Rainis → rainistika, Vatmana papīrs→ vatman papīrs “vatman,” p. 100). In Lithuanian linguistics, it is unusual to speak seriously of forming action nouns directly from nouns (bypassing the verb), while nevertheless also adding a verbal suffix, as, for example, some ciematōšana “settlement-ization” is supposedly formed from ciemats “settlement” directly with the verbal suffix -o- and the nominal suffix -šana (p. 84); nor would the coincidence of a masculine adjective and a noun, such as Latvian fakultatīvs (p. 98; in Lithuanian these words are adapted differently -- fakultatyvus ir fakultatyvas, but this is not considered a matter of suffixal derivation), be treated in Lithuanian linguistics as a matter of borrowing and grammaticalization (adaptation) only, rather than conversion.

There is no doubt that a valuable book has been received not only by linguists, Latvian terminology organizers and users in various fields, and language-culture practitioners, to whom the author dedicated it (pp. 4, 25), but also by Latvian linguistics itself and terminology in general. The more in-depth studies there are of the terminology of individual languages, the firmer and more scientific the general theory of terminology will be. Without studies of those individual languages, it would seem to be a set of requirements, rules, and assertions—artificially imposed on languages from outside and mostly inconsistent with the actual life and usage of languages. Studying the terms and systems of individual languages, their interrelations, and finally the influence of non-linguistic factors usually makes it clear that such requirements and rules cannot be absolutized in any way. Terminology, like language itself, is a living, changing phenomenon; its change is even more noticeable than that of many other parts of the language system, and is also more dependent on people’s deliberate activity. All this is beautifully illustrated by V. Skujinia’s book. Thus, the pleasure of reading “Principles for Organizing Latvian Terminology” grew into delight at the success of our neighbors’ terminology and of a dear colleague.

St. KEINYS

The language of the abstracts in the Lithuanian Physics Collection

“Lietuvos fizikos rinkinys,” whose thirtieth anniversary was commemorated two years ago, is read by physicists and specialists in other fields of science not only in Lithuania but also abroad. Articles in it are published in Russian or English

¹ Užpalis K. „Lietuvos fizikos rinkinio“ ištakos// Fizikų žinios. 1991. Nr. 1. P. 18-19.

90

languages, while the article abstracts are in Lithuanian. These abstracts, like other scholarly publications, are characterized by abstraction, clarity, logicality, precision, brevity, and other features that are generally determined by terminology, naming, and stereotypes of construction and sentence word order. The language of most abstracts in “Lietuvos fizikos rinkinys” is fluent, the sentences precise and clear, and the terms correct and appropriately chosen. However, some questionable points do occur. Here are one or two sentences from abstracts in this collection.

It was established that, because of the electron-sky line interaction at E= 20 V/cm, the electron drift velocity decreases by 17%. A brief analysis of the propagation of coherent light rays through lenses and their mutual interaction leads to an exposition of the principles for processing or recording optical information. Ultraviolet radiation varies over the course of the year and the day.

What is problematic in these sentences? Undoubtedly, the terms, the words, and the style. These matters, especially terminology and lexis, will be discussed in greater detail in the article. The analysis draws on manuscripts of abstracts for articles submitted to “Lietuvos fizikos rinkinys” in 1990–1993.

1. Terms.

One of the main problems with terminology in the abstracts is the disregard for terms given in the “Dictionary of Physics Terms².

Both generic and specific terms are usually disregarded. For example, the dictionary gives the terms transformation “a certain change in the kind of matter or energy”; transition “a change in the state of an electron (or positron), for instance, during the absorption or emission of light”; junction “a contact of a certain kind in an electric circuit, where two materials are joined.” Authors of abstracts often refer to all these concepts by a single inadmissible calque, transition, for example: phase transition (= phase transformation 393), atomic transition (= nuclear transformation; cf. 393 atomic transformation, see nuclear transformation); electron transition (= electron jump 339), potential transition (= potential jump 339); electron-hole transition (= electron-hole junction 265), p–n transition (= pn junction 265). In place of a heterogeneous, or heterojunction, junction, however, the abstracts contain the incorrect term

² Fizikos terminų žodynas. V., 1979. 677 p. (toliau nurodomas tik žodyno puslapis).

