| Left unit | Sense | Right unit | Relation type | Relation name | Document | Tagger | Area | Notes |
General trends in standardization of scientific terminology in Serbian: a critical analysis of the state of affairs | --> | Building the terminology of any scientific area is a long and laborious process. In the recent past, a trend has been noted, and reported by many researchers in the area of Serbian scientific terminology, of importing borrowings of lexical and larger structural units from English into specific scientific registers, rather that to opt for translations, calques, etc. This corresponds closely to the fact that a consensus has been reached among Serbian scientists of various orientations regarding the status of English as the only language of scientific communication in the last several decades.
In this paper, an attempt is made to critically evaluate the above outlined trend, from both inherently linguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives. An open-ended multidisciplinary approach, developed by Bugarski (1996a; 1996b) and adapted for the purposes of this paper, is tested against the data coming from various scientific fields, such as computer science, quality control and quality management, linguistics, engineering, etc. The analysis of the data at hand - international terms most of which have not yet been standardized in Serbian - indicate that a hierarchy of criteria for evaluating the terms, which are to be fully accepted in a given scientific register, should be organized in such a way as to give primacy to the parameter measuring the international value of terms, the shortness parameter and the monosemy parameter. In all the instances analyzed herein the English borrowings are given primacy over translation and structural calques in the linguistic code which could be labeled as "modern scientific variety of Serbian".
| preparation | N-S | TERM18_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Zientzia-arloko terminologiaren normalizazio-joera orokorrak serbiera: egoeraren analisi kritikoa | --> | Edozein zientzia-arlotako terminologia eraikitzea lan luzea eta neketsua da. Aurreko hamarkadetan, serbierako zientzia-arloko ikertzaile askok joera bat nabaritu dute eta horren berri eman dute: ingeleseko unitate lexikalen maileguak eta unitate-egitura luzeagoen maileguak hartzen dira zientzia-erregistro zehatz baterako, itzulpenak edo kalkoak egin ordez. Izan ere, iritzi ezberdinetako zientzialari serbiarrek adostasuna lortu dute eta aurreko hamarkadetan ingelesari eman diote zientzia-komunikaziorako hizkuntza bakarraren estatusa.
Komunikazio honetan, joera hori modu kritikoan aztertzen saiatzen gara, linguistikaren zein soziolinguistikaren ikuspegitik. Bugarski-k (1988; 1996) diziplina anitzeko eta amaiera zehatzik gabeko ikuspegi bat garatu zuen; hitzaldi honetarako egokitu dugu eta zientzia-arlo askotatik (injinerutzatik, kalitate-kontroletik eta kalitate-kudeaketatik, informatikatik, ekonomiatik, eta abarretik) datozen datuak alderatzeko erabili dugu. Eskuratu ditugun datuek (baita alor jakinetako adituek emandako iritziek ere) adierazten dutenez, zientzia-alor jakin batean onartuko diren terminoak ebaluatzeko hierarkia bat ezarri behar da. Hierarkia hori hizkuntzaz kanpoko irizpideetan oinarrituko da, adibidez, nazioarteko kooperazioa eta komunikazioa. Horien arabera, ingelesetik hartutako maileguei lehentasuna ematen zaie "serbieraren zientzia-barietate modernoa" izeneko hizkuntzakodean, itzulpena eta egitura-kalkoaren aurretik.
| preparation | N-S | TERM18_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
The social dimension of terminological standardisation | --> | In today's society there are two apparently contradictory trends: on the one hand there is a growing need for harmonisation at international level due to continuous economic, political, social and cultural links and exchanges. But on the other hand there is a recognition of diversity (and the consequent affirmation of individuality) in all areas of human life.
Terminology, which is an eminently social field, must accommodate these general trends, along with others such as the headlong progress of technology, the advance of sciences towards interdisciplinarity and hyper-specialisation, and the immediacy with which data are exchanged in the information society. All these factors lead to an increase in the number of specialist terms which enrich terminology but also call into question some of its basic concepts, such as the one to one relationship between ideas and names, the concept of mastery of a specialist field and the role of standardisation in terminology.
The basic principles of standardisation, such as consensus between the sectors of society involved, remain fully valid in guaranteeing specialist communication, but in practical terminological work the close relationship which must exist between standardisation and society is sometimes neglected. The danger in this is that there may be a breakdown in the equilibrium required between the certain degree of arbitrariness which is inevitable in a consensus and the actual use of terminology by specialists. In this case, standardisation not only ceases to be effective but also fails to fulfil its purpose.
This paper looks, on the basis of experience in the standardisation of terminology in Catalan, at the social need for standardisation of terminology. Some of the difficulties faced will be discussed, and ideas will be given for approaching this field in present day society.
| preparation | N-S | TERM19_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Terminologia normalizatzeak gizartean duen eragina | --> | Egungo gizartean bi joera nabarmentzen dira, eta kontrajarriak, itxura batean. Alde batetik, gero eta indartsuagoa da nazioarteko harmonizazioa lortu beharra, ekonomian, politikan eta kultura eta gizarte gaietan etenik gabe sortzen ari diren loturak eta elkarren arteko trukaketak eraginda; eta bestetik, aniztasuna onartu beharra, eta, ondorioz, norbanakoen izaeraren berrespena, giza bizitzako arlo guztietan agertzen ari den moduan.
Terminologiak berak ere, gizartearekin lotuta dagoen jarduera denez, uztartu egin behar ditu joera orokor horiek, eransten zaizkien beste batzuekin batera, hala nola: teknologien aurrerakuntza zorabiagarria, zientziak diziplinartekotasunera eta hiperespezializaziora daramatzan bilakaera, eta informazioa elkarren artean berehala trukatu beharra. Alderdi horiek guztiek, espezialitateko terminologiaren gehikuntza kuantitatiboa eragiteaz gain, terminologia lanen ikuspegia ere zabaldu egin dute; eta, egia bada ere ikuspegi berri horrek terminologia aberastu egin duela esatea, zalantzan jarri ditu terminologiaren oinarrizko zenbait kontzeptu: kontzeptu-izendapen bikotearen adierabakartasuna, espezialitateko eremuen kontzeptua, eta normalizazioak terminologian duen eginbeharra.
Nahiz eta gaur egun normalizazioko oinarrizko printzipioek balio osoa gorde komunikazio espezialduaren bermearen bidez (eta elkarrekin zerikusia duten gizarteko sektoreen arteko adostasuna da printzipio horietako bat), terminologiako lan praktikoan, batzuetan, ahaztuxe uzten da normalizazioaren eta gizartearen artean egon behar den lotura estua. Horrek dakarren arriskua zera da: adostasuna lortzeko ezinbestekoa den arbitrarietatea, maila baterainokoa behintzat, eta adituek terminologiari ematen dioten erabilera erreala orekatu behar izan arren, eten egin daitekeela. Kasu horretan, normalizazioa ez bakarrik ez litzateke eraginkorra izango, are gehiago, bete gabe utziko lituzke bere helburuak.
Komunikazio honetan, katalanerako terminologia normalizatzeko lanetan izandako eskarmentutik hasita, batetik, gizarteak terminologia normaltzeko duen beharra aurkeztuko dugu, hurrengo, horretarako dauden zenbait zailtasun aipatuko ditugu, eta, amaitu orduko, ideia batzuk plazaratuko ditugu hori guztia egungo gizartean bideratu ahal izateko.
| preparation | N-S | TERM19_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Term creation for Irish-medium third-level education and vocational training | --> | Fiontar is a unit in Dublin City University which runs a BSc in Finance, Computing and Enterprise, through the medium of the Irish language. Staff and students, while fluent speakers of Irish, have not had occasion to become familiar with the extensive technological terminology required for this degree. As all subjects are taught through Irish, all terminology used on the course must be available in Irish. To this end, a special bilingual (Irish-English) termbank has been created for use by students and staff on the BSc in Finance, Computing and Enterprise.
The VOCALL project (Vocational Language Learning for Less Widely Used and Taught Languages) is a project funded by the European Commission under the Leonardo Da Vinci Programme. The project is coordinated by Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland. The objective is to build language learning tools for vocationally-oriented learners in the areas of computers, office skills and electronics. Focussing on less widely used and taught languages (LWUTLs) including Irish, the VOCALL partners are compiling multilingual glossaries of technical terms in the areas of computers, office skills and electronics and this involves the creation of a large number of new Irish terms in the above areas.
With the help of the Terminology Committee for the Irish Language (An Coiste T?arma?ochta) Fiontar and VOCALL are addressing the terminological needs of both Irishmedium third level education and Irish-medium vocational training. Our paper will discuss the methodology used by both groups in term creation. The paper will also address the difficulties encountered in encouraging the use of new and/or standardised terminology in the Irish language.
| preparation | N-S | TERM23_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Irlanderaren bidezko hezkuntza unibertsitariorako eta lanbide heziketarako terminoak sortzea | --> | Dublin Hiriko Unibertsitateko atal bat da Fiontar, zeinak Ekonomia, Informatika eta Enpresa-ikasketetako Lizentziatura ematen baitu, irlanderaren bidez. Irakasleek eta ikasleek, irlanderazko hiztun trebeak izan arren, ez dute aukerarik izan titulu horretarako behar den terminologia teknologiko zabala ezagutzeko. Gai guztiak irlanderaz ematen direnez gero, irakasgaian erabilitako terminologia osoak egon behar du eskuragarri irlanderaz. Horretarako, Ekonomia, Informatika eta Enpresa-ikasketetako Lizentziaturako ikasleek eta irakasleek termino-banku elebiduna (irlandera-ingelesa) sortu dute berenberegi.
VOCALL proiektua (Vocational Language Learning for Less Widely Used and Taught Languages - Lanbide Arloetako Hizkuntzaren Ikaskuntza Gutxi Erabiltzen eta Irakasten Diren Hizkuntzetan) Europako Batzordeak finantzatzen du Leonardo da Vinci Programaren barruan. Proiektuaren koordinadore da Dublin Hiriko Unibertsitatea (Dublin, Irlanda). Informatika, bulego-lana eta eraikuntzako ikasleentzako hizkuntza ikasteko tresnak egitea da helburua. Gutxi erabiltzen eta irakasten diren hizkuntzetan kontzentratzen da proiektua (LWUTL), irlandera barne. Informatika, bulego-lana eta eraikuntzako arloetako termino teknikoen glosario eleanizduna biltzen ari da VOCALL, eta horrek esan nahi du arlo horietako irlanderazko termino berri ugari sortzen ari dela.
Terminology Committee of the Irish Language-ren laguntzaz (An Coiste TéarmaÃochta - Irlanderarako Terminologia Batzordea), Fiontar eta VOCALL irlanderaren bidezko hezkuntza unibertsitariorako eta lanbide-heziketarako terminologia-beharrizanak betetzen ari dira. Gure komunikazioa talde bi horiek terminoak sortzeko erabiltzen duten metodologiaz izango da. Irlanderazko terminologia normalizatuaren erabilpena bultzatzeko aurkitu diren arazoak ere ikusiko ditugu.
| preparation | N-S | TERM23_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Terminology, translation and legal discourse from the viewpoint of the Basque language | --> | For the translation of legal texts it is absolutely necessary to study terminology. In the case of Basque the need is even greater, as our language is not in a good situation in the field of law.
In recent years we have therefore worked to bring together in a single text the different translation techniques (use of adequate terminology, creation of new terms) and an in-depth knowledge of the legal systems which Basque must assimilate (Spanish, French and EU law). Once all this is correctly organised in a single text we can mould the "legal discourse" of Basque.
To attain this goal we have been translating doctrinal texts in law at the University of Deusto since 1994. We wish to indicate the difficulties we have had over the years and also our achievements, if there can be said to be any. As indicated above, our study is based on the following: achieving a correct, high-quality legal discourse from the viewpoints of both law and linguistics, using translation and terminology to configure that discourse.
| preparation | N-S | TERM25_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Terminologia, itzulpena eta diskurtso juridikoa: euskararen kasua | --> | Testu juridikoen itzulpenari ekiteko, ezinbestekoa da terminologia bera lantzea. Euskararen kasuan beharrizan hori areagotu egin da, esparru horretan gure hizkuntzaren egoera ez baita primerakoa, ezta hurrik eman ere.
