-- Lithuanian technical dictionary Trumpas (127 p.) by A. Novodvorskis is visible. Since 1952, the linguistic consultation and some approval of the dictionaries of terms was carried out by the mentioned Terminology Commission (which began its existence in 1945 at the Presidium of the MA and was transferred to the Institute of Lithuanian Language in 1951). N. Grigas, A. Kučinskaitė, J. Paulauskas, V. Bartusevičius, V. Labutis worked in it at different times and with different loads under the direction of J. Kruopa — all of them later left this job, K. Gaivenis worked IT almost alone for about ten years until he fell ill. In 1954, the first normative dictionary of the general (although incomplete) language was published – the Dictionary of Modern Lithuanian Language. During its preparation, several dozen specialists from various fields of science provided terminological advice. Not one of them —probably to encourage DLKŽ rep. red. John Crooks became the editor of the term dictionary. The decade of the reaping of Lithuanian terminology came, during which: V. Gudelis's Dictionary of Geology and Physical Geography Terms (1956, 220 p., about 5000 terms); Bibliographical and bibliographical terminology, sas. 1, compiled by I. Kisinas (1956, 48 p.); Dictionary of Physics Terms, red. P. Brazdžiūnas (1958, 123 p.); Dictionary of Sports Terms, compiled by V. Steponaitis (1959, 340 p.); Russian-- Lithuanian Polytechnic Dictionary, ed. kol. Mr. A. Novodvorskis (1959, 518 p.); J. Čeitis Dictionary of Melting Terms (1960, 283 p.); A. Krutulis, Short Music Dictionary (1960, 208 p., about 1500 terms); K. Daukšo Dictionary of Chemistry (1960, 449 p.); Literatūros terminų žodynas, compiled by J. Petronis, V. Vanagas, A. Zalatorius (1962, 80 p., about 3000 terms)? ; A. Jurevičius and A. Čižo Explanatory Dictionary of Textile Terms (1962, 99 p.); A dictionary of botanical terms, compiled by Bo- * In 1961, L. Timofeev and N. Vengrov published a dictionary of literary science terms (208 pp., Lithuanian examples selected by J. Vildžiūnas). 14 Tanikos žodyno komisija, ed. prof. J. Dagys (1965, 663 p.); Russian-- Lithuanian Dictionary of Economic Terms, ed. akad. K. Meškauskas (1966, 291 p.); M. Mikalajūno Trumpas Russian Lithuanian synoptic meteorology terms dictionary (1966, 39 p., rotaprint). Some time later, A. Trečiokaite’s Dictionary of Informatics Terms (1969, 96 p.), V. Anskaitis and M. Kilo’s Russian-- Lithuanian Dictionary of Agricultural Terms (1971, 364 p.) and Lithuanian-Russian-German Explanatory Dictionary of Woodworking Terms (1971, 119 p.) were published. It should also be mentioned that: B. Augustinas, P. Danisevičius and K. Miecevičius (ed. by P. Pošiūnas) Short guide for criminalists (1970, 184 pp.), to the standardization of the terminology of which J. Kruopas and K. Gaivenis contributed a great deal. The dictionaries of terms were usually prepared by the most prominent specialists in the subjects and/or collectives of scientific institutions. Although the generations of scholars and linguists, institutions, ideologies and other basic things changed during the upheavals of state and nation life, the structure of the preparation and approval of terminological dictionaries remained. Almost all of the dictionaries mentioned were reviewed by the Terminology Commission, although the Polytechnic Dictionary and the Dictionary of Agricultural Terms were not approved. Of course, those dictionaries had many technical, lexicographical, linguistic shortcomings. The basic shortcomings — the bilingualism between Russian and Lithuanian caused by the occupation and its inevitable consequence — the abundance of Russian verbs, which, by the way, was propaganda-wise viewed as an enrichment of the Lithuanian language, not infrequent Russian verbs, more moderately, but noticeably — foreignness. All dictionaries of almost the same type — bilingual, Russian-- Lithuanian, polytechnic and agricultural — even without Lithuanian index; distinguishes only literature (in Lithuanian-Russian languages) and botany, where the subject itself requires and Latin; more dictionaries —music, land improvement, chemistry, botany, wood ~ and explanatory. Only in 1958 the only