მთავარი ტერმინოლოგიის საკითხები არის ქართული რეცენზირებადი სამეცნიერო ჟურნალი, რომელსაც 2014 წლიდან გამოსცემს თსუ არნოლდ ჩიქობავას სახელობის ენათმეცნიერების ინსტიტუტის თარგმნითი ლექსიკონებისა და სამეცნიერო ტერმინოლოგიის განყოფილება. ჟურნალი ტერმინოლოგიის საკითხები ეხება ტერმინოლოგიის თეორიული კვლევებისა და პრაქტიკული მუშაობის საკითხებს. მისი მიზანია მოიცვას ქართული ტერმინოლოგიის სხვადასხვა დარგი, მკითხველს გააცნოს უცხოეთის ტერმინოლოგიური გამოცდილება, უახლესი საერთაშორისო პრაქტიკა და თეორიული კვლევები. ჟურნალი ტერმინოლოგიის საკითხები გამოიცემა ყოველწლიურად. მთავარი რედაქტორია ფილოლოგიის მეცნიერებათა დოქტორი ლია ქაროსანიძე. კვლევების გასავრცელებლად ჟურნალი უზრუნველყოფს მასზე ღია წვდომას. მომხმარებლებს შეუძლიათ წაიკითხონ, ჩამოტვირთონ, გადაამრავლონ, გაავრცელონ, დაბეჭდონ, მოძებნონ ან განათავსონ ბმულები ჟურნალში მოცემული სტატიების სრულ ტექსტებზე გამომცემლის ან ავტორის წინასწარი ნებართვის გარეშე. ჟურნალის მაღალი ხარისხის საგამომცემლო მომსახურებისა და კვლევების გავრცელების უზრუნველსაყოფად რედაქციაში მიღებულ და რეცენზირებულ სტატიებზე დაწესებულია სტატიის მომზადების გადასახადი. საფასურისა და გადახდის პირობები იხილეთ გვერდზე [ავტორებისთვის].
საავტორო უფლებები (c) 2014 Lia Karosanidze https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
საავტორო უფლებები (c) 2016 Lia Karosanidze https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
საავტორო უფლებები (c) 2018 Lia Karosanidze https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
საავტორო უფლებები (c) 2020 Lia Karosanidze https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
საავტორო უფლებები (c) 2022 Lia Karosanidze https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
საავტორო უფლებები (c) 2024 Arnold Chikobava Institute of Linguistics https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
აკადემიურ სასწავლო და სამეცნიერო კვლევებში ზოგიერთი ტერმინის გამოყენების საკითხისათვის
მოხსენებაში განხილული იქნება სასწავლო და სამეცნიერო კვლევებში გამოყენებული ზოგიერთი ტერმინის უმართებულოდ გამოყენების შემთხვევები. ქართულ ენაში ტერმინი უსაფრთხოება ხელოვნურად დამკვიდრდა მე-20 საუკუნის 20-30-იანი წლებიდან, როდესაც დაიწყო ქართული ენის შევსება თარგმნილი ტექნიკური ტერმინებით. მაგ., ამ მიზნით გადმოაქართულეს რუსული ტერმინი Техника безопасности. „ბეზოპასნოსტის“ შესატყვისად დაამკვიდრეს ტერმინი უსაფრთხოება, შედეგად შესიტყვება Техника безопасности ითარგმნა, როგორც უსაფრთხოების ტექნიკა. განისაზღვრა მისი გამოყენების კონტექსტიც: ტექნიკური უსაფრთხოება, შრომის უსაფრთხოება და სხვ. საქართველოს პოლიტექნიკური ინსტიტუტის სამთო-გეოლოგიურ ფაკულტეტზე 