91

and inadmissible term heterotransition (As the temperature increases, drift barriers caused by heterotransitions should decrease).

The terms overlap, overlapping should also be considered inadmissible calques, cf. Russian перекрывание, перекрытие, English overlap, overlapping, German Überlappung. The “Dictionary of Physics Terms” recommends the term superposition for this concept. Thus, instead of the compound term band overlap, band superposition should be used.

Many other compound terms given in the “Dictionary of Physics Terms” are also disregarded. For example, frequency characteristic 39 is replaced by frequency characteristic, combinational scattering 290 by combinational scattering, nonequilibrium charge carrier, equilibrium charge carrier 154 by nonequilibrium carrier, equilibrium carrier, layered structure 264 by stratified structure, repulsive potential 229 by repulsive potential, capacitive resistance 382 by capacitive resistance, direct measurement 178 by immediate measurement, and so on.

Abstract authors unnecessarily use an adjective with the suffix -al instead of the noun in the genitive case in these compound terms: wave number (= number of the wave 281), base current (= current of the base 318), drift velocity (= velocity of drift 103), electric charge (= charge of electricity 154), electron-hole plasma (= plasma of electrons and holes 220), correlation function (= function of correlation 92), modulation noise (= noise of modulation 368), probability function (= function of probability 92), and so on.

Another problem with terminology in the abstracts is the use of awkwardly formed, incorrect terms, for example: polarizer phase-frequency properties (= phase-frequency properties), electron-hole interaction (= interaction between an electron and a hole 268), electronegative character (= electronic negativity, electronic repulsion, while the opposite property should be called not electropositivity, but electronic positivity, electronic attraction). The compound terms electronically negative, electron-repulsive metal; electronically positive, electron-attractive metal would also fit this microsystem.

The abstracts also contain incorrect terms that have not been used for a long time, for example, current carrier (The observed potential difference is unrelated to the concentration gradient of hot current carriers (= hot charge carriers)).

92

In some cases, adjectives formed from proper names with the suffix -inis, -ė are unacceptable, e.g.: Gaussian function (= Gausso function 91), Coulomb potential (= Kulono potential 228), etc. Doubts about such term formations had already been raised in a review of the Physics Terms Dictionary published in 1958. In that review, Keplerian force was corrected to Kepler force; Brownian motion to motion of Brown; Fraunhoferian diffraction to Fraunhofer diffraction³.

Lithuanian has the adjectives powerless, formless, meaningless, weightless, waterless, and so on. Thus, authors of abstracts should also pay attention to this and use not dimensionless, but of dimensionless value; not d e f e c t l e s s, but a defect-free system, and so forth. In other similar compound terms, such as contactless sensor, contactless meter, the qualifying elements should be replaced by adjectives expressing a negative contrast, that is, non-contact sensor, non-contact meter.

Abstracts contain compound terms whose qualifying elements are incorrect compound adjectives, e.g.: high-frequency (= high-frequency) oscillations, high-temperature (= high-temperature) laser microscope, double-circuit (= two-circuit) diagram, liquid-crystalline (= liquid-crystal) light modulator, coarse adispersive (= coarse-dispersed) fraction.

Trečioji bėda – piktnaudžiavimas tarptautiniais terminais. Santraukose galima aptikti tokių skolinių, kurių jau atsisakyta prieš 35 metus išleistame „Fizikos terminų žodyne“, pvz.: diagonalė (= įstrižainė), diametras (= skersmuo), koaksialinis (= bendraašis) bangolaidis, lokalinis (= vietinis) įtempimas, magnetorezistyvinė (= magnetovaržinė) elektरोvaros jėga ir rezistyvinis (= varžinis) slėgio jutiklis, parcialinė (= dalinė) banga, o kitų skolinių, kaip specifinė (= savitoji) šiluma, varža, šleifas (= kilpa), viskozimetras (= klampomatis), vizualinis (= regimasis) indikatorius ir t.t. bandoma atsisakyti ir 1979 m. išleistame „Fizikos terminų žodyne“.

The terms aggregate, mechanism are increasingly ousting Lithuanian names for many physical phenomena or their properties, e.g.: excitation dynamics of porphyrin aggregates (= derivatives); annihilation of photoexcitations in pseudoisocyanine Y-aggregates (= derivatives); <--> electrical conductivity

³ Zdanis J., Remišauskas M., Čižas A., Kokšta V. Daugiau dėmesio terminologijai. Tiesa. 1958 spalio 31.