English-Lithuanian Polytechnic Dictionary by A. Novodvorskis (172 pages, about 10,000 terms, without Lithuanian index, unapproved) was published. Only 13 years later, in 1971, a Russian-- Lithuanian-English dictionary of computational technology terms (600 p., about 17 000 terms, Lithuanian and English index, reviewed by the Terminology Commission) and a small English-Lithuanian dictionary of melioration and land management terms by R. Kelbauskienė and J. Kazėnas —minimumas (1971, 31 p.) were published. Here are also mentioned domestic publications - J. Vosyliaus Latin-Lithuanian-English-German-Russian 15 Short pharmaceutical polyglot dictionary (1970, 350 p.) and J. Starkauskas and A. Šuopis prepared Clinical diagnostics dictionary (1971, 182 p.). There have been more educational dictionaries of internal publishing terms (for students, usually rotaprinted) (English-Lithuanian, German-Lithuanian, French-Lithuanian), one of the first and largest —V. Nečiūno English-Lithuanian Medical Dictionary (1962), mentioned also in V. Nečiūno Basic Affixes and Word Roots for Medical Terminology (1967, 128 p.). This is not the place to discuss in detail the theoretical and methodological basis of terminology of that time. They had remained essentially clear from earlier, although the conditions for their consolidation were not favourable. As we moved further away from a good start, tradition and even a decent continuation, these things sometimes arose for the organizers themselves — not only problematically, but also, unfortunately, crisis-like. This is what happened with the Medical Terms Dictionary —among the editors themselves there were diametrically opposed views on purity, the preparation of the dictionary stalled, problems broke out in the press, even in the party —one-part. In fact, the manuscript was widely reviewed, suspended, deposited, specially edited —it was published (20,000 copies!) only in 1980 (996 p.), it was published —as a response to the careless, sometimes unserious manifestations of purism (called bourgeois) that was then strongly condemned —purified and re-purified, most importantly —the choice of its norms was left completely unclear: “Where Lithuanianized Latin and Lithuanian equivalents are presented side by side, they are to be considered equivalent and used selectively” (3). There was no such vague standardization before or after, and always — whether it was explained or not — the first term was the basic variant of the standard. Now —optional: aphasia —inability to walk, ablactation: 1. weaning of the baby, 2. abruption, ablepsy —blindness, abrasion —1. fasting, 2. exhaustion, acne —acne, adipose —obesity, catharsis —1. laxative, cogitation —thinking, gargling —snoring, insomnia —insomnia, instillation —drip, and so on and so forth! And the aforementioned provision of the dictionary says: “Because of the different characteristics of some terms, the elements mentioned (i.e., “Latinized Latin term, purely Lithuanian term” — J. K.) are not applied equally to all terms. For many clinical, pharmaceutical, microbiological, cytological terms, only the lithuanized Latin form is used (= used —J. K.)” (3), 0 after it is added: “In compound terms, for space saving reasons, only the lithuanized Latin forms are more often presented.” 16 Lithuanianized Latin forms” (3). So the crooked super-Latinized disposition of the dictionary is quite clear. But it is completely incomprehensible and unreasonable. Latin is the basic language of medicine (and of anatomy, physiology, as well as botany and zoology), and the dictionary first and foremost provides the international norm — a Latin (or Latinized) term, so why translate it into Lithuanian if there is a truly Lithuanian term, a legal, national variant, vitally necessary for the use of the Lithuanian language. Of course, in cases of ablepsy, catharsis, cogitatio, gargarism, etc., the usage dictionary may not have had much effect, the norms to Lithuanian at least somewhat (but only after a good decade) Medical Encyclopedia (vol. 1, 1991; vol. 2, 1993). However, in those — also numerous and important — cases where there was already an international Word in use, and its Lithuanian equivalent, and