1932 წელს კათედრას ეწოდა „უსაფრთხოების ტექნიკისა და საწარმოო სანიტარიის კათედრა“. უნდა აღინიშნოს, რომ იუნესკოს კვალიფიკაციების ჩარჩოსა და სწავლის სფეროების 2011 წელს გადმოქართულებულ კლასიფიკატორში ტექნიკური საქმიანობის შინაარსის შესაბამის კონტექსტში ტერმინი უსაფრთხოება მართებულად არის გამოყენებული, მაგ., კოდი: 0712.3.1 შრომის უსაფრთხოებისა და გარემოსდაცვითი ტექნოლოგიები, 0712 გარემოს დაცვის ტექნოლოგია; 1022.1.1 პროფესიული უსაფრთხოება; 103 უსაფრთხოების უზრუნველყოფის მომსახურებები. მაგრამ ეს ტექნიკური ტერმინი სასწავლო სფეროს შინაარსობრივი კონტექსტის გაუთვალისწინებლად ჩასმულია სოციალური მეცნიერებების სფეროშიც, სადაც, ინგლისური დედნისაგან განსხვავებით, დამატებულია სპეციალობა ამ სახელწოდებით „0312.2.2 უსაფრთხოების კვლევები Security Studies“, ანუ ჩასმულია სოციალური და პოლიტიკური მეცნიერებების სფეროში (03), რომლის შესწავლის საგანია არა ტექნიკური საქმიანობის სფერო, არამედ მმართველობა, პოლიტიკური პრინციპები და პრაქტიკა. მოცემულ შემთხვევაში უნდა გამოყენებულიყო არა ტექნიკური, არამედ ქართული ენისათვის ტრადიციული, სოციალურ-პოლიტიკური შინაარსის მატარებელი ტერმინი, შინაარსობრივად და კონტექსტურად მართებული, ძირძველი ქართული სამეცნიერო ტერმინი უშიშროება. შესაბამისად, უნდა ეწეროს „0312.2.2 უშიშროების კვლევები“. ეს სერიოზული შეცდომა ხშირად აბსურდულ ვითარებას ქმნის სოციალური მეცნიერებების შემსწავლელ სასწავლო სტრუქტურაში. ამ სფეროებაღრეული სახელწოდების გამო ზოგჯერ იწვევენ ადამიანებს, რომელთაც მინიჭებული აქვთ, მაგ., აკადემიური ხარისხი „პროფესიული უსაფრთხოების დოქტორი“ (1022.1.1), ანუ რომელთა კვლევის საგანია ტექნიკური ტერმინით, უსაფრთხოებით, აღნიშნული სფერო, კერძოდ, სამუშაო გარემოს კომფორტული პირობებით უზრუნველყოფა; შრომის ჰიგიენის, საწარმოო სანიტარიის, სახანძრო, ფეთქებად-, რადიაციულ- და ელექტროუსაფრთხოების საკანონმდებლო და უფლებრივი აქტები და სხვ. ორივე ტერმინის ანალიზი მოწმობს, რომ ტერმინ უშიშროების შინაარსი და მისი გამოყენების სფეროები (ჰუმანიტარული მეცნიერებები – კოდი 02; სოციალური მეცნიერებები – კოდი 03 და სხვ.) არსობრივადაა განსხვავებული ტერმინ უსაფრთხოების შინაარსისა და გამოყენების სფეროებისაგან (ინფორმაციისა და კომუნიკაციის ტექნოლოგიები – კოდი 06; ინჟინერია, წარმოება და მშენებლობა – კოდი 07; ჯანდაცვა, სოციალური კეთილდღეობა - კოდი 09; მომსახურებები – კოდი 10 და სხვ.). ამასთან, ცალ-ცალკე თითოეული მათგანის შინაარსი და გამოყენების სფეროები იმდენად ფართო და მრავალფეროვანია, რომ მათი ხელოვნურად ერთი რომელიმე ტერმინის სახელწოდებაში, მაგალითად, უსაფრთხოებაში გაერთიანება, როგორც კლასიფიკატორშია, არ არის მიზანშეწონილი, რადგანაც იწვევს საქმიანობის სფეროების, მათი სპეციფიკის აღრევასა თუ სხვა გაუგებრობებს.
