ქართული საენათმეცნიერო ტერმინოლოგიის განვითარების გზა საარქივო მასალებისა და პირველი ტერმინოლოგიური ლექსიკონების მიხედვით

ანოტაცია

This paper discusses linguistic terminological work performed in the first decade of the Sovietization of Georgia, the starting point for this study being Giorgi Akhvlediani’s personal archive stored at the Museum of the
Tbilisi State University.

Centralized language policies implemented by the Government of the Democratic Republic of Georgia (1918-1921) implied standardization of the
literary language, as well as terminology planning, this process being interrupted by the Bolshevik occupation of the country (1921). The planned conference dedicated to the reformation of the literary language was cancelled, and the organizing commission was moved to a newly established State Scientific Board, where it was named a “terminological section”. It
took the responsibility of working on terminological and language planning
policies. In this paper, I argue that in the first years of the Soviet era, the Board was to a lesser extent controlled by the Government compared to
later periods, although the goal of the policies had changed. The files I have
managed to locate in Akhvlediani’s archive describe in detail meetings of the aforementioned section. The minutes of the meetings are 10 in total, the
period of the meetings covering the time span from 22.09.1922 to 21.01.1923. The members of the Board were G. Akvlediani, A. Shanidze, K. Kekelidze, G. Natadze, D. Uznadze, and S. Moseshvili. As is well-known,
this section did not function for long. In 1925, when the new language policy was launched and supervised by P. Makharadze (Karosanidze 2014: 179), another terminological committee was founded.

There is a list of accepted and rejected linguistic terms which I group in the following way: (a) languages and language groups' names, (b) general linguistic terms, (c) phonetic/phonological terms, (d) terms relevant to
morphology, (e) terms relevant to syntax, and (f) terms relevant to semantics and lexicography.

These data have also been double-checked against the background of the linguistic terminology dictionaries published in the 1920s, in particular, the appendix of glossary edited by Akhvlediiani (1923), which was likely to be a result of the discussion described in the aforementioned minutes, and the bilingual dictionary of linguistic and literary terms (both Russian-
Georgian and Georgian-Russian), which saw the light in 1928. It should also
be mentioned that some of the terms defined therein had already been used
by Akhvlediani in his 1918 “Introduction to Linguistics”.

This paper also features a table that illustrates the evolution of the use of specific terms. It has been possible to trace a tendency to use, beside Georgian terms, their Latin counterparts that came into force and sometimes became privileged (cf. e.g., merq’evi maxvili ‘erratic stress’ vs. dinamik’uri maxvili ‘dynamic stress’). In the pertinent publications, a
number of such terms have been detected that were later on rejected by Georgian linguists and are not in use nowadays. These terms evidently have a historical value.

Furthermore, this paper provides an analysis of the development of particular terms, e.g., the prefix p’ra- (cf. Russian пра-) being translated into Georgian as c’inap’ar- ‘arch-’ (as in e.g. c’inapari ena ‘proto-language’) and p’irvel- ‘first’ (as in e.g. p’irvelkartul- ‘Early Georgian’,p’irvelrusul-
‘Early Russian’) in the minutes; in 1923, the prefixal part p’irvel- was
chosen for the dictionary, but in 1928 it was substituted by c’inar- ‘pre-’
(c’inarkartuli ‘Pre-Georgian’, c’inarena ‘pre-language’) in the dictionary.

The analysis of these and similar examples provides an attempt to demonstrate Georgian linguists’ methods and attitudes to terminological work and the process of language standardization in the 1920s.