often a substitute, the dictionary pointed — and pointed — back to internationality. Some things that were well named and acquired in Lithuanian at that time by common efforts, and which were already well established in the broader public usage, such as šunvotė, piktvotė, pūlinys, pūlynas, dictionary were for a long time relegated to Latin bales (the first — furunkulas, karbunkulas, abscesas, flegmonal), until they were at least somewhat recaptured by the Medical Encyclopedia. The dictionary has approval —The dictionary was reviewed by the Terminology Group of the Institute of Lithuanian Language and Literature of the Lithuanian SSR Academy of Sciences, but all approval is clearly stated in the Preamble: “Part of the manuscript prepared for printing was read by K. Gaivenis and J. Klimavičius, research associates of the Terminology Group of the Institute of Lithuanian Language and Literature” (3). The portion was small and directed—some things of difficult making and term forms. It is a sad story, because the efforts of some of the authors and contributors of the dictionary are the true contribution to Lithuanian medical terminology. But tar — all the same. On 7 December 1971, the organizational and coordinating Terminology Council was established at the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences (4 sections, 22 members, chairman — Vytautas Mažiulis, deputy — Dr. Stasys Keinys, secretary — Dr. Kazimieras Gaivenis). The Institute of Lithuanian Language and Literature formed a Terminology Group (attached to the Dictionaries Sector), which later — in 1991 — grew into the Terminology Department of the Institute of Lithuanian Language (since April 2003 — the Terminology Centre). The Council did not make much progress in the terminology work, although there were ambitions and hopes. A translation aid published in 1973, composed by 17 14500 terms, not approved); Lithuanian-- Russian-German-English Explanatory Dictionary of Wood Terms (rev. by B. Papreckis, 1998, 212 p., VLKK does not object). Mentionworthy are J. Velička’s Short Encyclopedia of Maritime Terms with Russian and English equivalents (1991, 441 p.) and Russian-Lithuanian and Lithuanian-- Russian Maritime, Fishing and Polytechnic Terms Dictionary (vol. 1, 1992, 398 p., vol. 2, 1992, 446 p. —about 17 500 terms), J. Banaitis’s Maritime Techniques. Lithuanian-- Russian-English dictionary of shipping and fishing (1994, 1024 p., about 17 000 terms, revised by the Terminology Department) and English-Lithuanian dictionary of marine technology, shipping and fishing (2001, 728 p., 40 000 terms, not approved). The following dictionaries of terms in a completely new field of computer science are published extensively: K. V. Paulauskas (ed.) and R. Jasinevičius lietuviy-angly— Russian Explanatory Dictionary of Computer Science (1995, 376 p., about 4200 terms, reviewed by the LKI Terminology Section); Lithuanian-- English— Russian-German language terminology dictionary. Informatics (ed. R. Valatkaitė, Z. Kudirka, 1997, 943 p., 18 000 terms, VLKK does not object); K. V. Paulauskas Explanatory Dictionary of Computer Abbreviations (2000, 352 pp., 4000 abbreviations, about 6000 terms, VLKK does not object) and others. The Lithuanian-- Russian-English explanatory dictionary of InJormacijos terms (compiled by A. Trečiokaitė, 1993, 140 p., revised by the Terminology Department) is also mentioned. In the field of economics, trade, banking and finance, several important dictionaries are worth mentioning: Lithuanian-- English-German-Russian encyclopedic dictionary of modern economic terms by P. Auštrevičius, D. Pupkevičius, D. Treigienė (reviewer K. Gaivenis, 1991, 510 p., about 2500 terms); K. Paso, B. Louzo, L. Deivis Dictionary of Economic Terms (red. A. Pupkis, rec. K. Gaivenis, 1994, 310 p.: II ed., 1997, 583 p.); A. Buračo, B. Svecevičiaus Lithuanian-- English-Lithuanian Business, Banking, Stock Exchange Terms Dictionary-- Guide (1994, 718 p., terms revised by K. Gaivenis); A. Buračo Lithuanian-- English Explanatory Dictionary of Banking and Commerce Terms (1997, 456 p., revised by K. Gaivenis); A. Buračo lietuvių-anglų kalbų Pasaulio valiutų ir monetų žinynas (1999, 368 p., terms revised by K. Gaivenis); German-Lithuanian dictionary of scientific and marketing terms for agricultural enterprises (compiled by A. Poviliūnas, 1996, 410 p., not approved). 