საავტორო უფლებები (c) 2024 ტერმინოლოგიის საკითხები https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
სიტყვაწარმოების ერთი საშუალებისათვის ქართულში (არ[ა]- და ვერ[ა]- უარყოფითნაწილაკიანი სახელები)
უარყოფა უნივერსალური ფუნქციურ-სემანტიკური კატეგორიაა, თუმცა სხვადასხვა ენას მისი გამოხატვის სხვადასხვა საშუალება აქვს: ლექსიკურ-სემანტიკური, გრამატიკული (მორფოლოგიური და სინტაქსური)... ქართულ ენაში, ჯერ კიდევ ძველი ქართულიდან მომდინარე, არსებობს უარყოფით ნაცვალსახელთა და ზმნიზედათა ჩამოყალიბებული გრამატიკული მოდელი, უარყოფითი ნაწილაკისა (არ[ა]-, ვერ[ა]- და ნუ[რა]-) და კითხვითი სიტყვების (ნაცვალსახელების [ვინ, რა], ზმნიზედების [სადა, გზით, დროს...]) // სახელების [ფერი, ნაირი, ვითარი... ] მონაწილეობით [არ[ა]ვინ, ვერ[ა]ვინ, არ[ა]რა, არასადა, ვერასადა, არაოდეს, არასგზით, არაფერი, ვერაფერი, არავითარი, ვერავითარი, ვერანაირი...]. აღსანიშნავია, რომ არ[ა]- უკუთქმითნაწილაკიანი სახელები კატეგორიული მოთხოვნით-ბრძანებითი შინაარსის შემცველია, ხოლო ვერ[ა] ნაწილაკი სახელს შეუძლებლობის, ვერშეძლების ნიუანსს სძენს (შდრ. სულხან-საბა: „არა უქმნელობის უარი... ვერა არ ძალ-მიც ქმნა...“). თანამედროვე ქართულში არ[ა]- და ვერ[ა]- უარყოფით თავსართ-ნაწილაკით ნაწარმოებ სახელთა რიცხვი სულ უფრო იზრდება. არ[ა]- ფორმანტი განსაკუთრებით აქტიურია ტერმინების წარმოებისას: არააალებადი, არაადეკვატური, არააკადემიური, არააპრობირებული, არააქცენტირებული, არადისტანციური, არადიფერენცირებული, არაგამტარი... ამგვარ წარმონაქმნთა ხვედრითი წილი მით უფრო ძლიერდება, რაც უფრო იზრდება სალიტერატურო ენაში ოფიციალურ-საქმიანი სტილის გავლენა. როგორც ბუნებრივ მეტყველებაში, ასევე მწიგნობრულ ენაში მუდმივად მიმდინარეობს ანტონიმურ წყვილთა წარმოქმნა, უფრო ზუსტად კი, რომელიმე „თვისებრივი“ ცნებისთვის საპირისპირო, კონტრასტული შინაარსის ცნების გაჩენა. ამავე დროს, სალიტერატურო ენაში, მით უფრო – მისი ფუნქციონირების ოფიციალურ-საქმიანსა და სამეცნიერო სფეროში ეს პროცესი ბევრად უფრო ინტენსიურია, რაც სხვადასხვა ფაქტორებით არის გამოწვეული. „ქართული ენის განმარტებითი ლექსიკონის“ ახალი რედაქციის სამუშაოები ხელშესახებად წარმოაჩენს ამგვარ წარმონაქმნთა უკიდურესად გაძლიერების ტენდენციას, რაც შესაბამის ანალიზსა და შეფასებას მოითხოვს. ამგვარი წარმონაქმნების დამკვიდრების პროცესი ენაში, ცხადია, ერთგვაროვანი არ არის. მათი ნაწილი სტაბილურ ადგილს იმკვიდრებს ანტონიმურ ცნებით სისტემაში (ურცხვი, უქმი, არაჩვეულებრივი, არადამაკმაყოფილებელი, არნახული, არამკითხე [მოამბე], არაკაცი, ვერდამნახავი...), ხშირ შემთხვევაში კი უარყოფის სიტუაციური („ერთჯერადი“) გამოყენების ნიმუშად გვევლინება (არაგონიერი, არანებისმიერი, არაღირსი, არდამნახავი, ვერგანცდა, ვერმიხვედრილი, ვერსაფიქრელი, ვერდანახული, ვერგაქცეული, ვერგანკურნებული...).
