Terminologija ir dabartis

TERMINOLOGY AND THE PRESENT "Terminology ir present" in — such a title Kaunas University of Technology has published a collection of articles į 1997 m. Articles written for the scientific conference “Problems of the language of technical sciences” held there on June 4. The book was published before the conference, so participants could get acquainted with the speakers’ thoughts not only in the auditorium, but also when they returned home. Articles published in the journal. ir Five dozen į authors work in nine higher 43 education institutions and research jų institutes. This Lithuanian language ir Terminologists from Latvian Language Institutes, a large group You-- no ir Lithuanian foreign language teachers ir at Šiauliai higher education institutions, approximately every — fifth author is a specialist in natural and technical sciences iš Kaunas University of Technology, Vilnius University and Institute of ir Mathematical Informatics. Most of the articles are related in one ar way or another to technical language su terminology, only a few are ba dedicated to much broader subjects, for example, Barzdžiukienės L. „Language — as a Cultural Expression G. of Man“, Cepaitienės „Signs of the ir Function of R. Language Etiquette“, Lekavičienės "Speech ir consciousness on the basis of psycholinguistic research". Also, only a few articles at least somewhat more broadly explore some subject of terminology theory (K. Gaivenium ir A. Kaulakienės „Linguistic subjective ir evaluation of technical terminology“, Skujeniai V. „International elements of national terminology“, Skujeniai V. ir M. Kirytė „Terminography specificity with regard to the stylistics of special texts“) are examined the features of the ar presentation of individual sources ar jų (N. Banevičienė „Defects in the definitions of technical terms J. standards“, Gaivenytės „The ir comparison of structures of Lithuanian English four-word [-- technique terms“, J. Korsako „Physical terms in terms of lexicon of metalanguage texts“, Nečiūnas V. ir V. Nečiūnienė „Artificial Latin Greek ir affixes and accents in medical terminology“ et al. ). ir With a broad historical linguistic view, some of į the subjects of special lexicon are examined in his articles. ' Terminology ir present: Scientific works. Kaunas: Technology, 1997, 244 p. 80 gia V. Rimša („On some technical terms“) and Sk. "Indo-European Languages: The Languages of the Indo-European Languages". Most of the articles are devoted to terminology practice and teaching issues. The objective foundation is characteristic of most articles written by specialists of natural and technical sciences. In these papers, the inconsistencies of terms in some fields are raised and interesting proposals are made (V. Dagienė „Teaching software terminology problems“, St. Ratautas „Terminological difficulties of the word dress“, St. Zajankauskas „Apie terminus émenys, pavyzdys, mėginys, tyrinys, bandinys ir kt.“, St. Zebrauskas „Difficulties in the use of some electrical engineering terms“, A. Zilinskas „Lithuanian informatics terminology difficulties“ and others). However, there are mostly articles that in one way or another deal with or explain various issues of teaching scientific language and terminology. Just a few of such articles: D. Aleknienė and V. Žulienė “Education of correct pronunciation of professional language”, R. Bukauskienė “Teaching English terminology of ecology and agronomics in higher education”, G. Klimovienė, “Teaching business and commerce terms using active teaching methods”, E. Mileškevičienė “Teaching methods of specialty terminology- ”, Sv. Statkevičienės „Peculiarities of teaching professional language ir to doctoral students“ et al. Part of these articles corrects a pinch of po different language (especially professional) subjects. There are ir articles devoted almost exclusively to professional language culture, for example, Bartkevičienės R. ir N. Petniūnienė, Celiešienė, Žilinskienė Žukienė, „Professional language V. difficulties of R. foresters“ ir R. „Deficiencies of ir Teachers’ Written Spoken V. Language“, Liolienė „Some inaccuracies in the usage of electrical engineering ir terms“, Molytė „Most common E. medical terminology errors“, etc. ir The authors of the articles are often very concerned about the topical questions of language, lo terminology, and usage teaching. The main focus is ir on the current terminology practice in special jų language teaching subjects. ir By the way, the close connection of terminology itself, its practice with su teaching will perhaps be the most interesting feature of mo the content of the collection, so far rarely so one thing į Then. “Pure” terminologists, as well as various terminology commissions, are usually hardly interested in training, although it is one of the most important (if the ne most important) methods į of implementation of terms in usage. So, in general, the collection at least ar touches on the existence of a number of important terms, the jų ir su current state of things related to them. “Terminologija ir dabartis” is an — interesting, contentful, technically well arranged book. ir It will be undoubtedly be used by terminology ir managers and language teachers. ir However, based on the