Bada, azken urteotako lanaren xedea izan da testu berean behar bezala uztartzea itzulpengintzaren arloan azaltzen diren eginkizun desberdinak, alegia, terminologia egokia erabili (hizperrien bitartez nahiz beste teknika batzuen bitartez), euskarak "etxeratu" behar duen sistema juridikoa bere luze-sakonean ezagutu (Espainiako Zuzenbidea, Frantziako Zuzenbidea, Europako Erkidegoen Zuzenbidea) eta osagai horiek guztiak artez antolatzea azken testu batean. Hori bete-betean lortuz gero, euskarazko "diskurtso juridikoa" moldatuko genuke.
Xede hori iristeko, 1994. urteaz geroztik, Deustuko Unibertsitatean Zuzenbidearen inguruko testu doktrinalak itzultzen dihardugu. Esperientzia horretan izandako zailtasunak eta, halakorik izanez gero, lorpenak ere azaldu nahi ditugu. Jarraikoak izango dira, gorago esan bezala, azterketa horren ardatz: emaitza gisa, diskurtso juridiko zuzena eta kalitatezkoa, Zuzenbidearen ikusmiratik eta linguistikaren ikuskeratik ere; eta diskurtso hori itxuratzeko abiaburu gisa, terminologia eta itzulpena.
| preparation | N-S | TERM25_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Method for extracting Basque terminology from translated legal texts | --> | This paper is intended to make known the method used to locate and analyse legal terminology in Basque in a complete corpus for a particular field. Discarding the methods usually used in terminology processing, we based our research on three points: computer resources, the corpus linguistics and the science of translation. Since legislation itself is the basis of written law and is therefore highly important in legal terminology, we took as our framework for research the whole body of law produced by the Basque Parliament. Since the Basque language versions are translations of Spanish originals, we based our study on those originals and then found their Basque equivalents, in the sure knowledge that legal terminology in Spanish is sufficiently well consolidated and set down in dictionaries. After obtaining the full texts in both languages on a computer data carrier, we proceeded to compare and set out in parallel the two versions so that we could identify with numbers those paragraphs which had the same contents. Using a special application we then established connections between the appearances of the main terms in the Spanish list already drawn up and the context paragraphs and paragraphs with the same numbers in the Basque version. We then located the segments of the paragraphs in Basque which contained the term equivalent to the Spanish one, and transferred the whole thing to a relational database. This allows us to determine what terms appear and what terms do not appear, the area of law to which they belong, the degree to which the Basque terms are consolidated, the syntactic structures of the Basque segments equivalent to the Spanish terms, etc. Phraseology, which is so important in specialist language, could also be treated in this same way.
| preparation | N-S | TERM28_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Lege-testu itzulietako euskal terminologiaren hustuketarako metodologia | --> | Alor zehatz bateko corpus osoan erabili den euskarazko terminologia juridikoa lokalizatu eta aztertzeko metodologiaren berri eman nahi dugu komunikazio honetan. Terminologiaren ohiko metodologiaz at, hiru oinetan finkatu dugu gure lana: baliabide informatikoak, corpus-linguistika eta traduktologia. Legeriak -legea dagoenez zuzenbidearen hastapenean- zuzenbideko terminologia osoan duen garrantzian oinarrituz, Eusko Legebiltzarreko legegintza-produkzio osoa hartu dugu aztergai. Legeen euskal bertsioak gaztelaniazko jatorrizko testuen itzulpenak direnez, erdal testuez baliatu gara, gaztelaniazko terminologia juridikoa aski finkatua eta bildua dagoelakoan, euskal terminoak bilatzeko. Bi hizkuntzetako testu guztiak euskarri informatikoan eskuratu ondoren, bi bertsioen alderatzeari, eta paralelizatzeari ekin diogu, eduki bereko testu-zatiak zenbaki bereko paragrafoan ager daitezen bietan. Ondoren aplikazio berezi baten bidez, aldez aurretik prestaturiko gaztelaniazko zerrenda bateko termino garrantzitsuenen agerpenak, bere testuinguru-paragrafo osoarekin, eta zenbaki bereko euskal bertsioko paragrafoarekin, lortu ditugu. Ondoren, euskarazko paragrafoetan, erdal terminoaren eduki baliokidea daraman segmentua lokalizatu dugu, eta guztia, datu-base erlazional batera eraman. Honela, jakin ahal izan dugu zein diren agertzen eta agertzen ez diren terminoak, zuzenbideko zein alorretakoak diren, zenbaterainoko finkapen-maila aurkitzen den euskal termino horietan, zein den gaztelaniazko terminoen euskal segmentu baliokideen egitura sintaktikoa, eta oraindik burutu gabe dagoen azterketa lexikologiko baten bidez, termino horien zenbait alderdi lexikogenetiko aztertzeko parada dugu.
| preparation | N-S | TERM28_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Design and management of terminological databases: a constant challenge | --> | Ever since information technology first made it possible to store and then process linguistic data, terminology has had to adapt constantly to technological innovations. This has posed, and indeed continues to pose, a constant challenge for the joint work of terminologists and software specialists.
The design and management of terminological databases pose theoretical and methodological problems (how can a term be represented? Is there a minimum representation? How are terms to be classified?), as well as IT problems (How should terminological databases be structured? What relationships should be covered? What is a dictionary unit?).
The need to find solutions which can be applied effectively in a real context has led us to take an approach which does not ignore theoretical postulates and the different methods of terminology and IT, but enables us to handle problems, carry out terminological work and disseminate the results.
| preparation | N-S | TERM29_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Terminologiako datu-baseak diseinatzea eta kudeatzea: etengabeko erronka | --> | Informatikak hizkuntzako datuak gorde eta, aurrerago, tratatzeko aukera eman zigunetik, terminologiak teknologi berrikuntzetara egokitu behar izan du etengabe. Horrek amaieragabeko erronka ekarri izan dio -eta oraindik ere hala dakarkio- terminologo eta informatikoen elkarlanari.
Hala da, terminologiako datu-baseak diseinatzeak eta kudeatzeak hainbat arazo dakar bai teoria eta metodologiaren aldetik (nola adierazi terminoa? Ba al da gutxieneko adierazpenik? Nola sailkatu terminoak?), eta baita informatikaren aldetik ere (zein egitura eduki behar luke terminologiako datu-base batek? Zein erlazio jaso behar lituzke? Zein da hiztegi bateko unitatea?). Benetako testuinguruetan ondo aplikatzeko balioko duten konponbideak aurkitu beharrak ikuspuntu jakin bat hartzera eraman gaitu, informatikako postulatuak eta metodologiak begi aurretik galdu gabe bada ere, arazo horiei aurre egin, terminologi lana bete eta emaitzak zabaltzeko aukera izan dezagun.
| preparation | N-S | TERM29_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Terminology management and knowledge processing in lesser-used languages | --> | Terminology management, that is collection, analysis, validation and distribution of terms, is crucial for converting information into comprehensible and applicable knowledge. Specialists of all persuasions are involved in coining terms, modifying existing terminology, rendering terms archaic or re-introducing discarded terms with new meanings. One task of specialists, it appears, is to coin neologisms, introduce retronyms, translate terms, validate terms and, in a rather indirect manner, compile or help to compete terminology collection of their specialisms. Modern science, contemporary leisure and entertainment, innovative enterprises, all distinguish themselves from their older incarnations not merely through goods, services or artefacts, but also through the terminology they use to describe the sciences, arts and culture, and business and enterprises. Terminology management is by and large a manual task that relies on the existence of well-motivated documentalists, translators and terminologists; the later performing the function of the former two. Currently available terminology management systems have alleviated some of the storage and retrieval tasks associated with the archival and presentation of specialist terms. However, the tasks of collection, analysis and validation are undertaken with skilled human beings. In languages used by numerical majorities, the expensive task of terminology management is underwritten by the expectation that there is a potentially large numbers of people who require and are willing to invest in creating terminology databases. For languages used by numerically smaller number of people this indeed is not the case; terminology management here is often linked with the politically-motivated, and often emotionally charged, work of language planning. The dependence on human beings for terminology management is greater in the lesser-used language communities than say may be the case of other languages.
The automation of terminology involvement management is not merely a task of writing computer programs, although such and undertaking is onerous in itself. Such an automation requires an understanding of how specialist text is written, how human beings deal with semantics of specialist domains, how discourse pattern change according to the needs of the authors and the readers of the texts. Writings in and about lesser-used languages are not easy come by and it appears that it is difficult to persuade people to undertake research and data collection in these areas. Somehow, specialist writing is associated with term 'technical writing', a discourse pattern which in turn is associated with machines and thereby not given the same status as the more abstract task of parsing sentences according to a mathematical model of language or searching for cultural icons in texts for instance.
But knowledge processing, a term that can be used for elaborating related activities like education, training, teaching and learning, problem solving and so on, is crucially dependent on the availability of specialist terminology collections. This especially true during the formative years of a child, the early carrier of a novice or a person being retrained; facts, principles, theories, and rules of thumb related to any human enterprise, collectively known as knowledge, are to be assimilated and then applied for teaching, learning, problem-solving etc. The 'raw material' available in text books, journals, unarticulated past experience, has to be communicated through the agency of terms whose meanings are well defined and used frequently by a specialist enterprise. Knowledge processing therefore is inextricably linked terminology management which, in turn, is linked with language planning and politics. Over the last ten years we have been building terminology collections in languages used by numerically larger groups of people, like English, German and Spanish, while at the same time attempting to adapt such methods for lesser used languages like Welsh, Norwegian, Flemish and Catalan. This paper will discuss challenges encountered, opportunities identified and solutions suggested for managing terminology of specialist languages in multilingual environments where at least one language belongs to the lesser used category on numerical groups. Our theoretical framework draws from recent work in corpus linguistics, philosophy and history of science on the one hand and computing sciences on the other.
| preparation | N-S | TERM30_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Terminologia-kudeaketa eta ezagutza-prozesaketa hizkuntza minorizatuetan | --> | Terminologia-kudeaketa (terminoak biltzea, aztertzea, baliozkotzea eta antolatzea) oso garrantzitsua da informazioa ezagutza ulergarri eta aplikagarri bilakatzeko. Joera guztietako adituak dabiltza terminoak sortzen, dagoen terminologia aldatzen, termino batzuk arkaikotzat ematen edo baztertutako terminoak esanahi berriekin birsartzen. Badirudi adituen eginbeharreko bat dela neologismoak sortzea, erretronimoak (berrezarpen lexikalak) sartzea, terminoak itzultzea, terminoak baliozkotzea eta, nahiko zeharka, euren espezialitateetako terminologia-bildumak egitea edo egiten laguntzea. Zientzia modernoa, gaur egungo aisia eta dibertsioa, enpresa berritzaileak, euren enkarnazio zaharrengatik nabaritzen dira, ez bakarrik ondasun, zerbitzu edo tresnen bidez, bai eta zientziak, arteak eta kultura, eta negozioak eta enpresak deskribatzeko erabiltzen duten terminologiaren bidez ere. Terminologia-kudeaketa, oro har, eskulana da eta motibaturiko dokumentalistengan, itzultzaileengan eta terminologoengan bermatzen da; azken horrek beste bien funtzioa betetzen du. Termino espezializatuak artxibatzearekin eta aurkeztearekin lotuta dauden biltegiratze- eta berreskuratze-lan batzuk arindu dituzte gaur egun terminologia kudeatzeko sistemek. Hala ere, gizaki adituek egiten dituzte bilketak, azterketak eta baliozkotzeak. Hiztun ugariko hizkuntzetan, datu-base terminologikoak behar dituzten eta horiek sortzeko dirua inbertitzeko prest dauden pertsona-kopuru handia egongo denaren esperantzak bermatzen du terminologia-kudeaketaren lan garestia. Hiztun gutxiago dauzkaten hizkuntzetan ez da hori gertatzen. Kasu horietan, terminologia-kudeaketa hizkuntza plangintzaren lanarekin lotzen da sarritan. Lan horrek, era berean, motibazio politikoak eta, askotan, emozio-karga bat ere badauzka. Hizkuntza minorizatuetan, terminologiakudeaketak gizakiengan daukan menpekotasuna handiagoa da beste hizkuntza batzuetan baino.