საავტორო უფლებები (c) 2022 ტერმინოლოგიის საკითხები
საეკლესიო ტერმინოლოგია XIX-XX საუკუნეების ქართულ-რუსულ და რუსულ-ქართულ ლექსიკონებში
While editing Russian-Georgian dictionaries, we have faced the necessity to take special attention to the specific lexical group of words, which are names of church concepts and the spiritual terminology in general. Our job serves to edit and update terminological and translation dictionaries (in particular, the Russian-Georgian dictionary). The list of dictionaries we have researched goes as follows: 1. Russian-Georgian dictionary, in two volumes, Niko Chubinashvili, Tbilisi, 1971; 2. Georgian-Russian dictionary, in one volume, David Chubinashvili, Tbilisi, 1984; 3. Russian-Georgian dictionary, in three volumes, Publishing of Georgian Academy of Sciences, Tbilisi, 1956-1959; 4. Russian-Georgian dictionary, in one volume, Tbilisi, 1883; The main result of our work is the determination of spiritual words, which are placed in each dictionary, the differences that occurred between available materials and what is common for them. In this article, we’ll represent the processed materials, we’ll show the results of our research and share our opinions about the basic tendency of church terminology, which appears in the translation dictionaries of XIXXX centuries.
საავტორო უფლებები (c) 2018 ტერმინოლოგიის საკითხები
საქართველოს ვუკოლ ბერიძის სახელობის ტერმინოლოგიის ასოციაცია (მიზნები და ამოცანები)
Terminology work plays one of the most important roles in many European countries. Terminology associations and language institutes of Estonia, France, Sweden, Spain, and other countries work on terminology according to the language law. The European Association for Terminology (EAFT) was founded in 1996. Almost 40 organizations (different terminological centers or language institutes) are members of EAFT, which also cooperates with different international organizations. The European Association for Terminology intends “to provide a platform at the European level for the promotion and coordination of terminological activities and the heightened awareness, improved recognition and continued professionalization of the terminology sector”. In order to promote terminological activity at international conferences, Symposiums, seminars, and summits are held every year. EAFT also offers summer schools, and two International Terminology Awards are given every two years – the International Award for Outstanding Achievement in Theoretical/ Fundamental Research in the Field of Terminology and the International Award for Applied Terminology Research and Development. Vukol Beridze Association of Terminology of Georgia, founded on 27 June, 2017, has already been admitted as a member of the European Association for Terminology (EAFT). The members ofthe Vukol Beridze Association of Terminology of Georgia can become any person interested in the field of terminology. The article concerns the objectives and main tasks of the terminology association.
Estonian was introduced as the official state language in Estonia after gaining sovereignty in 1918. From 1940 the Soviet occupation changed the language policy of the country. Together with the decrease of functional as well as regional areas where Estonian was used, the rapid rise of the status of Russian took place. The period from the end of XIX century reflects the biggest changes in society. A number of measures were taken in order to restore the Estonian language to its rightful status. The proclamation of Estonian as the official state language and its legalization as such by a corresponding Constitutional amendment were passed by the Supreme Council on 6 December 1988. The Language Law was passed on 18 January 1989. Today, Estonia is a member of a number of international organizations, and it itself affects language. In order to develop and save the language, the “Development Plan of the Estonian Language 2011-2017” was adopted. Language management plays one of the most important roles in the development plan, which includes general language management, specialized language management, and name management. The new Language Law was passed in 2011. It had not changed the main principles of the law. The history of Estonian language policy and the modern situation will be discussed further in the article.