24 The field of law is not empty either, but here prevail translations (usually educational) — English-Lithuanian (3) and German-Lithuanian (1) dictionaries, some not quite dictionaries of terms — there are words in that field, and the terms sometimes have no Lithuanian equivalents, only descriptions. Noteworthy is the dictionary of terms used in the laws of the Republic of Lithuania (compiled by R. Mockevičius, 2000, 607 p.; 2nd ed., 2002, 767 p.). From various other fields, larger, more significant dictionaries of terms are mentioned: Systematic Latin-Lithuanian-German-English-Russian Dictionary of Botanical Names (compiled by R. Jankevičienė, 1998, 524 p., VLKK does not object); systematic Latin-Lithuanian-English-French-Russian-German dictionary of mammals (edited by P. Bluzma, 2002, 436 p., almost 3500 names, VLKK does not object); Trumpas angly— Lithuanian and Lithuanian-English dictionary of plant biology terms (prepared by O. Rupainienė, 1998, 432 p., about 7000 terms, VLKK does not object); Lithuanian-English-Russian Dictionary of Environmental Protection Terms (2000, 518 p., 2261 term, VLKK does not object); V. Stuikis, L. Tymukas, R. Vasiliauskytė Lithuanian-English-Russian Explanatory Dictionary of Livestock Terms (1993, 216 p., reviewed and reviewed by LKI Terminology Section); systematic Latin-Lithuanian dictionary Veterinary anatomy, histology and embryology terms (manual L. Daugnora, 1998, 180 p., VLKK does not object); L. Daugnora, R. R. Budrio, R. Trainienė systematic Latin-Lithuanian dictionary Bird anatomy terms (2002, 216 p., VLKK does not object); Dictionary of Medical Histology and Embryology (2001, 256 p., VLKK does not object); A. Lapytė and J. Šurkas Trumpas psychiatry terminų žodynas (1996, 88 p., reviewed by the Terminology Section); Latin-Lithuanian spelling of obstetric-- gynecological diagnoses and operations (compiled by A. Venckauskas, 1997, 98 p., 2000 titles, not approved); English-Lithuanian Dictionary of Medical Terms (compiled by D. Ramanauskienė, E. Zagorskaitė, 1997, 429 p., not approved); English-Lithuanian-Russian dictionary of pheromones (compiled by A. Skirkevičius, 1997, 154 p., about 900 terms, not approved); V. Gudelis Lithuanian-Russian-- German-English Explanatory Dictionary of Sea Coastal Research Terms (1993, 408 p., approved by the Terminology Council (!)); S. Vaitekūnas’ school dictionary Enciklopedinis geografij- (1994, 256 p., not approved); Lithuanian-Russian geodetic terms 25 os žodynas (compiled by S. Kazakevičius, 1993, 216 p., about 7000 terms, not approved); V. Straižio Encyclopedia of Astronomy (2002, 333 p., not approved); /History Dictionary (edited by Ms. V. Pukienė, 2003, 434 p.) (two significant school dictionaries in this field are also mentioned); Dictionary of Psychology (special ed. R. Augis, R. Kočiūnas, 1993, 368 p., not approved); L. Jovaišos Lithuanian-English-- German-Russian interpretative dictionary Pedagogikos terminai (1993, 263 p., about 1 000 terms, checked and recommended by the Terminology Department); English-Lithuanian Special Education Dictionary (compiler and co-editor J. Petruševičius, 2002, 369 p., about 3500 terms, not approved). Among the larger dictionaries of terms, we should also mention those of warfare, management, postal services, philosophy, sociology, social security, labour market, art, fine arts, architecture, iconography, literary theory and literary science, theology, religious studies, librarianship and bibliography, book studies, etc. ; from smaller —business, customs, accounting, medicinal plants, crop plants and weeds, conifers, dendrology, soil science, rhizology, hunting, etc. It is certainly worth mentioning J. Pričinauskas’s Russian-Lithuanian language goods dictionary (1996, 734 p., 40 000 terms, discussed by the VLKK, although not officially approved) and Logistika: lietuvių-anglų kalbų logistikos terminai, sąvokos (compiled by E. Palšaitis, R. Palšaitis, 2001, 350 p., not approved). In Lithuanian terminology, not only are Western languages (mainly