Terminologia-kudeaketaren automatizazioa ez da programa informatikoak idaztea besterik gabe, lan hori, berez, zaila izan arren. Automatizazio hori egiteko jakin egin behar da zelan idazten diren adituen testuak, gizakiak zelan konpontzen diren arlo espezializatuen semantikarekin, diskurtsoaren ereduak zelan aldatzen diren testuaren egilearen eta irakurleen beharrizanen arabera. Hizkuntza minorizatuetan idatzitako testuak eta hizkuntza minorizatuei buruzko testuak ez dira erraz lortzen eta badirudi zaila dela arlo horietan azterketak eta datu-bilketak egiten hasteko inor konbentzitzea. Zelanbait, idazketa espezializatua "idazketa teknikoa" terminoarekin lotuta dago, makinekin zerikusia daukan diskurtso-eredu bat. Horren ondorioz, ez du lortzen hizkuntzaren eredu matematiko baten arabera esaldiak aztertzeari edo testuetan ikono kulturalak bilatzeari, lan abstraktuagoak baitira, ematen zaien estatus bera.
Ezagutza-prozesaketa terminoa hezkuntza, prestakuntza, irakaskuntza eta ikaskuntza, arazoak konpontzea, eta abarren moduko ekintza parekoak garatzeko erabil dezakegu. Terminologia espezializatuen bildumen eskuragarritasunaren menpe dago ezagutza prozesaketa. Hori egia da, batez ere haurraren hezkuntza-urteetan, hasberriaren edo berriro prestatzen ari denaren hasierako ikasketetan: gizakiaren edozein ekintzarekin zerikusia daukaten gertakariak, printzipioak, teoriak eta esperientziak (ezagutza) asimilatu egiten dira eta gero irakasteko, ikasteko, arazoak konpontzeko eta abarretarako erabiltzen da. Liburuetan, egunkarietan, iraganeko esperientzia ez-artikulatuan eskuratzen den "material gordina" terminoen bidez komunikatu behar da, zeinen esanahiak ondo definituta baitaude eta adituek sarritan erabiliko baitituzte.
Beraz, ezagutza-prozesaketak eta terminologia-kudeaketak daukaten lotura askaezina da; terminologia-kudeaketa, era berean, hizkuntz plangintzarekin eta politikarekin dago lotuta. Azken hamar urteotan hiztun ugariko hizkuntzetako terminologia-bilketak egiten ibili gara, adibidez, ingelesean, alemanieran eta gazteleran. Aldi berean, metodo horiek hizkuntza minorizatuei egokitzen saiatu gara, adibidez, galeserari, norvegierari, flandeserari eta katalanari. Komunikazio honen gaiak izango dira aurkitutako erronkak, identifikatutako aukerak eta emandako irtenbideak hizkera espezializatuen terminologia inguru eleanizdun batean kudeatzeko, zeinetan hizkuntza bat gutxienez hizkuntza minorizatua baita. Gure marko teorikoa hizkuntza corpusari, filosofiari eta zientziaren historiari buruzko ikerketa berrietatik hartu dugu, alde batetik, eta informatikako ikerketatik, bestetik.
| preparation | N-S | TERM30_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Automatic terminology extraction and its application to Basque | --> | 1. Introduction
In recent years work has begun to develop instruments in several languages for automatic terminology extraction in technical texts, though human intervention is still required to make the final selection from the terms automatically chosen. As an example we can cite the following instruments: LEXTER (Bourigault, 92), AT & Tko Terminght (Church & Dagan, 94), TERMS by IBM (Justeson & Katz, 95) and NPtool (Arpper, 95).
Their areas of application can be divided into two main groups: information indexing and the making-up of terminological glossaries. In areas where terminology is developing dynamically, such as computer science, it is almost impossible to carry out effective terminological work without an instrument of this type.
If a similar instrument is to be developed for Basque we shall come up against more major drawbacks, because the unifying process of the language has not been completed, research carried out is limited and Basque is an agglutinative language.
2. Terminology extraction
It is a hard task to obtain a formal, complete definition of a term, but that is precisely what a major part of this work consists of: defining the characteristics of terms. To obtain technical terms from the corpus a combination of NLP techniques (based on linguistic knowledge) and statistical techniques is usually used.
2.1. Linguistic Techniques
Linguistic techniques are used basically to make the initial selection of terms.
Morpho-syntactic models are usually used, so it is advisable to have the text already analysed or at least labelled. The results are conditioned heavily by the quality of the linguistic tool used. In any event in some projects neither morphological nor syntactic analysis is carried out (Su et al., 96).
Lemmatisation is linked to morphological analysis and the removal of ambiguities. In complex inflected languages poor results will ensue if only the formal aspect of words is dealt with: lemmatisation will be necessary. Linguistic knowledge is also of prime importance in the standardisation of terminology: a discrimination between terms must be made, because some of them may form part of longer units.
2.2. Statistical Techniques
In most projects statistical methods have been used to reduce the assumed terms which follow the linguistic model. The methods applied vary widely from project to project, so the simplest idea is to require a minimum absolute frequency (Justeson & Katz, 95), though several probabilistic formulae are generally combined.
2.3. Results
The results obtained are not yet those required for absolutely automatic extraction. A balance must be found between recall and precision. In this balance preference is given to recall, provided there is a person who can carry out the terminology reduction. To obtain a recall of 95% precision is usually reduced to 50%, and for a precision of 85% cover is not reduced even to 35%.
3. Application to Basque
The IXA Group intends to develop a tool of this type for Basque. The morphological analyser is already being prepared (Alegria et al, 96), the lemmatizer/labeller is almost completed (Aduriz et al, 96) and work has been done on surface level syntax.
While these tools are being prepared, we must work on the modelling of technical terms, i.e. we must reduce their characteristics. To that end, basing work on existing technical dictionaries and using statistical techniques, principal models must be obtained. We do not yet have any results, but we believe that the model will be wider than the noun phrase. In the choice of technical terms, the case of internal declension may prove decisive.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
1. Introduction | --> | In recent years work has begun to develop instruments in several languages for automatic terminology extraction in technical texts, though human intervention is still required to make the final selection from the terms automatically chosen. As an example we can cite the following instruments: LEXTER (Bourigault, 92), AT & Tko Terminght (Church & Dagan, 94), TERMS by IBM (Justeson & Katz, 95) and NPtool (Arpper, 95).
Their areas of application can be divided into two main groups: information indexing and the making-up of terminological glossaries. In areas where terminology is developing dynamically, such as computer science, it is almost impossible to carry out effective terminological work without an instrument of this type.
If a similar instrument is to be developed for Basque we shall come up against more major drawbacks, because the unifying process of the language has not been completed, research carried out is limited and Basque is an agglutinative language.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
2.1. Linguistic Techniques | --> | Linguistic techniques are used basically to make the initial selection of terms.
Morpho-syntactic models are usually used, so it is advisable to have the text already analysed or at least labelled. The results are conditioned heavily by the quality of the linguistic tool used. In any event in some projects neither morphological nor syntactic analysis is carried out (Su et al., 96).
Lemmatisation is linked to morphological analysis and the removal of ambiguities. In complex inflected languages poor results will ensue if only the formal aspect of words is dealt with: lemmatisation will be necessary. Linguistic knowledge is also of prime importance in the standardisation of terminology: a discrimination between terms must be made, because some of them may form part of longer units.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
2.2. Statistical Techniques | --> | In most projects statistical methods have been used to reduce the assumed terms which follow the linguistic model. The methods applied vary widely from project to project, so the simplest idea is to require a minimum absolute frequency (Justeson & Katz, 95), though several probabilistic formulae are generally combined.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
2.3. Results | --> | The results obtained are not yet those required for absolutely automatic extraction. A balance must be found between recall and precision. In this balance preference is given to recall, provided there is a person who can carry out the terminology reduction. To obtain a recall of 95% precision is usually reduced to 50%, and for a precision of 85% cover is not reduced even to 35%.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
3. Application to Basque | --> | The IXA Group intends to develop a tool of this type for Basque. The morphological analyser is already being prepared (Alegria et al, 96), the lemmatizer/labeller is almost completed (Aduriz et al, 96) and work has been done on surface level syntax.
While these tools are being prepared, we must work on the modelling of technical terms, i.e. we must reduce their characteristics. To that end, basing work on existing technical dictionaries and using statistical techniques, principal models must be obtained. We do not yet have any results, but we believe that the model will be wider than the noun phrase. In the choice of technical terms, the case of internal declension may prove decisive.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
2. Terminology extraction | --> | It is a hard task to obtain a formal, complete definition of a term, but that is precisely what a major part of this work consists of: defining the characteristics of terms. To obtain technical terms from the corpus a combination of NLP techniques (based on linguistic knowledge) and statistical techniques is usually used.
2.1. Linguistic Techniques
Linguistic techniques are used basically to make the initial selection of terms.
Morpho-syntactic models are usually used, so it is advisable to have the text already analysed or at least labelled. The results are conditioned heavily by the quality of the linguistic tool used. In any event in some projects neither morphological nor syntactic analysis is carried out (Su et al., 96).
Lemmatisation is linked to morphological analysis and the removal of ambiguities. In complex inflected languages poor results will ensue if only the formal aspect of words is dealt with: lemmatisation will be necessary. Linguistic knowledge is also of prime importance in the standardisation of terminology: a discrimination between terms must be made, because some of them may form part of longer units.
2.2. Statistical Techniques
In most projects statistical methods have been used to reduce the assumed terms which follow the linguistic model. The methods applied vary widely from project to project, so the simplest idea is to require a minimum absolute frequency (Justeson & Katz, 95), though several probabilistic formulae are generally combined.
2.3. Results
The results obtained are not yet those required for absolutely automatic extraction. A balance must be found between recall and precision. In this balance preference is given to recall, provided there is a person who can carry out the terminology reduction. To obtain a recall of 95% precision is usually reduced to 50%, and for a precision of 85% cover is not reduced even to 35%.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Terminologiaren erauzketa automatikoa eta bere aplikazioa euskararako | --> | 1. Sarrera
Azken urteotan testu teknikoetatik terminologia automatikoki erauzteko tresnak ari dira garatzen zenbait hizkuntzatarako, baina oraindik giza laguntza behar izaten da automatikoki hautatutako terminologiaren artean azken aukeraketa egiteko. Horren adibide gisa, tresna hauek aipa daitezke: LEXTER (Bourigault, 92) AT&Tko Termight (Church & Dagan, 94) IBMko TERMS (Justeson & Katz, 95) NPtool (Arpper, 95).
Aplikazio-eremuak bi multzo handitan bana daitezke: informazioa indexatzeko eta terminoen glosategiak eraikitzeko. Gainera, terminologia oso modu dinamikoan bilakatzen den arloetan, informatikan adib., halako tresnarik gabe ia ezinezkoa da lan terminologiko eraginkorrak egitea.
Halako tresna bat euskararako garatu nahi badugu, eragozpen gehiago topatuko dugu ondoko hiru arrazoiengatik: bateratze-prozesua bukatzeke izateagatik, egindako ikerketak murritzak direlako eta hizkuntza eranskaria izateagatik.
2. Terminologiaren erauzketa
Terminoaren definizio formal eta osoa lortzea lan neketsua da eta horretan datza lanen atal garrantzitsu bat: terminoen ezaugarriak mugatzea. Corpusetatik termino teknikoak lortzeko konbinatu ohi dira NLPko teknikak (ezagumendu linguistikoan oinarritutakoak) eta teknika estatistikoak.
2.1. Teknika linguistikoak
Teknika linguistikoak erabiltzen dira batez ere terminoen hasierako selekzioa egiteko. Horretarako, eredu morfosintaktikoak erabili ohi direnez gero, komenigarria da testua analizaturik edukitzea edo gutxienez etiketatua. Tresna linguistikoen kalitateak baldintzatuko ditu, hein handi batean behintzat, tresnaren emaitzak. Hala ere, proiektu batzuetan ez da analisi morfologikorik edo sintaktikorik egiten (Su et al., 96).