publication the reader will have to be cautious throughout — the book will form a considerable fiber of various inaccuracies, mistakes, false statements, interpretations and unproven ar conclusions. Therefore, in order to help the authors of the book to the ir readers, in this paper it is concerned ir above all to mention at least the most important unacceptable or questionable things, as well as to draw their attention to some inaccuracies of thought and language. An old problem of some of our specialists ir in other fields of science and art is insufficient knowledge of the history of these things. From this arise relatively not rare strong feelings — many probably think that before the twentieth century or even the first period of independence of the country in this century There was almost nothing in Lithuania – neither art, nor music, nor science or technology, although we are the heirs of the culture of the great Grand Duchy of Lithuania and we have one of the oldest universities in Eastern Europe. Unfortunately, some of the authors of “Terminologija ir dabartis” seem to find the beginning of their fields too late — in the article “Difficulties in the use of some electrotechnical terms” it is stated that the seventy-fifth anniversary of the University of Lithuania coincides with the same anniversary of technical sciences (p. 216), and the author of the article “Priesaginiai medicinos terminai P. Avižonio „Akių ligų vadove“” seems to believe that the aforementioned book by P. Avižonis, published in 1940, is one of the first sources of Lithuanian medical terms (p. 51). Both Lithuanian terminology, and especially the beginning of science or technology, should be searched for much earlier. We have ir another strange habit of very vaguely — calling people linguists. Even the linguists themselves primary school teacher A. Vireliūnas is (1887-1925) often called a linguist, apparently because he 82 spent several years in the early 1920s su J. Jablonskiu, K. Būga ir worked with others In the terminology commission, he gė prepared a set of terms adopted by the commission and wrote another article book. nį ir Perhaps sometimes for similar reasons in the article "Lexical [= Lexical] ir stylistic characteristics of scientific texts" linguists named engineers A. Novodvorski and the doctor A. Suminas (p. 154). But seeing around K. Gaivenis, E. Jakaitienė, J. Palionis, Piotrovskis, R. Reformatskis, A. Vinokuros, etc. G. ir names of real linguists, it is quite reasonable to doubt, only the ar mentioned persons will not į tą have entered the company by mistake. Iš articles of the collection is easy to catch a good variety of inaccurate interpretations of various language subjects. Iš A few examples — of words with a suffix as su a derivative of the verb ending -tis made word inertis (p. 16) ir inverse — suffixes -fas derivative supported clear limb derivative infection (p. 53). Carelessly except in the words wasters and plays with suffixes -ula ir - yes (p. 54), unusually broken remains of the base words pragulėjo and damaged roots -gulir -Zeid-. Such things point to the fact that some terminology scholars should study more thoroughly the foundations of constructive division. Better knowledge of word formation, grammar, language su culture and presentation theory would be very useful. This might help to avoid the creation of non-existent rules, allowing more objective evaluation of both the statements of others and the available language material. For example, when correcting adjectives with the suffix -inis, -e used in an electrical engineering publication only because they are derived from international words with the suffix -alar -yv. (active, differential, etc., p. 128), it is easy to think that this is not possible in the common language of adjectives. But this is not the case — no one gets stuck and there is no basis for getting stuck to such vedas when they are properly made and used. In another article, the powers of -inis, -ė are further restricted — it is stated that before this prefix “no other prefix should be used” (p. 135). It's unheard of. First, it is not clear how such a preposition could be used. Unless it is meant here that adjectives with -inis, -€ are not made from words with a suffix. But that would be a big lie. The adjective suffixes -7nis, -€ are just one of those that are now very constructive and have relatively few constructional restrictions. We should express ourselves much more precisely, so as not to give the impression that we are deducing non-existent rules or some non-existent language tendencies. This is extremely important when teaching students, not only in scientific conferences or scientific publications, because only the real things need to be taught. For example, about words with the international accent Ardro, it is stated: "The accent Aidro can not be replaced by an independent word. Here it is important what the second accent of the compound word is — Lithuanian or international. If it is international and denotes a term or scientific concept [=is a term], then a compound word should be used, e.g., [=:] hydrostatics, hydrodynamics, hydrotransmission, etc., and if it is Lithuanian, the compound term should be replaced by a compound, e.g., [=:] hrdrauline