English, aiming at a five-language standard) spreading and taking hold, but in certain cases approved Western or certain US dictionaries are adopted, e.g. : The systematic (with Lithuanian alphabetic arrow) Technical Dictionary of Road Terms (1990) of the Permanent International Association of Road Congresses (prepared by K. Skerys, 1994, 128 p., not approved); Civil Aviation Terms Dictionary (head editors R. Eriksonienė and J. Klimavičius, 1996, 352 p., revised and approved by the Terminology Section) — according to ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) Doc. 9294; International Postal Service (Manual in Lithuanian, French, English, Esperanto, Russian and German, compiled by A. Piliponis, 1996, 352 p., not approved) — according to the Universal Postal Union’s eight-language Vocabulaire Polyglotie du Service Postal International (Berne, 1992); Interlinear dictionary of basic and general metrology terms (prepared by V. Valiukėnas, P. J. Žilinskas, 1997, 96 p., VLKK does not object) — according to International Vocabulary of Basic and General Terms in Metrology (Geneva, 1993); English-Lithuanian Glossary of Cartography and Geodesy Terms (compiled by V. Vainauskas, 2000, 614 p., about 5000 terms, VLKK does not object) — translated from the 26 US Defence Mapping Agency Glossary of Mapping, Charting and Geodetic Terms, 1981, Defence Mapping Agency Hydrographic /Topographic Center Washington, D. C. 20315; NATO Glossary of Terms (edited by A. V. Garsys, Col. J. Norgėla, 2001, 310 p., not approved) — translated from the NATO Glossary of Terms and Definitions (English and French) AAP 6 (approved in September 1998, Doc. 3680). The quantity is large. But a lot of it is created at the expense of educational (for students), school, reference dictionaries. There is also an obvious quantitative imbalance — dictionaries of physics, polytechnics, medicine, geography, geology, music, which have not been updated recently. There have never been large dictionaries of biochemistry, genetics terms. The dictionary of forestry terms promised by the Terminology Council has not yet been published, but a guide to foresters’ biographies (with photos!) has been published!.. The lack of quality is evidenced by the approvals — so far all agree, none disagree, not a few dictionaries — no; occurs with language errors (even major ones). The young (again young!) state is fatally lacking a capitalist law dictionary (and encyclopedia). There have been published several dictionaries of economic terms, but the terminology defects and problems in this field are large and obvious. There seems to be no shortage of dictionaries of computer terms, but neither they nor the numerous (although not always professional) discussions have helped to establish the top 100 or even the top 10 terms, and English jargon is used in many places (including schools). In general, there has been not one dictionary of terms that has not added any new word in terminology. Dictionaries of terms are not easy to compile. As a person who has written about 500 p. reviews and expert opinions, I can assess this quite accurately. The provision of the requirements for the preparation of the General Terms Dictionaries, adopted by the protocol resolution of 9 December 1999 through the efforts of the VLKK, that the preparation group must also include a “linguist terminologist (or other specialist of the common Lithuanian language)”, is of little help, because the entire process of preparation, review and approval for the linguists terminologists is į 27 workload is unbearable, 0 their ranks are thinning. On the other hand, terminology work in Lithuania is not considered scientific — even when it is done by the best specialists (professors, academics). The planning, organization and coordination of terminology is not institutionalized, it does not belong to anyone — this important work is not done. In the Lithuanian White Paper on Science and Technology (2001), prepared by the Department of Science and Studies under the Ministry of Education and Science, there is no mention of terminology, terminology, terminography, although terms are the red threads of the fabric of all sciences. Where are we—on a straight road, at a crossroads, or at a dead end? Nobody even considers that. And the necessary qualitative, and partly quantitative, rise remains beyond sight. Although a small star of hope has fallen — the presidential election of the Academy of Sciences was won by a candidate whose program also includes terminology. We'll see after the centenary. Conclusions 1. The beginning of Lithuanian terminology — 1821. The first printed dictionary of terms was published in 1907. For nearly a century, the work of terminology was carried out by individual enlightened enthusiasts, mostly botanists. 