Analisi morfologikoarekin eta desanbiguazioarekin lotuta dago lematizazioa. Flexio konplexuko hizkuntzetan hitz-forma bakarrik tratatzeak emaitza kaxkarrak ekarriko ditu eta lematizazioa ezinbestekoa izango da. Ezagumendu linguistikoa funtsezkoa da terminoen normalizazioan ere; termino batzuk beste luzeago batzuen baitan egon daitezkeenez, haien artean diskriminatu egin behar baita.
2.2 .Teknika estatistikoak
Eredu linguistikoari jarraitzen dioten balizko terminoak murrizteko erabili ohi dira metodo estatistikoak proiektu gehienetan. Aplikatutako metodoak asko aldatzen dira proiektuaren arabera: sinpleena izango litzateke maiztasun absolutu minimo bat eskatzea (Justeson & Katz, 95), baina orokorrean formula probabilistiko anitz konbinatzen dira.
2.3. Emaitzak
Lortzen diren emaitzak ez dira oraindik beharko liratekeenak erauzketa zeharo automatikoa egiteko. Oreka bilatu behar da estaldura (recall) eta doitasunaren artean (precision). Oreka horretan estaldurari lehentasuna ematen zaio atzetik terminologia murrizteko pertsona bat badago. % 95 inguruko estaldura lortzeko doitasuna % 50-era jaitsi ohi da, eta doitasuna % 85 ingurukoa izan dadin estaldura % 35era ere ez da iristen.
3. Euskararako aplikazioa
IXA taldearen asmoa da euskararako mota honetako tresna bat garatzea. Horretarako analizatzaile morfologikoa jadanik prest dago (Alegria et al., 96), lematizatzaile/etiketatzaile bat bukatzear dago (Aduriz et al., 96) eta azaleko sintaxiari ere ekin diogu.
Tresna horiek prest dauden bitartean termino teknikoen modelizazioari ekin behar diogu, hau da murriztu behar ditugu termino teknikoen ezaugarriak. Horretarako dauden hiztegi teknikoetan oinarritu, eta teknika estatistikoak erabiliz, eredu nagusiak lortu behar dira. Emaitzarik ez badugu ere, eredua izen-sintagmarena baino zabalagoa izango dela susmatzen dugu. Beste aldetik, termino teknikoak hautatzerakoan barneko deklinabidekasua erabakigarria izan daiteke.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
1. Sarrera | --> | Azken urteotan testu teknikoetatik terminologia automatikoki erauzteko tresnak ari dira garatzen zenbait hizkuntzatarako, baina oraindik giza laguntza behar izaten da automatikoki hautatutako terminologiaren artean azken aukeraketa egiteko. Horren adibide gisa, tresna hauek aipa daitezke: LEXTER (Bourigault, 92) AT&Tko Termight (Church & Dagan, 94) IBMko TERMS (Justeson & Katz, 95) NPtool (Arpper, 95).
Aplikazio-eremuak bi multzo handitan bana daitezke: informazioa indexatzeko eta terminoen glosategiak eraikitzeko. Gainera, terminologia oso modu dinamikoan bilakatzen den arloetan, informatikan adib., halako tresnarik gabe ia ezinezkoa da lan terminologiko eraginkorrak egitea.
Halako tresna bat euskararako garatu nahi badugu, eragozpen gehiago topatuko dugu ondoko hiru arrazoiengatik: bateratze-prozesua bukatzeke izateagatik, egindako ikerketak murritzak direlako eta hizkuntza eranskaria izateagatik.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
2. Terminologiaren erauzketa | --> | Terminoaren definizio formal eta osoa lortzea lan neketsua da eta horretan datza lanen atal garrantzitsu bat: terminoen ezaugarriak mugatzea. Corpusetatik termino teknikoak lortzeko konbinatu ohi dira NLPko teknikak (ezagumendu linguistikoan oinarritutakoak) eta teknika estatistikoak.
2.1. Teknika linguistikoak
Teknika linguistikoak erabiltzen dira batez ere terminoen hasierako selekzioa egiteko. Horretarako, eredu morfosintaktikoak erabili ohi direnez gero, komenigarria da testua analizaturik edukitzea edo gutxienez etiketatua. Tresna linguistikoen kalitateak baldintzatuko ditu, hein handi batean behintzat, tresnaren emaitzak. Hala ere, proiektu batzuetan ez da analisi morfologikorik edo sintaktikorik egiten (Su et al., 96).
Analisi morfologikoarekin eta desanbiguazioarekin lotuta dago lematizazioa. Flexio konplexuko hizkuntzetan hitz-forma bakarrik tratatzeak emaitza kaxkarrak ekarriko ditu eta lematizazioa ezinbestekoa izango da. Ezagumendu linguistikoa funtsezkoa da terminoen normalizazioan ere; termino batzuk beste luzeago batzuen baitan egon daitezkeenez, haien artean diskriminatu egin behar baita.
2.2 .Teknika estatistikoak
Eredu linguistikoari jarraitzen dioten balizko terminoak murrizteko erabili ohi dira metodo estatistikoak proiektu gehienetan. Aplikatutako metodoak asko aldatzen dira proiektuaren arabera: sinpleena izango litzateke maiztasun absolutu minimo bat eskatzea (Justeson & Katz, 95), baina orokorrean formula probabilistiko anitz konbinatzen dira.
2.3. Emaitzak
Lortzen diren emaitzak ez dira oraindik beharko liratekeenak erauzketa zeharo automatikoa egiteko. Oreka bilatu behar da estaldura (recall) eta doitasunaren artean (precision). Oreka horretan estaldurari lehentasuna ematen zaio atzetik terminologia murrizteko pertsona bat badago. % 95 inguruko estaldura lortzeko doitasuna % 50-era jaitsi ohi da, eta doitasuna % 85 ingurukoa izan dadin estaldura % 35era ere ez da iristen.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
2.1. Teknika linguistikoak | --> | Teknika linguistikoak erabiltzen dira batez ere terminoen hasierako selekzioa egiteko. Horretarako, eredu morfosintaktikoak erabili ohi direnez gero, komenigarria da testua analizaturik edukitzea edo gutxienez etiketatua. Tresna linguistikoen kalitateak baldintzatuko ditu, hein handi batean behintzat, tresnaren emaitzak. Hala ere, proiektu batzuetan ez da analisi morfologikorik edo sintaktikorik egiten (Su et al., 96).
Analisi morfologikoarekin eta desanbiguazioarekin lotuta dago lematizazioa. Flexio konplexuko hizkuntzetan hitz-forma bakarrik tratatzeak emaitza kaxkarrak ekarriko ditu eta lematizazioa ezinbestekoa izango da. Ezagumendu linguistikoa funtsezkoa da terminoen normalizazioan ere; termino batzuk beste luzeago batzuen baitan egon daitezkeenez, haien artean diskriminatu egin behar baita.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
2.2 .Teknika estatistikoak | --> | Eredu linguistikoari jarraitzen dioten balizko terminoak murrizteko erabili ohi dira metodo estatistikoak proiektu gehienetan. Aplikatutako metodoak asko aldatzen dira proiektuaren arabera: sinpleena izango litzateke maiztasun absolutu minimo bat eskatzea (Justeson & Katz, 95), baina orokorrean formula probabilistiko anitz konbinatzen dira.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
2.3. Emaitzak | --> | Lortzen diren emaitzak ez dira oraindik beharko liratekeenak erauzketa zeharo automatikoa egiteko. Oreka bilatu behar da estaldura (recall) eta doitasunaren artean (precision). Oreka horretan estaldurari lehentasuna ematen zaio atzetik terminologia murrizteko pertsona bat badago. % 95 inguruko estaldura lortzeko doitasuna % 50-era jaitsi ohi da, eta doitasuna % 85 ingurukoa izan dadin estaldura % 35era ere ez da iristen.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
3. Euskararako aplikazioa | --> | IXA taldearen asmoa da euskararako mota honetako tresna bat garatzea. Horretarako analizatzaile morfologikoa jadanik prest dago (Alegria et al., 96), lematizatzaile/etiketatzaile bat bukatzear dago (Aduriz et al., 96) eta azaleko sintaxiari ere ekin diogu.
Tresna horiek prest dauden bitartean termino teknikoen modelizazioari ekin behar diogu, hau da murriztu behar ditugu termino teknikoen ezaugarriak. Horretarako dauden hiztegi teknikoetan oinarritu, eta teknika estatistikoak erabiliz, eredu nagusiak lortu behar dira. Emaitzarik ez badugu ere, eredua izen-sintagmarena baino zabalagoa izango dela susmatzen dugu. Beste aldetik, termino teknikoak hautatzerakoan barneko deklinabidekasua erabakigarria izan daiteke.
| preparation | N-S | TERM31_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Automated Chinese terminology builder | --> | An increase in terminology has been an indicator of rapid development in breadth and depth in any hot field (especially in science and technology disciplines). As a result, any lively discipline is bombarded with problems in standardization of terminology. It is important to make sure the terms coined are systematically created, non-ambiguous in meaning and usage and consistent with other related terms in the same domain. However, for any major language where uniformity is not a norm (e.g. Chinese as used in mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong), to unify the terms used within a discipline depends on the existence of a term bank in an organization where provision of guidance in usage and collection and maintenance of new terms should be its routine duties. The theme of this paper is study how to facilitate automated coinage of terminology and make it an integral part of a term bank existing on the Internet. The terminology coiner will make use of databases such as corpora of definitions of existing terminology, syntactic rule base, lexicons (technical and general), morpheme database (Yuan et al., 1994), Chinese word formation rules (Lu et al. 1977). It will consist of a parser, a syllable-based transformer (for transliteration purposes) and a coiner. The basic idea is to follow Alshawi?s idea in their LDOCE experience and work with English definitions of terms. Key words are extracted from parsing such definitions so that literal translation of English key words into Chinese can be achieved. Then the Chinese key word translations are processed in the coiner making use of Chinese morpheme database and Chinese word formation rules. The output will be alternative translations for human experts to choose from.
| preparation | N-S | TERM32_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Txinerarako terminologia-eraikitzaile automatizatua | --> | Terminologia berria izan da edozein arlotako garapen azkarraren adierazlea, batez ere zientzien kasuan. Horren ondorioz, edozein diziplina bizik arazo ugari izaten ditu terminologia normalizatzean. Asmatzen diren terminoak sistematikotasunez sortu behar dira, esanahiari eta erabilerari dagokionean ezin dira anbiguoak izan, arlo bereko pareko beste termino batzuekin koherenteak izan behar dute. Hori guztia garrantzitsua da eta horrela egiten dela ziurtatu behar da. Hala ere, hizkuntza handi batek ez badauka berdintasunik (adibidez, kontinenteko Txinan, Taiwanen eta Hong Kongen erabiltzen den txinerak), diziplina batean erabiltzen diren terminoak termino-banku baten bidez bateratu behar dira. Termino-banku hori termino berriak erabiltzeko, biltzeko eta gordetzeko irizpideak ematen dituen erakunde batean egon beharko luke. Komunikazio honen gaia izango da zelan jarri martxan terminoen asmatzaile automatizatu bat eta termino-banku baten zati osagai bilakatu. Asmatzaile horrek datu-baseak erabiliko ditu, adibidez, dauden terminoen definizioen corpusak, arau sintaktikoen oinarria, lexikoiak (teknikoak eta orokorrak), morfemen datu-baseak (Yuan et al., eskuizkribua), txinerako hitz-eraketarako arauak (Lu 1975). Osagaiak hauek izango dira: egitura-aztertzaile bat, oinarritzat silabak hartzen dituen eraldatzaile bat (letraldaketa egiteko) eta asmatzaile bat. LDOCE esperientzian Alshawi-k erabilitako kontzeptuari jarraitzea eta hitzen ingelesezko definizioekin lan egitea da oinarrizko ideia. Definizio horien egitura-azterketatik gakohitzak ateratzen dira, txinerara hitzez-hitzezko itzulpena egin ahal izateko. Gero, txinerazko gako-hitzen itzulpenak asmatzailean prozesatzen dira, txinerazko morfemen datu-baseak eta txinerazko hitz-eraketarako arauak erabiliz. Ondorioa itzulpen alternatiboak izango dira, gizaki adituek aukera dezaten.
| preparation | N-S | TERM32_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Argument relationships / field relationships: the search for Basque equivalents to
referential adjectives | --> | The problems posed for Basque translators by referential adjectives in texts of all types are well known. It has often been shown that to find the equivalents in Basque of referential adjectives in neighbouring languages various different paths must be followed (Ensunza, 1989; Loinaz, 1995), though to a certain extent the choice of the resources to be used is usually left to the good judgement, intuition and aesthetic sense of the writer/translator.