pavara, hidraulinis siurblys, hidraulinis variklis, etc.” (p. 238). Without going into the flaws of the expression of this passage (after all, it is not as if to keep silent about the contradiction of the first sentence and the final part of the passage as if to say that it is impossible to replace a proper word, but it is immediately replaced!), it is important to say here, first of all, that the current use of common language does not at all give rise to such rules. On the contrary. If such a rule were to be followed (and there is a considerable number of such international prefixes, apart from hydro-), it would be necessary to make a considerable revolution in the present language practice. ir Iš where do these things come from? Perhaps the overly literally understood recommendations of the State Lithuanian Language Commission concerning the autosu (by the way, this would show how carefully high institutions should intervene in individual partial questions of usage, interfering with how exactly o they should express their statements). Not all linguists interpret the individual aspects of language in the same way. That's a problem. ne This is how the truth of science can be sought. However, it is wrong to inflate the possibilities of some ar assumptions. These are probably the most interesting targets iš of prof. ir V. Urbutis’ reflections on possible interpretations of compound word formation by one another, the absolute rejection of compounding itself as a way of word formation (doors are considered to be limb derivatives). But all the ir academic words 84 work descriptions, and school textbooks of limbs and punches work into a pile do not cry. This should also be observed by teachers of higher schools (especially those who do not teach philology) and should not burden the heads of teachers of other subjects or students (p. 70). Similarly, the abbreviated words medpunktas, medsesuo, tubdispanseris, etc. are not suitable to be referred to as punctual or enriched terms (pp. 135-136). The publication contains a considerable number of language corrections. Unfortunately, some of them are questionable, some are unacceptable at all, and in some places things that cannot be corrected are corrected. Without a broader context, it is difficult to say whether the word volume corrects the word gauge in the sentence gauge of felled wood (p. 41), because these are words with completely different meanings. Therefore, by being presented without further explanation, this amendment may mislead people. Unfortunately, such correction of words and genders torn from the necessary usage environment seems to be spreading. It is difficult to understand why the correction of the most vivid saying of the tree and the best possible translation of its proposed substitute tree is usually used in another meaning (p. 41, for the use of those words see DZ, 439 and 923, LKZ VII 270). It is not clear why the term root cutting is considered strange (p. 43). The linguist is badly mistaken when she claims that it is against the language norms to say ačiū /abai (p. 77). Language correctors should be much more careful, especially to try to get to know the living language, the theory and practice of language correction as well as possible, because when they start to correct quite good terms, composed on the basis of the living language or even the very words of that language, the words unexpectedly come out of their mouths: "Lord! What is being done to our language? Why does an artificial language seem better to some than a living one? In general, the corrections must be obvious, very clear, justified, you need to show exactly what and in which cases is corrected. In some places it may be difficult for the reader to figure out whether it is appropriate or not to use individual words or sentences, for example, in one place it is corrected as a language error (p.71) and elsewhere it is suggested to be used (p.224). When it is asserted, although based on A. Pupkiu, that noun forms are “a necessary indicator of compound terms” (p. 42), it is considerably overstated. It is even doubtful whether it is necessary to say, as it is provided there, only pure pine forest, temporary storage, natural atzel. 55 It is unclear on what is based the correction of the certificate of the word compounds aluminium cores, condenser motors by the originator (p. 128). Probably every specialist ir or other language user would confirm that it is more common ar now to say aluminis šaukštas, stieminis dalgis, sidabrinis pinigas, kovas laidas. Ir The origin is not foreign here, well-known, but in the present language in such cases it seems to have become the identity of ir the poetic, artistic, technical o ne language. Well, the sayings o condenser motor condenser motor obviously name ir different concepts, because they cannot be corrected by each other (in terms of language). Unless to someone mixed things up (but it would be a matter of o ne language, error)... It happens that in the given examples everything is ne corrected, what can be corrected. For example, in the sentence When selecting antennas was guided by jų prevalence, the completeness of the created calculation methodology corrects only the word completeness (p. 69), but, if you didn't