93

dispersion is relaxation in nature and is caused by the hopping charge-transfer mechanism (= relaxation and caused by hopping charge transfer); about the mechanism of ice formation (= formation) in a cloud; the acoustic phenomenon is then determined by the acoustoelectric interaction mechanism (= acoustoelectric interaction); the specific features (= properties) of the conductivity mechanism of thin polycrystalline selenium films, etc.

The same can be said of the term common to many scientific fields, structure, cf. Latin structura. When using it, authors of abstracts mean two things: a derivative and an arrangement. So why not call them by those names, e.g.: the effect of trapping centers on the electroluminescence of ZnS: Mn film structures (= arrangements); <...> semiconductor-metal-semiconductor structures consisting of a single-crystal layer (= derivatives of a single-crystal layer or single-crystal-layer derivatives), and so on.

2. Lexicon. Among lexical issues, the most problematic are words used with inadmissible meanings, calques, and outright foreignisms. For example:

apart (adv., foreignism) — without, except: the field is quantizing and homogeneous, apart (= except for) a narrow channel;

determine — much better: cause, determine: <...> the dependence on the phase difference <...> is determined by (= is caused by) the quantities; variation in recombination centers is determined by nonthermal processes (= variation is caused by nonthermal processes);

given (in) — inadmissible meaning: “this, a certain”. The Russian participle данный undoubtedly contributed to the emergence of this inadmissible meaning; cf. в данном словаре — in this dictionary, в данный момент — at this moment, and so on. Therefore, the following should be corrected: <...> the method used is the one that is more convenient in the given (= this) case; these quantities fully characterize the energy accumulated at a given (= certain, this) point in time.

Authors of abstracts often also use the participle assigned in an inadmissible sense—“specified, required; prescribed; selected”—following Russian usage. This is nothing other than an unsuccessful calque of the Russian word заданный, e.g.: boundary conditions may be assigned (= specified, selected) in three ways; <...> the resulting dependence on the assigned (= selected) accuracy. Abstracts even contain the reflexive verb assign oneself, e.g.: <...> having assigned oneself (= specified, prescribed)

94

one of the parameters, the other parameter becomes defined (= defined); <...> it is necessary to specify (= select) the required quantity;

a series, the whole series – better many, a multitude, numerous or the like: thanks to these studies, a series of <...> new studies took shape (= these studies gave rise to many, numerous new studies); <...> one can address a whole series (= many) questions in cloud and precipitation physics;

to place – not recommended; use “insert” or “keep”: I place the manufactured solid specimenss (= having inserted them) into the resonator, obtained;

fully – not recommended; use “entirely, completely”: <...> the mean value is fully (= completely) defined quantity; <...> the calculation of the flow of energy fully (= completely) absorbed (= taken up);

to occur – not recommended; use “be”: <...> aerosols occur (= are) from 5 to 60% of the total atmospheric SO₂ amount;

to bind – not recommended; use “relate”: A theoretical formula was obtained relating (= linking) the position of the observed signal to the order parameter;

composition – not recommended; use “composition”: <...> the sensitivity dependence on the composition of the solid solution (= composition);

following – not recommended; use “this, such, that”: <...> the subradical integral can be expressed as the sum of following (= these, such) integrals;

to encounter – not recommended in the senses “notice, detect” and “be, occur”: currents and voltages of all kinds of forms are encountered (= there are currents and voltages of all kinds of forms).

As can be seen, the shortcomings of the terminology and lexicon in the abstracts are as follows: 1) variation in terminology (when terms given in earlier terminology dictionaries are disregarded), 2) excessive internationalization of terminology (when too much trust is placed in other languages and Lithuanian language resources are used), and 3) words used in inadmissible senses (when meanings are most often borrowed blindly from other languages).

Thus, abstract authors take too little interest in the terminology of their field and in language culture; they could consult more often the “Dictionary of Physics Terms,” the “Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian,” “Advice on Language Usage,” “Terminology Corrections,” and other publications. As a result, linguists have to perform the labor of Sisyphus, continually reminding people of things that might seem well known and tiresome.

Angelė KAULAKIENĖ

95