Referential adjectives always derive from a noun, but often origins and referential nature are mixed and adjectives which are completely predicative are thrown into the same bag as adjectives which are without doubt completely referential. In English Levi clearly expressed in 1978 the need to distinguish between two types of adjectives deriving from nouns, whose semantic and syntactic characteristics were different: "nominal nonpredicating adjectives" and "denominal adjectives". The latter are derived by means of suffixes such as -y, -ful and -ous, so that they take not only their grammatical category but also their predicative nature from their suffixes. On the other hand "nominal nonpredicating adjectives" are by category adjectives but behave similarly to nouns: linguistic difficulties / language difficulties. In the case of Spanish, as defended by Bosque in 1989, there are some generative suffixes which are unlikely to derive to referential adjectives (-esco, -il, -oso, -ino) and others which frequently derive to such adjectives (-al, -ar, -ario, -ico). In French, too, different suffixes are generally used to create referential and predicative adjectives, giving rise to pairs such as familial-familier and infantil-infantin.
In any event, two types can be distinguished in adjectives which are truly referential due to their relationship with the noun which they modify (Bosque, 1989; 1992; Bosque & Picallo, 1994): on the one hand are those which modify nouns denoting activities or consequences, where the referential adjective is frequently the argument of the noun.
Examples would be decisi?n presidencial ("presidential decision"), which must mean what is decided by the President, and extracci?n dental ("tooth extraction"), denoting the action of removing a tooth or molar. It is obvious that in the latter case the adjective dental is equivalent to the direct object of the verb extraer ("to extract"). In Basque compound nouns are prime candidates for this (hortz-ateratzea). However, we are unlikely to translate decisi?n presidencial as presidente-erabaki: we would almost certainly opt for presidentearen erabaki. Why is there this difference between the "subject nature" of the modifier of compound nouns and the "defined nature" of this element?
On the other hand, when referential adjectives modify the noun (an object with no argumental structure) the relationship between the noun and the adjective cannot be predicted: in this case we find a relationship of field or of ownership, which is shown by dictionary compilers by the periphrasis -ri dagokion. For instance hilo dental ("dental floss") is the floss used to clean teeth, and in Basque hortzetako haria would probably be preferred to hotz-haria. Finally, the group known in phonetics as a consonante dental would be kontsonante horzkaria and not hortz-kontsonante.
In short, the classification of the relationships which may exist between nouns and their modifiers is universal: on the one hand there are modifiers with a predicative nature and on the other those with a referential nature. Within this last group are modifiers of noun arguments and modifiers with an ownership or field relationship with nouns.
These relationships can be expressed through different grammatical categories in one language or another: through adjectives, prepositional or postpositional phrases, compound nouns, etc. For instance the adjective marginal in English is used in a referential fashion in marginal note and in a predicative one in marginal case. In Spanish, however, the difference between these referential and predicative uses is made by using nota al margen and caso marginal. In Basque, the Elhuyar dictionary gives albo-ohar or marjinako ohar for the referential use, but examples of the bazterreko kasu type for the predicative use. In any event many languages have adjectives which cover all three areas described. This can be illustrated with an example from Levi: musical voice, musical criticism, musical comedy.
In this study we shall attempt to determine the resources through which each of these universal relationships can be expressed in Basque and where the limits of each resource lie (at least at the present). What types of adjective can be created through adjective generating suffixes? Although many referential adjectives can be expressed in Basque through compound words, this method clearly does not offer forms for all such adjectives. Where then is the limit? Where is the key? Is it in predicative/non predicative nature, in argumental, field or possessive relationships or is it elsewhere? Does definite/indefinite, animate/inanimate, countable/uncountable nature have any influence? Is impossibility influenced by whether the noun modified is an action, a consequence or an object? Under what conditions could we be forced to use loans to translate referential adjectives from other languages into Basque? When do we use noun complements in Basque to replace adjectives in other languages?
In summary, the aim of this study is to achieve a systematisation which can help us find the equivalent in Basque to referential adjectives in neighbouring languages in a fairly automatic way.
| preparation | N-S | TERM34_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Argumentu-harremana / eremu-harremana: izenondo erreferentzialen euskal ordainen bila | --> | Ezaguna da izenondo erreferentzialek sekulako arazoak sortzen dizkietela edozein testu euskaratu behar duten itzultzaileei. Askotan jarri da agerian hainbat bide erabili behar direla inguruko hizkuntzen izenondo erreferentzialen euskal ordainak lortzeko (Ensunza, 1989; Loinaz, 1995) baina edonola, idazle/itzultzailearen zuhurtasunaren, intuizio onaren edota estetika-zentzuaren azpian uzten da neurri handian kasu bakoitzean erabili behar den baliabidearen aukeraketa.
Izenondo erreferentzialak izenetatik eratorritakoak izaten dira beti baina askotan, jatorria eta izaera erreferentziala nahasi eta zaku berean sartzen dira erabat predikatiboak diren izenondoak, zalantzarik gabe erreferentzial hutsak diren izenondoekin. Ingeleserako Levi-k (1978) garbi utzi du izenetik eratorriak diren baina ezaugarri semantiko eta sintaktiko desberdinak dituzten bi izenondo-mota bereizteko beharra: 'nominal nonpredicating adjectives' eta 'denominal adjectives'; azkenekoak -y, -fill eta -ous bezalako atzizkien bidez eratorritakoak dira eta haien gramatika-kategoria ezezik, haien predikatuizaera ere jasoko lukete atzizkitik. 'Nominal nonpredicating adjectives' sailean sartuko liratekeenak berriz, kategoriaz izenondoak izanik ere, izenen antzeko jokaera sintaktikoa izango lukete: linguistic difficulties / language difficulties. Gaztelaniaren kasuan Bosque-k (1989) defenditu duen bezala, badira izenondo erreferentzialak nekez ematen dituzten atzizki izenondo-sortzaileak (-esco, -oso, -ino) eta izenondo erreferentzialak eman ohi dituztenak (-al, -ar, -ario, -ico). Frantsesez ere atzizki desberdinak erabili ohi dira izenondo erreferentzialak eta predikatiboak sortzeko eta ondorioz, familial-familier eta infantilinfantin bezalako bikoteak dituzte. Edonola, benetan erreferentzialak diren izenondoen artean ere, modifikatzen duten izenarekin duten harremanagatik (Bosque, 1989; 1992; Bosque eta Picallo, 1994), bi mota bereiz daitezke: alde batetik modifikatzen duten izena ekintza- edo ondorio-izena denean, askotan gertatzen da izenondo erreferentziala izen horren argumentua izatea. Adibidez, decisión presidencial ezinbestean izango da presidenteak erabakitakoa eta extracción dental hortz edo hagin baten ateratzearen ekintza. Bistan da azken kasuan dental izenondoa extraer aditzaren osagarri zuzenaren parekoa dela eta euskaraz izen elkartu sintetikoak hautagai bikainak direla hauetarako (hortz-ateratzea). decisión presidencial ostera, nekez egingo dugu presidente-erabaki eta presidentearen erabaki aukeratuko dugu ia zalantzarik gabe. Zein da desberdintasun honen arrazoia, izen elkartuaren mugatzailearen 'subjektutasuna' ala elementu horren 'mugatutasuna'?
Bestetik, izenondo erreferentzialek modifikatzen dutena (argurmentu-egiturarik gabeko objektu-)izena denean, izenaren eta izenondoaren arteko harremana ezin aurresan daiteke; hiztegigileek -ri dagokion perifrasiaren bidez definitzen duten esparru-harremana edo jabego-harremana dugu orduan. Adibidez, hilo dental hortzak garbitzeko erabiltzen den haria da eta euskaraz, hortzetako haria nahiago genuke seguruenik hortz-haria baino. Azkenik, fonetikaren esparruan erabiltzen den consonante dental multzorako kontsonante horzkaria erabiltzen da eta ez hortz-kontsonante.
Laburbilduz, unibertsala da izenen eta haien modifikatzaileen artean egon daitezkeen harremanen sailkapena: predikatu-izaera duten modifikatzaileak alde batetik eta izaera erreferentziala duten modifikatzaileak bestetik. Gainera, azken multzo honen barruan izenaren argumentuak diren modifikatzaileak eta izenarekin jabego- edo eremu-harremana dutenak daude.
Harreman horiek gramatika-kategoria desberdinen bidez adieraz daitezke hizkuntza batean eta beste batean: izenondoen bidez, preposizio- edo posposizio-sintagmen bidez, izen elkartuen bidez e.a. Esate baterako, ingeleseko marginal adjektiboak erabilera erreferentziala eta predikatiboa ditu hurrenez hurren marginal note eta marginal case multzoetan; gaztelaniaz berriz, erabilera erreferentziala eta predikatiboa bereizten dituzte, nota al margen eta caso marginal eginez. Euskararako, 'Elhuyar hiztegian' albo-ohar edo marjinako ohar aurki daiteke erabilera erreferentzialerako baina bazterreko kasu bezalako adibideak erabilera predikatiborako. Edonola, zenbait hizkuntzatan, deskribaturiko hiru esparruak estaltzen dituzten izenondoak daude; Levi-ren adibideak gogoraraziko ditugu horretarako: musical voice, musical criticism, musical comedy.
Lan honetan, harreman unibertsal horietako bakoitza euskaraz zein baliabideren bidez adieraz daitekeen eta baliabide bakoitzaren mugak (gaur egun behintzat) non egon daitezkeen finkatzen saiatuko gara: Euskal atzizki izenondo-sortzaileen bidez, zein motatako izenondoak sor daitezke? Zenbait izenondo erreferentzial izen elkartuen bidez euskara badaitezke ere, garbi dago bide honek ez dituela izenondo erreferentzial guztien ordainak eskaintzen. Non dago muga? Predikatu-/ez-predikatu izaeran, argumentu-/eremu- /jabego-harremanean edo beste nonbait al datza gakoa? Izenondoaren jatorrian dagoen izenaren mugatu/mugagabe, bizidun/bizigabe, zenbakarri/zenbakaitza bezalako tasunek ba al dute nolabaiteko eraginik? Modifikatua den izena ekintza-, ondorio- edo objektu-izena izateak ba al du eraginik ezintasun horretan? Zein dira erdal izenondo erreferentzial bat ezinbestean mailegatu behar izatera eraman gaitzaketen baldintzak? Noiz erabili ohi ditugu euskal izenlagunak erdal izenondoak ordezkatzeko?
Lanaren helburua laburki esanda, inguruko hizkuntzen izenondo erreferentzialak euskaratzeko beharrean gaudenean modu automatiko samarrean egiten lagunduko ligukeen sistematizazioa lortzea da.
| preparation | N-S | TERM34_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Neology against the clock: the Internet | --> | This paper is intended to look at the challenges faced by neology in terminology at the present time. I will do this by discussing various points which influence neology in the field of the Internet.
Terms referring to the Internet are coined and spread at such speed and to such an extent that they have turned into a race against the clock in different languages. The formation of new terms goes on at a dizzy speed, parallel to technological advances and innovations in the field of computer science and telecommunications in general. This is common in all scientific and technological progress, and therefore characteristic of neology in terminology, but the specific nature of this area confers particular features on neology which must be taken into account.