საისტორიო წყაროებში დადასტურებული ერთი რიგის იურიდიული ტერმინებისათვის (ძეგლი, ძეგლისწერა, ძეგლი-განაჩენი, ძეგლთდება )
The terms dzeglists’era, dzegli-ganacheni, dzegltdeba attested in the Georgian historical sources are based on the term dzegli “monument”. The main meaning of the term ძეგლი is a multifunctional sacred stone niche that is erected by a human as material evidence of the eternal agreement and obligation to the Lord and society. The establishment of this word as a legal term reflects a certain historical process – the oldest rule of writing the law on stone used in manuscripts, c.f. dzegli “a stone niche depicting agreement and obligation” > “a written document depicting approved obligations”. Dzeglists ’ era means writing the laws, the written definitions of the law. Dzegli-ganacheni is a written expression of the law enacted as a result of the judgment. dzegltdeba/dzeglisdeba is the legalization of the written decision of lawmakers made as a result of the judgment, i.e., the universal law. Generally, the legal meaning of the word ძეგლი is not unfamiliar to the Georgian folk consciousness. The term ძეგლთდება/ძეგლისდება was derived on the basis of the dialectal folk terminology by King George V the Brilliant and used for proper purposes. This assumption is based on 1. The terms that still exist in the mountain dialects of Eastern Georgia (dzegli, dzengli, dzeglis dadeba, danadebi, dast’uris dzegli, ẖar-kvabit dzengli, medzengle, etc.); 2. The antiquity and nature of the folk customs and traditions related to them; 3. The attestation of these terms (dzegli/dzengli/dzergi; dzegne/dzegni) in another dialectal area, i.e., Southwest Georgia. Thus, ძეგლი “an erected multifunctional sacred niche” > dzegli “a material expression of agreements and obligations, the laws (a niche, a manuscript)” > 1. dzeglists’era “writing the laws; the written definitions of the law”; 2. dzegli-ganacheni “a written document of the laws enacted as a result of the judgment”; 3. dzeglisdeba “the legalization of the written decision of lawmakers, i.e., enacting the universal law”.
ახალი სამშენებლო ტერმინების დამკვიდრების შესახებ
The Faculty of Construction of Georgian Technical University has prepared 6 volumes of “Illustrated Explanatory Dictionary of Constructional terms”. This dictionary includes more then 15 300 words and almost 2 500 colored illustrations. Many single-word terms are presented with the results of etymological research. Words are given in alphabetical order. The visual space of terms is full of formulas, circuitry, sketches and pictures. This kind of visibility gives us the possibility to learn the content of each term. Language is a constantly changing phenomenon; many new concepts and the area of usage of terms are changing. Our job serves for adding explanations in the modern edition of the dictionary. Accordingly, while working on the new edition, the authors created some new constructional terms, which are not given in Georgian internet resources and publications, or are presented inaccurately. In this article, we’ll represent part of the terms, which are names of ornamental motifs of decorative architecture.
The usage of Indian-Arabian numbering, based on ten numerical: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0, and onthe positional principle is evidenced by Georgian architectural monuments of the X and XI centuries A.D. Up to this period, starting from the VI century B.C., we used alphabetic numbering: ati =10, asi =100, atasi =1000, bevri =10000, atbevri = bevris bevri =100000, ushkari = 1000000, usht’i = 10000000, usht’is usht’i = 100000000. The present paper considers some military actions of XIII century with participation of armed forces amounting to erti bevri + ori atasi = 12 thousand and atbevri = bevris bevri = 100 thousand, where erti=1 and ori =2. Besides, you can find Bevris Bevri with Rustaveli’s poem, in the first line of the couplet 269.