2.The Lithuanian Science Society (1907), stirred up by the national liberation movement, gave at least a slightly more organized impetus, but it did not manage to mature the fruits of terminology. 3.The beginning of organized terminology—- the discussions of specialists gathered in Voronezh after the Second World War about the redesign of terms. 4.In the first Lithuanian Republic, even Jablonski’s authority and knowledge in the Commission of Terminology, which worked in 1921-1926, could not restrain the unprofessional and excessive purism, which manifested itself in numerous ignorant innovations. The subsequent Terminology Commission of the Lithuanian Language Society consolidated the system of organized creation, consideration and approval of terms initiated by Jablonski and institutionalized it forever. 5. From the fertile years of 1938 to 1954 there is a huge gap in terminology. The preparation of the dictionary of the contemporary Lithuanian language (1954) brought about a decade of terminology. However, almost all the dictionaries of terms are Russian-Lithuanian, and they are full of Russian translations, which are propaganda-- wise viewed as enriching the Lithuanian language. In general, the theoretical and methodological bases sometimes fluctuated. The Terminology Council, established at the end of 1971, although it did not greatly complicate the work of terminology, encouraged a significant innovation — the use of English (and less often — 28 other languages) in the dictionaries of terms. 7.In the year of the Second Republic of Lithuania a real breakthrough in terminology began — about 200 dictionaries and dictionary were published. A major incentive was the 1996-2005 programme for the use and education of the state language. Documents for the preparation and approval of terminology dictionaries have been adopted. Several capital dictionaries of multilingual terms have been published. However, there is both an imbalance in quantity and a lack of quality. The terminology work is not considered scientific. Its planning, organization and coordination are not institutionalized. The rise of terminography work remains beyond the horizon. Auksoriūtė A. The terminological legacy of Laurynas Ivinskis. —Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 40, Vilnius, 1998, 32-40. General requirements for the preparation of dictionaries of terms (Approved by the resolution of the State Lithuanian Language Commission to the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania on 9 December 1999 (minutes No. 7)). —Native Language 3, Vilnius, 2000, 22-24. Budnuoepardhuseckuii ykazameiv aumepamypsl no 6onpocam AUMOBCKOU MepMuHo.10euu (1945-1980). Coctaswiu K. Taitssinuc n C. Kedtnuc, BiutbHioc, 1981. Brazdžiūnas P. Creation of Lithuanian terminology in physics. —Language Culture 44, Vilnius, 1983, 4-8. "Letter to K. Jurgelionis (13.)" (in Lithuanian). —Selected Writings 3. London, 1961, pp. 926–930. 2000. The glossary of zoological nomenclature [Rec.]. —Collected Writings 3, Vilnius, 1961, 783-786. The history of the Lithuanian anatomy dictionary. —Terminologija 9, Vilnius, Lithuania 2002, 55-65. Dagys J. How Lithuanian dictionaries of botanical terms were prepared. —Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 16, Vilnius, 1975, 244-248. On the dictionaries of Lithuanian educational terms (Decision of the Terminology Council of the Presidium of the MA of the LTSR of 20 December 1978). —Language Culture 37, Vilnius, 1979, 4-5, * This list is not just a list of the literature cited or mentioned, but relates to many of the things that are discussed in the article, even implicitly. It is therefore a bibliographical form. 29 On the preparation and publication of dictionaries of Lithuanian terms (Decision of the Presidium of the Council of Terminology of the Lithuanian SSR MA of 13 December 1979). —Mūsų kalba 3, Vilnius, 1980, 26-28. On the Rules for the Approval of Term Standards (Decree No. 69 of 29 January 1998). —Decisions of the Lithuanian Language Commission. 