First of all the channel through which Internet terms are made known is the net itself. This means that they not only spread rapidly (information on the internet can be accessed almost immediately) but also reach vast areas (all over the world). Furthermore, terms can be compiled, discussed and assessed anywhere: many Web sites can be found which give glossaries of Internet terms or propose names and even invite users to vote on them. This leads us to the fundamental point: Internet terminology extends beyond the bounds of its specialist field (which by definition is part of the lexicon of science and technology) and breaks into general language. It is used both by a wide variety of net users (from any or no specialist fields) and by people who read the press or follow the media.
What type of terminology is being created? What lexical creation systems predominate? There is a common denominator in all languages: terms are generated in English and come in as loanwords. How do the receiving languages respond to this? How do they deal with Internet terminology? Are all those words which seem to be terms actually terms? Do they meet actual needs for names or do sensationalist, ephemeral terms abound?
| preparation | N-S | TERM38_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Neologia, erlojupeko lasterketan: Internet | --> | Egungo errealitatean terminologia-neologiak aurrez aurre dituen erronkei buruz hausnartzea da komunikazio honen asmoa. Horretarako, bada, Interneten neologia sortzeko eragina duten zenbait puntu landuko ditugu.
Interneti buruzko terminoak azkar sortu eta zabaltzen dira, eta hedapen handia lortzen dute, hizkuntza guztiak erlojupeko bene-benetako lasterketa batean bailebiltzan. Egia da, bai, termino berrien sorkuntza abiadura ikaragarrian dabil, informatikako teknologia eta, orokorrean, telekomunikazioetako teknologia aurreratu eta eraberritzen den martxa berean. Ezaugarri hori aurrerakuntza zientifiko eta teknikoan berdin agertzen bada ere, eta, beraz, terminologiako neologiaren ezaugarri bada, landutako arloa berezia denez, berari dagokion neologiari berezitasun batzuk ezartzen dizkio, eta kontuan hartzekoak dira.
Alde batetik, Interneteko terminoak ezagutarazteko erabiltzen den kateak, beraz, sareak berak, terminologia azkar zabaltzeaz gain —Interneteko informazioa (ia) bat-batean lortzen da—, hedapen luze-zabala du oso, munduko edozein bazterrera heltzen baita. Are gehiago, edozein tokitatik biltzen dira terminoak, baita komentatu eta haztatu ere; adibidez, Interneti buruzko terminoen glosarioak zabaltzen dira Web askotan, eta izendegietarako proposamenak egin ere bai, eta erabiltzaileek botoa eman ahal izaten diete. Ondorioz, funts funtsezko arazo baten aurrean aurkitzen gara: espezialitateko eremuaren mugak gainditzen dituela Interneteko terminologiak (espezialitatera mugatzen da, definizioz, lexiko zientifiko eta teknikoa), eta erabilera orokorreko hizkeran sartzen dela indartsu; horrela, bai sarearen erabiltzaile heterogeneoek (edozein espezialitatekoek zein espezialitaterik gabekoek), bai prentsa irakurri edo komunikabideei arreta jartzen dietenek, guztiok erabiltzen dute.
Zelako terminologia sortzen ari da? Zeintzuk dira lexikoaren sorkuntzan gailentzen ari diren sistemak? Ezaugarri berdin eta komun bat daukate hizkuntza guztiek: terminoak ingelesez sortzen dira, eta mailegu moduan sartzen dira beste hizkuntzetan. Nola erantzuten dute hizkuntza hartzaileek? Nola lantzen dute Interneteko terminologia? Termino al dira termino itxurako guztiak? Izendatzeko benetako premiei erantzuten al diete? Edo, aldiz, lexikoaren sorkuntzan asko eta asko ez ote dira sentsazionalismoan erori eta azkar galduko direnak?
| preparation | N-S | TERM38_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Ondorioz, funts funtsezko arazo baten aurrean aurkitzen gara: | --> | espezialitateko eremuaren mugak gainditzen dituela Interneteko terminologiak (espezialitatera mugatzen da, definizioz, lexiko zientifiko eta teknikoa), eta erabilera orokorreko hizkeran sartzen dela indartsu;
| preparation | N-S | TERM38_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Lanbide-Heziketarako baliabide terminologikoak ematea gutxi erabiltzen eta irakasten diren hizkuntzetan: VOCALL proiektua | --> | VOCALL proiektua Europako Batzordeak sortu du Leonardo programaren babesean. Proiektuaren helburua lanbide-heziketako ikasleentzako hizkuntza ikasteko baliabide batzuk sortzea da, informatika, bulego-lan eta elektronikaren esparruetan eta, batez ere, gutxi erabiltzen eta irakasten diren hizkuntzetara zuzenduta, kasu honetan, irlandera, portugesa eta grekoa.
Gutxi erabili eta irakasten diren hizkuntzen kasuan, lexiko-banku eta terminologi bankuen moduko idatzizko baliabideak ez dira behar bezala garatu ikasleentzako laguntzatresna izan daitezkeen aldetik. Eta hori gogoan hartuta, eta multimedia bidezko CALL izeneko halako egitura baten barruan, esparru horietako bitako termino teknikoekin glosario eleanitzak egin ditugu, partaideen hizkuntzetan. Tresna hori, gaur egun oraindik prototipoa dena, proiektuko hizkuntza guztietarako berbera izango da, eta hizkuntza nork bere kontura ikasteko tresna gisa merkaturatuko dugu, bai atzerriko hizkuntza (2H) ikasi behar dutenentzat, bai lehen hizkuntza (1H) ikasteko arazoak dituztenentzat ere, lanbide-heziketan eta aipatutako esparruetan, beti ere.
Artikulu honetan, terminologia eleanitza sortzeko metodologia bat proposatuko dugu, orain arte izan ditugun esperientzietan oinarrituta; baina tresnaren beste alderdi batzuk ere azalduko ditugu.
| preparation | N-S | TERM39_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Contributions of the Thesaurus of the argentinian legal IT system to legal terminology | --> | The application of information technology to the field of law is referred to as "legal IT". Documentary legal IT is based on legal databases.
These databases contain basically three types of documents, corresponding to the three main sources of law: jurisprudence, legislation and the doctrine of authors.
There are public and private databases. The only public database in our country is the SISTEMA ARGENTINO DE INFORMATICA JURIDICA ("Argentinian Legal IT System"), which depends on the national Justice Ministry. At present this database has over 510.000 documents.
In this brief study we shall look in particular at a linguistic tool available to users of the system which enables them to recover information by topics: the Legal Thesaurus
| preparation | N-S | TERM40_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Informatika juridikoko sistema argentinarreko Thesaurusetik terminologia juridikora ekarpenak | --> | Informatika zuzenbidearen esparrura aplikatzean, informatika juridikoaz hitz egiten da. Agirietako informatika juridikoa datu-base juridikoen inguruan dago oinarrituta.
Datu-base horietan hiru agiri-mota aurkitzen dira batez ere, zuzenbidearen hiru iturri nagusien arabera, hain zuzen: jurisprudentzia, legegintza eta autoreen doktrina.
Datu-base batzuk publikoak eta beste batzuk pribatuak dira. Gure herrialdean, datubase publiko bakarra INFORMATIKA JURIDIKOKO SISTEMA ARGENTINARRA da, Estatuko Justizi Ministerioaren mende dagoena. Gaur egun, base horrek 510.000 agiri baino gehiago ditu.
Lantxo honetan, sistemaren erabiltzaileak eskura duen baliabide linguistiko baten gainean jardungo dugu batez ere: thesaurus juridikoa, informazioa gaika berreskuratzeko aukera ematen duena.
| preparation | N-S | TERM40_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Comparison of methods of derivation from prefixes and suffixes in Basque, Catalan and Spanish: lexicographic conclusions | --> | The purpose of this paper is to set forth some of the results of research by working groups at the above universities over the last three years. This study is part of the project titled Configuración morfológica y estructura argumental: léxico y diccionario, subsidised by the Spanish Education Ministry and based on a three-viewpoint approach. Firstly, derivation processes based on prefixes and suffixes have been analysed in all three languages, with special emphasis on those cases in which the basis for derivation is a verb and those in which the derivative is a verb. Two substantial differences have been found: one is between prefixes and suffixes within Basque and the other is between Basque derivatives and those of romance origin. Secondly, a theoretical exposition of these two differences has been sought and found. Thirdly, we have attempted to consolidate the contribution of this theoretical exposition to the field of lexicography. This paper aims to bring together the theoretical exposition and our lexicographic conclusions.
The differences which must be dealt with in any theoretical exposition are: a) the scarcity of prefixes in Basque as compared to the abundance of suffixes; and b) the fact that this imbalance is not shared by the romance languages. Our hypothesis is that a syntactic characteristic of Basque and the romance languages is extrapolated to their morphology, so that in Basque derivations the core of the structure is on the right, while in the romance languages it is on the left. To make this easier to understand, remember that prefixes in romance languages may act in two ways: as modifiers of a core, located on the left (refer/rehacer, desfer/deshacer, predir/predecir) or as the core, coming first with a complement on their right (eslomar-se/deslomarse, desfullar/deshojar). In the former case the prefix provides specificity for the core (the derivative predecir is a more specific version of the core decir, but to say before is, after all, still to say). In the latter case, the core is made up of the prefix itself, and the core is the basis of the derivation, so that prehistoria is not a more specific version of the basic complement historia but something different altogether. It can be seen in two ways that Basque has only the first form. First of all, it has the prefix des-, which has both possibilities, as in the case of the romance languages. In the derivative desegin it acts as a modifier of the basic core egin (the antonym of do), but when we seek an example of the prefix/core complement type (deshojar), desostatu, we find that it is not properly formed. Observe that the prefixes ber-/bir ''re' and ez- 'in-/des-'also act in the same way.
As regards lexicographic conclusions, the first point which must be stressed in this paper is the difficulty found in forming words such as desostatu. Secondly, we must make it clear that the prefix-core/base-complement of the romance languages and English has a corresponding feature in Basque in base-complement/suffix-core. This is an important contribution to modern lexicography. Beyond formations of the des1 hoja2 r ??hosto2 gabe1 tu type we must bear in mind the option hostoak2 galdu/kendu1 but especially the forms pozoin-du (en-venenar), bigun-du (re-blancederse), lerro-ka-tu (a-linear), irin-ez-ta-tu (enharinar), lur-rera-tu (a-terrizar), which should be standardised as the common correspondents of the prefixes a-, des-, en-, es-, in- and re- so that more and better resources are made available.
| preparation | N-S | TERM50_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
This paper aims to bring together the theoretical exposition and our lexicographic conclusions. | --> | The differences which must be dealt with in any theoretical exposition are: a) the scarcity of prefixes in Basque as compared to the abundance of suffixes; and b) the fact that this imbalance is not shared by the romance languages. Our hypothesis is that a syntactic characteristic of Basque and the romance languages is extrapolated to their morphology, so that in Basque derivations the core of the structure is on the right, while in the romance languages it is on the left. To make this easier to understand, remember that prefixes in romance languages may act in two ways: as modifiers of a core, located on the left (refer/rehacer, desfer/deshacer, predir/predecir) or as the core, coming first with a complement on their right (eslomar-se/deslomarse, desfullar/deshojar). In the former case the prefix provides specificity for the core (the derivative predecir is a more specific version of the core decir, but to say before is, after all, still to say). In the latter case, the core is made up of the prefix itself, and the core is the basis of the derivation, so that prehistoria is not a more specific version of the basic complement historia but something different altogether. It can be seen in two ways that Basque has only the first form. First of all, it has the prefix des-, which has both possibilities, as in the case of the romance languages. In the derivative desegin it acts as a modifier of the basic core egin (the antonym of do), but when we seek an example of the prefix/core complement type (deshojar), desostatu, we find that it is not properly formed. Observe that the prefixes ber-/bir ''re' and ez- 'in-/des-'also act in the same way.