კონსტანტინე (კოტე) ყიფიანის ლექსიკოგრაფიული მოღვაწეობის შესახებ
Lexicographic activity occupied a significant place in the rich and interesting literary and public activity of Rapiel Eristavi (1824-1901). Dictionaries published by him are really unique: 1) R.D.Eristov “Brief Latin- Russian-Georgian Botanical Dictionary; Records of the Caucasus Association of Agriculture; 1873. – 100 pages; 2) Rap.Dav. Eristov, “Brief Georgian-Russian-Latin Dictionary, Tiflis, 1884. – 167 pages. Much work was also done by Konstantin (Kote) Kipiani (1849-1921) for the creation of dictionaries. First of all, he is a public figure, a translator, and one of the founders of real Georgian artistic schools. Kote Kipiani, by his literary and artistic activity, did his best to be in the first rows of fighters for the revival of the Georgian language, of course, side-by-side with Ilia Chavchavadze (1837-1907) and Akaki Tsereteli (1840- 1915). Kote Kipiani studied at the best boarding school of Tbilisi, in Petersburg’s art academy, Moscow gymnasium, and the agrarian-forestry academy, from which he graduated in 1870. The same year, “Moscowskie Vedomosti” printed his article dealing with foot and mouth disease of neat cattle and sheep and its medication. Soon he returned home because of the illness of his father and in 1873 started to work at a public organization. In 1975, the tsar’s governor-general invited him to the office of assistant head of the Borjomi state domain. In the professional Georgian theater that was restored in 1879, Kote and like-minded persons began to revive this theater, and with great success, too, he participated in its plays. Simultaneously, Kote Kipiani implemented rather useful work to create vocabularies. Thus, the result of his 13 years work is “Russian- Georgian Dictionary on Astronomy, Zoology, Mineralogy and various terms and technical words”. Compiled by Konst. Dim.Kipiani, Tiflism 1896. – 96 pages. The above-stated dictionary consists of the following parts: 1. Words in astronomy, p. 2-19; contains 201 lexical units; 2. Words in zoology, p. 21-50; contains 563 lexical units; 3. Mineralogy, p. 51-59, contains 171 lexical units; 4. Terms and technical words, p. 60-91, contain 667 lexical units; 5. Georgian words, for which Russian terms couldn’t be found; p. 92-96; contains 131 lexical units. And finally, the peculiarity of this dictionary by Kote Kipiani should be emphasized: some Georgian terms were found for very many Russian terms. Therefore, this dictionary is a good base for making other, similar dictionaries vocabularies.
1. Sheep breeding is the field of Georgian agriculture, the roots of which date back to the ancient millennia of history, but as a classically formed cultural phenomenon, it has been preserved only in the region of Tusheti. 2. Tushetian sheep breeding is rich in the vocabulary related to this field of agriculture in which specific terminology can be distinguished – some lexical units are derived through the terminization of lexemes having the main denotatum, e.g. the word tsotsanidze “a sheep” lexically denotes a domestic animal that is bred to get meat, wool and cheese. Terminologically, the word tskhvari, “a sheep,” refers to a flock of sheep as well as the type of property of a farmer. The forms derived from it such as tskhvriani “with sheep”, satskhvare “for sheep”, tskhvarbevri “with a lot of sheep” have a terminological significance as well. As for the terminized units bat’k’ani “lamb”, sabat’k’ne “for lambs”, bat’k’niani “with lambs”, mebt’k’ne “lamb man” etc., they are derived from the word bat’k’ani “lamb” having the main lexical meaning. The paper is an attempt to list the terms related to sheep breeding so far as possible.
ქართული ტერმინთსაცავი (ელექტრონული რესურსები ტერმინოლოგიური კორპუსისათვის)
Nowadays, two main views have been advanced about terminology among contemporary Georgian researchers. One part argues that the old terms do not meet the requirements of modern terminology and find the solution in translating English terms or adopting them without translation. We believe that this view denies the old traditional school of terminology, the school that is the continuation of the older school itself. Modern terminological lexicography or terminography does not deny the old in any country. Computational linguistics provides new, additional possibilities for lexicography. In the 21st century there are more ways to conduct your work wisely and effectively. The creation of the Georgian terminological database will enable us to evaluate the old and not fall behind modernity. For this purpose, first of all, it is important to store all the terminological material in one database and to study and process it. We mean gathering terminological dictionaries compiled at different times. Modern terminology is based on the terminological database in a number of countries. In Georgia, the involvement of the Ministry of Defense made it possible to digitize and process terminological dictionaries as they have created a special program for compiling the terminological database together with the terminologists of the Institute of Linguistics. This year the National Parliamentary Library of Georgia has joined the work. In the digital library a special page has been created where the terminological dictionaries compiled at the Institute of Linguistics at different times will be placed; the Institute of Linguistics will be given the electronic versions. Electronic resources for the Georgian terminological corpus are being processed at the Institute. The paper deals with the principles of processing the terminological database based on the existing material.