1977-1998, Vilnius, 1998, 176-177. On the approval of glossaries of terms (Decision No. 59 of 30 January 1997). —Decisions of the Lithuanian Language Commission. 1977-1998, Vilnius, 1998, 52-54, On the partial amendment of the Decision No. 59 of the State Lithuanian Language Commission to the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania dated 30 January 1997 on the approval of terminology dictionaries (Decision No. 1 (77) of the State Lithuanian Language Commission to the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania dated 29 March 2001). —Native Language 5, Vilnius, 2001, 27-28. Gaivenis K. Lithuanian Terminology: Theory and Structure, Vilnius, 2002. Gaivenis K,Keinys S. Overview of Lithuanian educational term dictionaries, shortcomings, recommendations for improvement. —Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USSR. A serija 2 (75), Vilnius, 1981, 127-137. [aitsanc K,Knumasuuioc K. Hekoropblė BOnpocbi TEDMHHOJIOruuecKoji padotsl B Jintosckoit CCP. —Hayuno-- mexnuudeckas mepsunonoeus 2, MockrBa, 1973, 19-23. Grinius K. On the Litthuvian terminology of botany organography. —Lietuvių tauta 2 (3), Vilnius, 1914, 431-443. Indrašius N,Kucinskaité A,Vaitilavic¢ius A. Basic terms of psychiatry. —Health Protection 1, Vilnius, 1967, 56-59. J. A. Maciejauskas. Technical glossary [Rec]. —Jablonskio raštai 4, Kaunas, 1935, 284-287. 1966. pp. 66. "J. J. Bachmann". —The Letters of John Jablonski, Vilnius, Jurgis Pabrėža (1771-18491985, 71-72. ), Vilnius, 1972. The Scientific and Technological Revolution and the Development of Lithuanian Terminology. — Journal of Linguistics, 1985, 179-196. Overview of the development of Lithuanian terminology (up to 1940). —Kalbotyra 18, Vilnius, 1967, 5-34. Klimavičius J. Metrics belong to you. colleagues terminologists! —Mokslo Lieeva, 2000 16 1, 11 Klimavičius J. Terminology: works and workers. —Informacinis biuletenis 9, Vilnius, Ministry of Education and Science, 2001, 18. J. A. KaSarauskas' lexicographic works. —Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 13, Vilnius, 1972, 189-208. J. K. Drasutavi¢iaus (Drasucio) zodynéliai and lists of terms. —Lietuviy kalbotyros klausimai 16, Vilnius, 1975, 265-271. Drop V. For some terms used in medicine. —Sveikatos apsauga 4, Vilnius, Lithuania 1965, 52-53. Lemchenas Ch.,Šuminas A. On some questions of terminology. —The Court of Justice 1967 72 4. White Paper on Lithuanian Science and Technology, Vilnius, 2001. 30 The latest literature on Lithuanian terminology and terminography (1991-1992). It was composed by J. Gaivenytė and St. Keinys. —Terminology streams 1. Wilkinson 1994, pp. 101–109. The latest Lithuanian dictionaries of terms. J. Gaivenytė. —Terminologija 3, Vilnius, Lithuania 1996, 105-117; 4. 1997, 94-97; 5, 1998, 151-159; 6. 2000, 116-123; 7, 2000. 107-113: 8, 2001, 146-151; 9, 2002, 164-169: 10, 2003, 186—-192. Pavilonis S,Vaitilavicius A. Critical review of some Lithuanian medical terms. —Health Protection 3, Vilnius, 1959, 56-60. John Riley. Pronouns, or terms, adopted by the Terminology Commission [Rec.] —Jablonskio raštai 4, Kaunas, 1935, 322-324. John Riley. Our new terms. —Jablonskio raštai 4, Kaunas, 1935, Rygiškių Jonas. An excuse and an 307-308. answer. —Jablonskio raštai 4, Kaunas, Rumšas P Jablonskio contribution to lictuviy 1935, 308-310. arithmetic terminology. —Language Culture 29, Vilnius, 1975, 3-16. Rumšas P. History of Lithuanian geometry terms. —Mūsų kalba 2, Vilnius, 4-19. 1974, Rumšas P. At the origins of mathematical terminology. —Zigmas Žemaitis, Vilnius, 52-58. 1979, Šikšnys M. My Lithuanian language lessons and memories about J. Jablonskis. — Journal of Linguistics 5, Vilnius, 1962, 81-87. The work of terminology. Translation by A. Kaulakienė. Vilnius, 1973, Principles and Methods of Terminology. Lithuanian RST 1115-90 (ISO 704-87), Vilnius. 