As regards lexicographic conclusions, the first point which must be stressed in this paper is the difficulty found in forming words such as desostatu. Secondly, we must make it clear that the prefix-core/base-complement of the romance languages and English has a corresponding feature in Basque in base-complement/suffix-core. This is an important contribution to modern lexicography. Beyond formations of the des1 hoja2 r ??hosto2 gabe1 tu type we must bear in mind the option hostoak2 galdu/kendu1 but especially the forms pozoin-du (en-venenar), bigun-du (re-blancederse), lerro-ka-tu (a-linear), irin-ez-ta-tu (enharinar), lur-rera-tu (a-terrizar), which should be standardised as the common correspondents of the prefixes a-, des-, en-, es-, in- and re- so that more and better resources are made available.
| preparation | N-S | TERM50_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Firstly, derivation processes based on prefixes and suffixes have been analysed in all three languages, with special emphasis on those cases in which the basis for derivation is a verb and those in which the derivative is a verb. Two substantial differences have been found: one is between prefixes and suffixes within Basque and the other is between Basque derivatives and those of romance origin. Secondly, a theoretical exposition of these two differences has been sought and found. Thirdly, we have attempted to consolidate the contribution of this theoretical exposition to the field of lexicography. | --> | This paper aims to bring together the theoretical exposition and our lexicographic conclusions.
The differences which must be dealt with in any theoretical exposition are: a) the scarcity of prefixes in Basque as compared to the abundance of suffixes; and b) the fact that this imbalance is not shared by the romance languages. Our hypothesis is that a syntactic characteristic of Basque and the romance languages is extrapolated to their morphology, so that in Basque derivations the core of the structure is on the right, while in the romance languages it is on the left. To make this easier to understand, remember that prefixes in romance languages may act in two ways: as modifiers of a core, located on the left (refer/rehacer, desfer/deshacer, predir/predecir) or as the core, coming first with a complement on their right (eslomar-se/deslomarse, desfullar/deshojar). In the former case the prefix provides specificity for the core (the derivative predecir is a more specific version of the core decir, but to say before is, after all, still to say). In the latter case, the core is made up of the prefix itself, and the core is the basis of the derivation, so that prehistoria is not a more specific version of the basic complement historia but something different altogether. It can be seen in two ways that Basque has only the first form. First of all, it has the prefix des-, which has both possibilities, as in the case of the romance languages. In the derivative desegin it acts as a modifier of the basic core egin (the antonym of do), but when we seek an example of the prefix/core complement type (deshojar), desostatu, we find that it is not properly formed. Observe that the prefixes ber-/bir ''re' and ez- 'in-/des-'also act in the same way.
As regards lexicographic conclusions, the first point which must be stressed in this paper is the difficulty found in forming words such as desostatu. Secondly, we must make it clear that the prefix-core/base-complement of the romance languages and English has a corresponding feature in Basque in base-complement/suffix-core. This is an important contribution to modern lexicography. Beyond formations of the des1 hoja2 r ??hosto2 gabe1 tu type we must bear in mind the option hostoak2 galdu/kendu1 but especially the forms pozoin-du (en-venenar), bigun-du (re-blancederse), lerro-ka-tu (a-linear), irin-ez-ta-tu (enharinar), lur-rera-tu (a-terrizar), which should be standardised as the common correspondents of the prefixes a-, des-, en-, es-, in- and re- so that more and better resources are made available.
| preparation | N-S | TERM50_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
The purpose of this paper is to set forth some of the results of research by working groups at the above universities over the last three years. This study is part of the project titled Configuración morfológica y estructura argumental: léxico y diccionario, subsidised by the Spanish Education Ministry and based on a three-viewpoint approach. | --> | Firstly, derivation processes based on prefixes and suffixes have been analysed in all three languages, with special emphasis on those cases in which the basis for derivation is a verb and those in which the derivative is a verb. Two substantial differences have been found: one is between prefixes and suffixes within Basque and the other is between Basque derivatives and those of romance origin. Secondly, a theoretical exposition of these two differences has been sought and found. Thirdly, we have attempted to consolidate the contribution of this theoretical exposition to the field of lexicography. This paper aims to bring together the theoretical exposition and our lexicographic conclusions.
The differences which must be dealt with in any theoretical exposition are: a) the scarcity of prefixes in Basque as compared to the abundance of suffixes; and b) the fact that this imbalance is not shared by the romance languages. Our hypothesis is that a syntactic characteristic of Basque and the romance languages is extrapolated to their morphology, so that in Basque derivations the core of the structure is on the right, while in the romance languages it is on the left. To make this easier to understand, remember that prefixes in romance languages may act in two ways: as modifiers of a core, located on the left (refer/rehacer, desfer/deshacer, predir/predecir) or as the core, coming first with a complement on their right (eslomar-se/deslomarse, desfullar/deshojar). In the former case the prefix provides specificity for the core (the derivative predecir is a more specific version of the core decir, but to say before is, after all, still to say). In the latter case, the core is made up of the prefix itself, and the core is the basis of the derivation, so that prehistoria is not a more specific version of the basic complement historia but something different altogether. It can be seen in two ways that Basque has only the first form. First of all, it has the prefix des-, which has both possibilities, as in the case of the romance languages. In the derivative desegin it acts as a modifier of the basic core egin (the antonym of do), but when we seek an example of the prefix/core complement type (deshojar), desostatu, we find that it is not properly formed. Observe that the prefixes ber-/bir ''re' and ez- 'in-/des-'also act in the same way.
As regards lexicographic conclusions, the first point which must be stressed in this paper is the difficulty found in forming words such as desostatu. Secondly, we must make it clear that the prefix-core/base-complement of the romance languages and English has a corresponding feature in Basque in base-complement/suffix-core. This is an important contribution to modern lexicography. Beyond formations of the des1 hoja2 r ??hosto2 gabe1 tu type we must bear in mind the option hostoak2 galdu/kendu1 but especially the forms pozoin-du (en-venenar), bigun-du (re-blancederse), lerro-ka-tu (a-linear), irin-ez-ta-tu (enharinar), lur-rera-tu (a-terrizar), which should be standardised as the common correspondents of the prefixes a-, des-, en-, es-, in- and re- so that more and better resources are made available.
| preparation | N-S | TERM50_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Euskarak, katalanak eta gaztelaniak atzizki eta aurrizkien bidez gauzatzen dituzten eratorpen-bideen arteko erkaketa: ondorio lexikografikoak | --> | Hitzaldi honek azken hiru urteotan lau unibertsitate hauen taldeek egindako ikerkuntzaren ondorioetako batzuk azaltzeko helburua izango luke. Lan hori, Madrilgo Hezkuntza Ministeritzak diruz babesturiko Configuración morfológica y estructura argumental: léxico y diccionario izeneko proiektuaren barruan egin da, ikuspuntu hirukoitz baten barruan. Lehenik, atzizki eta aurrizkien bidezko eratorpen-prozesuak aztertu dira hiru hizkuntzetan, bereziki eratorpen-oinarri modura aditza dutenak edo eratorri modura aditza ematen dutenak arakatuz; ondorioz, bi desberdintasun nagusi aurkitu dira: euskararen barruan atzizki eta aurrizkien bidezko eratorpenen arteko, eta euskal eratorrien eta eratorri erromanikoen artekoa. Bigarrenik, bi desberdintasun horietarako azalpen teoriko bat bilatu eta aurkitu da. Hirugarrenik, azalpen teoriko horrek lexikogintzan eman dezakeen laguntza finkatzen saiatu gara. Komunikazio honek, azalpen teorikoa eta ondorio lexikografikoak laburbilduko lituzke batez ere.
Edozein azalpen teorikok argitu behar dituen bi desberdintasunak, zehazkiago, hauexek dira: a) euskarak atzizki ugari baditu ere, oso aurrizki gutxi dauka, eta b) desoreka hori ez dago inola ere hizkuntza erromanikoetan. Gure hipotesiak, euskararen eta hizkuntza erromanikoen ezaugarri sintaktiko bat morfologiaraino estrapolatuko du: eratorpenean ere euskarak egituraren burua edo gunean eskuinaldean jartzen du, eta hizkuntza erromanikoek ezkerraldean. Hau hobeto azaltzeko, kontutan hartu behar da hizkuntza erromanikoen aurrizkiek bi eratara jokatzen dutela: buru baten modifikatzaile modura jokatzen dutenak, buru horren ezkerraldean ager daitezke (refer / rehacer, desfer / deshacer, predir / predecir), eta buru modura jokatzen dutenak ere, lehenengo gunean kokatzen dira, osagarria eskuinaldean hartzen baitute (eslomar-se / desplomarse, desfullar / deshojar). Lehenengo kasuan, aurrizkiak buruaren zehaztasun bat adierazten du (predecir eratorria, decir oinarriburuaren zehaztasun bat da: aurretik esan, baina esan, azken finean); bigarren kasuan, aurrizkia bera da burua, osagarria eratorpen-oinarria delarik; izan ere, Prehistoria ez da historia oinarri-osagarriaren zehaztasun bat, oinarria (historia) ez den bestelako gauza bat baizik). Euskarak bere aldetik, lehenengo eredua baino ez dauka eskuragarri, bi ikuspegitatik egiazta daitekeenaren arabera: Lehenik, erromantikoetan aurreko era bietara jokatzen duen des- atzizki mailegatuak, desegin eratorrian, egin oinarri-buruaren modifikatzaile modura jokatzen du aurrean kokatuz (egitearen alderantzizkoa), baina aurrizki-osagarria/oinarriburua eredua aurkitu nahi dugunean (deshojar), desostatu gaizki eginda dagoela beha daiteke nonbait; ber-/bir- 're-' eta ez- 'in-/des-' aurrizkiek ere, horrelaxe jokatzen dute.
Ondorio lexikografikoei begira, lehenik desostatu bezalakoak egiteko eragozpenak azpimarratuko genituzke hitzaldi honetan. Bigarrenik, agerian utziko genuke hizkuntza erromanikoen (eta ingelesen) aurrizki-burua/oinarri-osagarriaren euskal ordaina oinarriosagarria/ atzizki-burua dela zuzen-zuzenean. Honek laguntza paregabea emango du gaurko lexikogintzan: des1 hoja2 r ?hosto2 gabe1 tu bezalako saioetatik haruntzago, kontutan hartu beharko dugu hostoak2 galdu/kendu1 bezalako aukera, baina bereziki, pozoin-du 'envenenar', bigun-du 're-blandecerse', lerro-ka-tu 'a-linear', irin-ez-ta-tu 'en-harinar', lur-reratu 'a-terrizar' direlako "jauziak" estandartzat hartu beharko dira, a-, des-, en-, es-, in- edo re bezalako aurrizkien ordainak aurkitzerakoan bide emankorrak eriden nahi baditugu.
| preparation | N-S | TERM50_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Edozein azalpen teorikok argitu behar dituen bi desberdintasunak, zehazkiago, hauexek dira: | --> | a) euskarak atzizki ugari baditu ere, oso aurrizki gutxi dauka, eta b) desoreka hori ez dago inola ere hizkuntza erromanikoetan.
| preparation | N-S | TERM50_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
The problem of geographical terminology in toponymic standardisation | --> | The paper I wish to present at the International Congress on Terminology is based on the contents of a report commissioned by the Directorate for Studies and Information of the Linguistic Policy Department of the Basque Government. This report was presented at the first meeting of the Special Committee for Toponymics, dependent on the Advisory Board for the Basque language in Donostia-San Sebastián in November last.
The need to standardise geographical terms, especially toponymic terms, arose during work to standardise place names in the Basque Autonomous Community (BAC), which has been going on at the DEIKER Institute at the University of Deusto for the last ten years.
The lack of geographical standardisation in the BAC and Navarre can be seen in the anarchical way in which everyday geographical terms are used in maps, road signs, text books, the media, etc. Each user applies their own criteria to geographical terms, giving rise to confusion and inconsistencies.
The first UN conference on the standardisation of geographical names (held in Genoa in 1967) recommended the drawing up of glossaries of geographical terms.
Recommendation 19A of the conference recommended that a study be undertaken into the nature of the geographical features bearing names in a particular region, and the different meanings of the words used to name those features.
Before looking in detail at the different areas to be dealt with in the paper, we must define what a toponym is. A toponym or geographical name is a proper noun made up of a specific element and, usually, a common or generic element. The latter indicates the general nature of the geographical feature while the former specifically identifies the individual feature in question. Examples would be Peña de Anboto, Avenida Ramón y Cajal, RÃo Ibaizabal, Alto de la Horca, etc.