აფიქსაციით მიღებული სახელური ნეოლოგიზმებიდა მათი ორთოგრაფიის პრობლემები
The language as a constantly changing phenomenon, following after the development of public life, requires new words and phrases to express new concepts. Thus, neologisms are created to fill these gaps. As is known, there are different ways of creating neologisms in a language. This time we are interested in nominal neologisms formed through affixation and showing the problems related to their spelling. During the research the following important questions emerged: a) What criteria should be chosen by a specialist when the words with the same meaning are sometimes considered to be improper, e.g. bordi (sabch’o) “board”, avtent’ik’uri (namdvili, sarts’muno, dednis shesabamisi) “authentic” and sometimes, to be a standard, e.g. degust’atsia (dach’ashnik’eba) “degustation”, insp’iracia (shtagoneba) “inspiration”, etc.? Accordingly, what qualifications should be given to such words as ist’eblishment’i “establishment”, keteringi “catering”, shop’ingi “shopping”, bankingi “banking”, autsorsingi “outsourcing”, bulingi “bulling”, geimeri “gamer”, k’ont’raktori “contractor”, etc. b) Is it acceptable to assess the use of one and the same formative in the word formation process differently in terms of properness according to the functional style of a language (on the one hand, drek’adi “flexible”, brunebadi “rotatable” and on the other hand, tsnobadi “famous”, mosmenadi “listenable”)? The situation is similar to the words having similar formation anazghaurebadi “payable”, regulirebadi “regulable”, angarishgebadi “accountable”, aragamravlebadi “non-multipliable”, aragaskhivebadi “non-alienable”, tvitkmnadi “self-creatable”, int’erp’ret’irebadi “interpretable”, k’onvent’irebadi “convertible”, mots’q’vladi “vulnerable”, p’rogramirebadi “programmable”, etc. c) What is the most accurate criterion for separating a neologism as a proper form and a barbarism as an improper form one in the case of the units created as a result of nominal word formation? For example, it is interesting whether we should consider shop’ingi “shopping” (cf. onlainshop’ingi “online shopping”, int’erne t’shop’ingi “internet shopping”), keteringi “catering”, bank’ingi “banking”, autsorsingi “outsourcing”, geimeri “gamer” to be barbarisms. What should we do if we consider a certain lexical unit to be neither a barbarism nor a neologism? These issues require comprehensive research and the development of common approaches. This will enable us to make the right decisions in such a varied and complex field that covers new words formed through affixation. Special caution is required when classifying them as neologisms or barbarisms in order to maintain the rich literary language and not to pollute it by improper words and expressions.
ტრადოსი – ტერმინოლოგიის ელექტრონული ბაზა
The current epoch of technical or commercial development is characterized by rapid changes. The novelty brings new concepts and terms the incorporation and establishment of which into the native language have become the main challenge for modern terminology. We believe that the creation of a unified electronic database is of vital importance for the development of Georgian terminology because we think that the introduction to the results of separate studies and using them are no less important than the conducted work. The terminological databases will contribute to showing the history of term development, the creation of new terms based on the latter and the coordinated work of terminologists. A number of terminological databases exist in the modern world that are available for all interested people. These databases enable us to find and use the terminological data of a particular nation or a language and develop our own one. The paper deals with one of the major and popular terminological databases called Trados. We discuss the services that are offered by this program. At the same time, we will speak about the flaws that were not taken into account during the creation of this terminological database and that makes it difficult to work on the terminology.