want to improve the to sentence further, you would have hoped to jo correct at least the beginning — It was guided by the prevalence of selected antennas<... >. In some cases, the name of the person is changed to the name of the object, e.g. : 1) Tolerance systems suda rym ui (= Tolerance unit for the tolerances system) (p. 70); For such angle measurement (= To measure such angles) the most commonly used sinusoidal ruler (p. 70);3) Great attention is paid to the quality assessment of the produced products (= A lot of attention was paid to evaluating the quality of produced products) (p. 65). It would be ir better to write in such cases as follows: ir 1) To establish a system of tolerances, a unit of tolerance shall be defined; 2) Such angles are usually measured with a sine ruler; 3) Great care is taken to evaluate the quality of products. | Si and can be tą reproached for the ir language of the authors of the articles. That, look, some word word is inappropriately used, that is gender, e.g.: systematicity of ar definitions (=systematics), younger older lower higher) 1) classes, p. 34;2) ir (= ir p. 100; 3) It is not enough to state the importance of language in scientific knowledge), (= properly formulated p. 21: 4) <...> 86 (=formed, formed) linguistic environment <...>, p. 66; 5) <...> it is necessary to <...> significantly expand the knowledge of international words in Lithuanian (= knowledge of international words used in Lithuanian language), p. 164 (moreover, this ir statement itself is highly questionable). Often, a part of the origin is forgotten, e.g. :1) This leads to structural variants of idioms (=variations of structural idioms, even better: variants are formed), <...> p. 25; 2) <...> can form andsynonymous phraseologisms (= synonymous phraseologisms, even better: to form phraseologisms), we included the program <...> p. 27; 3) Į ir jv a i - rias politeness formulas (=various politeness formulas; even better: various polite statements), learns to make sentences himself p. 102; 4) <...> <...> (=sentensu ces) in that word, p. 132; 5) <...> it is not difficult to detect minimal texts-syntagms (=reaching minimal tiny texty-sintagmy) dating back to pre-speech times, | p. 194 ir kt Stop it, stop it! Increasingly, linguists ir themselves, apparently moving away from the living language, no longer use the part of the genitive in those ir cases where the spirit of the living language complainedly demands it. jo | Recently, the reverse fashion of mixed (compatible non-compatible) certificates ir has become very widespread. Ir monument of honour10j Instead of Vilnius, it was built for the Grand Duke of Lithuania, the Grand o ne Duke of Lithuania. A large mixture in the reviewed ir publication. Not even one article headline maybe by some logic, 0 ne according to the language inclinations, such subjects as: “Education of correct pronunciation of professional language” (p. 11), “Deficiencies of the written and spoken language of lecturers” (p. 68), “Peculiarities of teaching professional language to doctoral students” (p. 189) and others were dropped. It would be smoother, more usual, more lively to speak and write correct pronunciation of professional language (pronunciation is taught, education is not suitable here), written and spoken language of lecturers, professional language of doctoral students. Without delving into the various inaccuracies of the publication, it is still very important to say a word about the writing of foreign names. The names of the countries using the Latin alphabet are usually written in the original form, 87 often with Lithuanian endings added. However, in some places, the pronunciatioir n-related spelling, for example, von W Humbolt (p. 46; only somehow in this case the foreign letter of the name is left), Heigens (p. 22) ir kt Even more inconsistently déliojamas Lithuanian ir endings, for to one author can write Wittgenstein (p. 20; This word was mistakenly printed in leidinyi as osu Je g), kitas ne su & o — Wittgenstein (p. 124). In this case, it is already difficult to ar understand, ar about Mr., about Mrs. is being spoken. There is a lot of confusion ir here, not taking into account the fact that Lithuanians, at least iš in the end, for the šį whole century was customary to assign ir male names to female persons, i.e. use Mr. Heidegger (pronounced, often spelled ir [Heidegeris]), Osgoodas [Obscured], Sapiras [Sepiras], but lady Heidegger [Heideger], Osgood [Osgud], Sapir [Sighs] (these examples are iš p. 46, 124, 125, selected they are presented there incorrectly). Be no doubt, it shows that there is still a lot of uncertainty for writers here. This A handful of comments ne are written in order to reproach this, as I said, quite interesting collection. No! No! No! Just wanted to draw readers (especially ne linguists) attention to į the fact that reading this book, by the way, like all the others, you need to think and ir fear that it is never appropriate to blindly ir follow what where how says the signature. The authors of “The Present of Terminology” ką sought the truth. ir ar ir Ne Always ji iš light up at once. So maybe the ir thoughts written here will help them ir to take a step forward in ti learning their į mother tongue. ir mo Stasys CHANGE