The above definition of a toponym reveals just how important geographical terms are, especially when it is realised that standard toponymic studies give two versions (Basque and Spanish) of each term. In general terms the generic element can be translated, while the specific one should be left unchanged. This would standardise the above terms in Basque as follows: Anbotoko atxa, Ramón y Cajal etorbidea (?), Ibaizabal, La Horca gaina (?).
However the following points require consideration:
1. We do not know the exact meaning of many generic elements: "alto" (given here in Basque as "gaina") could mean "mountain pass", "hill", "peak" or various other things.
2. "Standardised" geographical terms may be allocated arbitrarily. For instance in the district of Deusto we find avenida ("avenue") used for two thoroughfares which should not both be described thus: "Avenida Ramón y Cajal" is an ordinary street, while "Avenida Lehendakari Agirre" is a true avenue.
3. There is a lack of standardised geographical terminology. For instance the Spanish term avenida is translated into Basque variously as ibilbidea, etorbidea or pasealekua, depending on which Town Hall allocated the names. Likewise the Spanish term pico ("peak") may appear as gallur, haitzorrotza, haizpunta, mokorra, mokoa, punta, or tontorra depending on the author or research body involved (DEIKER, Elhuyar, Government of Navarra, Euskatzaindia, etc.).
After this initial presentation, the paper will continue along the following lines:
1. Analysis of the problem from the viewpoint of users of geographical terms.
2. Importance of and need for a standardisation of geographical terms as part of work to standardise toponyms. Reference will be made to the recommendations of the UN and of various specialists.
3. Summary of how geographical terms have been dealt with in toponymic standardisation work by the DEIKER institute at the University of Deusto.
4. Conclusions. Questions and answers
| preparation | N-S | TERM51_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
The paper I wish to present at the International Congress on Terminology is based on the contents of a report commissioned by the Directorate for Studies and Information of the Linguistic Policy Department of the Basque Government. This report was presented at the first meeting of the Special Committee for Toponymics, dependent on the Advisory Board for the Basque language in Donostia-San Sebastián in November last. | --> | The need to standardise geographical terms, especially toponymic terms, arose during work to standardise place names in the Basque Autonomous Community (BAC), which has been going on at the DEIKER Institute at the University of Deusto for the last ten years.
The lack of geographical standardisation in the BAC and Navarre can be seen in the anarchical way in which everyday geographical terms are used in maps, road signs, text books, the media, etc. Each user applies their own criteria to geographical terms, giving rise to confusion and inconsistencies.
The first UN conference on the standardisation of geographical names (held in Genoa in 1967) recommended the drawing up of glossaries of geographical terms.
Recommendation 19A of the conference recommended that a study be undertaken into the nature of the geographical features bearing names in a particular region, and the different meanings of the words used to name those features.
| preparation | N-S | TERM51_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
The paper I wish to present at the International Congress on Terminology is based on the contents of a report commissioned by the Directorate for Studies and Information of the Linguistic Policy Department of the Basque Government. This report was presented at the first meeting of the Special Committee for Toponymics, dependent on the Advisory Board for the Basque language in Donostia-San Sebastián in November last.
The need to standardise geographical terms, especially toponymic terms, arose during work to standardise place names in the Basque Autonomous Community (BAC), which has been going on at the DEIKER Institute at the University of Deusto for the last ten years.
The lack of geographical standardisation in the BAC and Navarre can be seen in the anarchical way in which everyday geographical terms are used in maps, road signs, text books, the media, etc. Each user applies their own criteria to geographical terms, giving rise to confusion and inconsistencies.
The first UN conference on the standardisation of geographical names (held in Genoa in 1967) recommended the drawing up of glossaries of geographical terms.
Recommendation 19A of the conference recommended that a study be undertaken into the nature of the geographical features bearing names in a particular region, and the different meanings of the words used to name those features. | --> | Before looking in detail at the different areas to be dealt with in the paper, we must define what a toponym is. A toponym or geographical name is a proper noun made up of a specific element and, usually, a common or generic element. The latter indicates the general nature of the geographical feature while the former specifically identifies the individual feature in question. Examples would be Peña de Anboto, Avenida Ramón y Cajal, RÃo Ibaizabal, Alto de la Horca, etc.
The above definition of a toponym reveals just how important geographical terms are, especially when it is realised that standard toponymic studies give two versions (Basque and Spanish) of each term. In general terms the generic element can be translated, while the specific one should be left unchanged. This would standardise the above terms in Basque as follows: Anbotoko atxa, Ramón y Cajal etorbidea (?), Ibaizabal, La Horca gaina (?).
However the following points require consideration:
1. We do not know the exact meaning of many generic elements: "alto" (given here in Basque as "gaina") could mean "mountain pass", "hill", "peak" or various other things.
2. "Standardised" geographical terms may be allocated arbitrarily. For instance in the district of Deusto we find avenida ("avenue") used for two thoroughfares which should not both be described thus: "Avenida Ramón y Cajal" is an ordinary street, while "Avenida Lehendakari Agirre" is a true avenue.
3. There is a lack of standardised geographical terminology. For instance the Spanish term avenida is translated into Basque variously as ibilbidea, etorbidea or pasealekua, depending on which Town Hall allocated the names. Likewise the Spanish term pico ("peak") may appear as gallur, haitzorrotza, haizpunta, mokorra, mokoa, punta, or tontorra depending on the author or research body involved (DEIKER, Elhuyar, Government of Navarra, Euskatzaindia, etc.).
| preparation | N-S | TERM51_A1.rs3 | A1 | TERM | |
Toponimoen normalizazio lanetan geografiako terminologiak dituen arazoak | --> | Eusko Jaurlaritzako Hizkuntza Politikarako Sailordetzako Ikerketa eta Informaziorako Zuzendaritzak eskatu zidan txosten baten edukian oinarritzen da, hain zuzen, Nazioarteko Terminologia Biltzarrean aurkeztu nahi dudan komunikazioa.
Donostian aurkeztu nuen txostena joan zen azaroan Euskararen Aholku Batzordearen baitan Toponimiako Batzorde Bereziak egindako lehenengo bileran.
Geografiako terminologia normalizatzeko premia, eta zehatzago esanda, toponimiarekin loturik dagoen terminologia normalizatzeko premia, EAEko toponimia normalizatzeko lanak egitean sortu zen, azken hamar urteotan Deustuko Unibertsitateko DEIKER Institutuak egiten diharduen lanen barruan. Geografiaren normalizazioa egoera eskasean aurkitzen da EAEn eta Nafarroan, gure inguruan egunero geografiako lexikoa erabiltzerakoan ikus daitekeen anarkiak azaltzen duen moduan: mapak, bideetako errotulazioa, testu liburuak, komunikabideak, etabar. Bakoitzak bere aburuen araberako geografiako terminologia erabiltzen du, eta horrela, egoera nahasia da, eta koherentziarik gabea.
Nazio Batuek geografiako izenen normalizaziorako 1967an Genoan egindako Lehenengo Biltzarrean gomendioak egin zituzten geografiako terminologiari buruz eta glosarioak egiteko.
Entitate geografikoen izaeraren azterketari buruzkoa da 19A gomendioa: "Eskualde jakin batean entitate geografikoek izena badute, entitate horien izaerari buruzko azterketei ekiteko gomendioa egiten da; baita entitate horiek izendatzeko erabilitako hitzen esanahi desberdinei buruz ere..."
Komunikazioan landuko ditugun alderdiak zehaztu baino lehen, toponimo kontzeptuaren definizioa emango dugu, geografiako terminoarekin duen loturari dagokionean.
Definizioz, toponimoa edo izen geografikoa hauxe da: "izen propio bat da, eta osagai espezifiko bat dauka, eta gehienetan, baita osagai komun edo orokor bat ere. Entitate geografikoaren izaera orokorrean hartuta identifikatzen du azken osagai horrek, eta osagai espezifikoak, aldiz, modu partikularrean identifikatzen du".
Esate baterako, Peña de Anboto, Avenida Ramón y Cajal, RÃo Ibaizabal, Alto de la Horca... Toponimo definizioa bera da termino geografikoaren garrantzia ikusarazten diguna; are gehiago, toponimoen normalizazio lanetan bi bertsio proposatzen direla kontuan hartzen bada (euskara eta gaztelera). Horrek esan nahi du, hala, oso goitik hartuta, osagai orokorra itzuli egin daitekeela, eta osagai espezifikoa bat ere aldatu gabe utzi behar dela.
Adibidez, goian aipatutako toponimoak honela normalizatuko lirateke euskaraz: Anbotoko atxa, Ramón y Cajal etorbidea (?), Ibaizabal, La Horca gaina (?).
Jarraian zenbait gogoeta puntu aipatutako ditugu eskuetan darabilgun gai honen gainean:
1.- Ez dugu ezagutzen osagai orokor askoren esanahi zehatza: "alto", "gaina" (bortua, mendia, gailurra...).
2.- "Normalizatutako" termino geografikoa edonola esleitzen da: adibidez, Deustuko auzoan bi "etorbide" aurkitzen dira, eta egia esan, ez lukete termino bera eduki behar: Avenida Ramón y Cajal (kalea) eta Avenida Lehendakari Agirre (etorbidea).
3.- Ez dago geografiako terminologia normalizaturik: adibidez, "avenida" terminoa itzultzeko "ibilbidea", "etorbidea", "pasealekua" etab. erabiltzen dira, udal bakoitzaren arabera, edo "pico" itzultzeko, "gailur", "haitzorrotza", "haizpunta", "mokorra", "mokoa", "punta", "tontorra"... ikerketa egin duen pertsonaren edo erakundearen arabera (DEIKER, Elhuyar, Nafarroako Gobernua, Euskaltzaindia...).
Aurkezpen horren ondoren, komunikazioak gai hauek hartuko ditu:
1.- Arazoen analisia "geografiako terminologiaren erabiltzailearen" ikuspuntutik.
2.- Toponimia normalizatzeko lanen barruan geografiako terminologia normalizatzeak daukan garrantzia eta hori egiteko dagoen premia. Nazio Batuen gomendioak eta espezialistenak bilduko dira.
3.- Deustuko Unibertsitateko DEIKER Institutuak toponimia normalizatzeko lanetan termino geografikoari eman zaion tratamendua laburbilduko da.
4.-Ondorioak. Galderak eta iradokizunak.
| preparation | N-S | TERM51_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Jarraian zenbait gogoeta puntu aipatutako ditugu eskuetan darabilgun gai honen gainean: | --> | 1.- Ez dugu ezagutzen osagai orokor askoren esanahi zehatza: "alto", "gaina" (bortua, mendia, gailurra...).
2.- "Normalizatutako" termino geografikoa edonola esleitzen da: adibidez, Deustuko auzoan bi "etorbide" aurkitzen dira, eta egia esan, ez lukete termino bera eduki behar: Avenida Ramón y Cajal (kalea) eta Avenida Lehendakari Agirre (etorbidea).
3.- Ez dago geografiako terminologia normalizaturik: adibidez, "avenida" terminoa itzultzeko "ibilbidea", "etorbidea", "pasealekua" etab. erabiltzen dira, udal bakoitzaren arabera, edo "pico" itzultzeko, "gailur", "haitzorrotza", "haizpunta", "mokorra", "mokoa", "punta", "tontorra"... ikerketa egin duen pertsonaren edo erakundearen arabera (DEIKER, Elhuyar, Nafarroako Gobernua, Euskaltzaindia...).
| preparation | N-S | TERM51_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |
Aurkezpen horren ondoren, komunikazioak gai hauek hartuko ditu: | --> | 1.- Arazoen analisia "geografiako terminologiaren erabiltzailearen" ikuspuntutik.
2.- Toponimia normalizatzeko lanen barruan geografiako terminologia normalizatzeak daukan garrantzia eta hori egiteko dagoen premia. Nazio Batuen gomendioak eta espezialistenak bilduko dira.
3.- Deustuko Unibertsitateko DEIKER Institutuak toponimia normalizatzeko lanetan termino geografikoari eman zaion tratamendua laburbilduko da.
4.-Ondorioak. Galderak eta iradokizunak.
| preparation | N-N | TERM51_A3.rs3 | A3 | TERM | |