1990. "Dictionary of Terms (1985-1990- )". Compiled by N. Banevičienė, supplemented by St. Keinys. —Lietuvių kalbos klausimai 31, Vilnius, 1994, 192-200, 201-202. Term dictionaries and terminology standards. A. Smetona. - A. Paulauskienė Lithuanian Language Culture, Kaunas, 2001, 247-254, Instructions for the Compilation of the Terms Dictionary Catalog, Vilnius, 1972. Umbrasas A. Legal terminology in Lithuania 1918-1940. —Terminologija 8, Vilnius, 2001, 76-94. Urbonas S. About some failed terms. —Sveikatos apsauga 4, Vilnius, Lithuania 1968, 44-56. Vaitilavičius A. On the issue of Lithuanian medical terminology. —Health Protection 2, Vilnius, 1957, 56-61. Valatka J. Some remarks on the newly prepared medical terms. —Health Protection 12, Vilnius, 1952, 33-34. Zemlevičiūtė P Dr. Jonas Basanavičius and his Medega are our national medicines. —Terminologija 9, Vilnius, 2002, pp. 103-121. From the memoirs of J. Jablonskj. —Literature and Language 1, Vilnius, Žemaitis Z. History of Lithuani1959. 32-39. an Mathematical Terminology. —Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 8, Vilnius, 1966, 195-201. 31 LITHUANIAN TERMINOGRAPHY: FEATURES OF THE PAST, DFFICULTIES OF THE PRESENT AND TASKS Summary Lithuanian terminography can be said to have begun in 1821. The old terminography is in manuscripts, the first printed terminological dictionary appeared in 1907. For nearly one hundred years terminographical work was done by single enthusiasts, mainly botanists. The Lithuanian Scientific Society (established in 1907), stimulated by the movement of national revival, gave a stimulus to a more organised approach, but did not have enough time to offer an appreciable result. The beginning of organised terminography —discussions about creation of terms by specialists united round the Lithuanian linguist Jonas Jablonskis in the rear of the World War I, in Voronezh in Russia. The principle of purity in Jablonskis® concept of terminology was essential. In the first Terminological Commission. which worked in the Republic of Lithuania between 1921-1926, even the teaching of Jablonskis and his authority did not stop unprofessional and unmoderate purism, which revealed itself in plentiful and inappropriate neologisms. However, the later Terminological Commission of the Lithuanian Language Society established the organised creation, discussion and approval of terminology and institutionalized it. From 1938 until 1954 there is a big gap in the work of terminography. The preparation of the first normalising dictionary of the Lithuanian language (Dabartinés lietuviy kalbos Zodynas, 1954) gave a good basis for terminography. However, almost every terminological dictionary was Lithuanian-Russian and there were a lot of translation-loans from the Russian language, which in the propaganda were valued as an enrichment of the Lithuanian language. On the whole, the theoretical and methodological foundations wavered from time to time. At the end of 1971 the Terminology Council at the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences was established. It did not push terminographical works forward noticeably, but it encouraged one significant innovation —the usage of English (less frequently — of other languages) in dictionaries of terms. At the time of the second Republic of Lithuania (from 1990) the real boom of terminography happened —about 200 terminological dictionaries were published. The big inducement was the Programm of the Usage and Development of the State Language 1996-2005. Procedures for the preparation and approval of terminological dictionaries were approved. A few fundamental multilingual terminological dictionaries were published. However, the disbalance of quantity and lack of quality is noticeable. Terminographical work in Lithuania is not viewed as scientific activity. Its planing, organising and co-ordination are not institutionalized. The rise of terminographical work still remains in the future. Jonas KLIMAVICIUS Received 2003-10-31 Lithuanian Language Institute P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-2055 Vilnius Email: [email protected] 32