ტექნიკური ტერმინოლოგიის სარედაქციო საკითხისთვის
Georgian scientific and technical language and terms encounter difficulties, negatively affecting some textbooks and manuals. Technical progress extremely declined the normative standards of the Georgian language and especially, technical terms. Rapid terminological changes have occurred in nearly all fields and especially in the field of Informatics; therefore, existing Georgian and Russian technical terms are not sufficient for modern requirements and edition of the newly structured vocabulary of technical terms with its brief explanations is of great importance. Terminology should be improved and simplified, renewed and updated with new terms while old ones and terms families should be excluded from the vocabulary. Hopefully, the "Law of Georgia on the official language" will provide solution of the problems related to technical terminology. The article deals with issues of the explanation of general technical terms and the rationality of term families.
disk’ursi “discourse” is a widely used term in modern Georgian. It is used differently in various fields of science as well as in everyday speech. The varied meanings make it difficult to comprehend the term. The present paper deals with this problem. Based on the special works about different specialized dictionaries and terms, we have found the meanings of the term, learnt much about its origin and the history of development. As a result, we have a picture that is perfectly described by the following excerpt: “As we can see no definition is clear and complete: sometimes is denotes the combination of texts, sometimes it refers to the relationship in discourse practices or the type of communication. It should be taken into account that in all the said fields (text linguistics, discourse analysis, sociology, social semiotics, logic and philosophy) the word discourse is defined differently, which means that the definition is not uniform even within different scientific knowledge” (Omiadze 2006: 18).
ლინგვონიმების საკითხისათვის აქტუალურ ლინგვისტიკურ ცნება-ტერმინთა ლექსიკონში
In the linguistic metalanguage, a significant part of which is the linguistic terminology, linguonyms have their own place. A linguonym is a specific unit of a metalanguage that marks a certain language, a dialect or a language family as a subject of description. Linguonyms are nomenclatural units. Our objective is to determine the place of linguonyms in the dictionary of actual linguistic terms and concepts that is being compiled by the Department of General Linguistics of the Arnold Chikobava Institute of Linguistics at TSU. In order to solve the said problem, the paper discusses the issue of interrelation between terminology and nomenclature at large; it shows the confrontation of a nomenclatural unit and a term as subjective and conceptual signs; it reviews different linguistic approaches based on which is made on creatinzg brief linguonymic annex for the printed version of the dictionary of actual linguistic terms and concepts that will unite the lexical units related only to Kartvelian languages.
ხელობის აღმნიშვნელი მე- -ე სართებით ნაწარმოები ახალი სიტყვები
The confix me- -e was used even in old Georgian to derive the words related to handicraft and profession, e.g. menelsatskheble, mezuere, memt’ile, mepsalmune, mekulbake. A number of lexical units derived by this confix are attested in modern Georgian as well. It is possible to further clarify the designations of handicrafts and professions with regard to semantic groups: 1. One who makes or repairs something, e.g. metone, meghvine, mep’ure, mekhashe, mesaate, menakhshire, mejghane; 2. One who cultivates and sells something, e.g. mebost’ne, meq’vavile, memts’vanile, merdzeve, mechaie, mets’vrilmane; 3. One who takes care of domestic animals, e.g. mejoge, metskhvare, meghore, meput’k’re; 4. An owner or a worker, e.g. mep’at’rone, mesak’utre, mepurne, mekise; 5. One who operates or drives something, e.g. meurme, meet’le, medilizhne, meborne, met’ive, megutne, memankane, mesach’e; 6. One who makes or plays musical instruments, e.g. mest’vire, mezurne, mebuke, medole, mechongure, mepandure; 7. One who takes care of farming land or guards something, e.g. mebaghe, mevenakhe, mezvre, mevele, mejinibe. A separate group will combine the designations of supporting or following something, e.g. memat’iane, meist’orie, memarjvene, medrove, etc. It is noteworthy that some terms have two meanings at the same time. For example, the word menakhshire denotes both a man who produces coal and a man who sells it; memts’vanile means both a man who cultivates greens and a man who sells it; Mepurne is a man who owns a bake-house or a man who works there; mechongure makes or plays the choghur, etc. In modern Georgian, a number of lexical units are derived using the said confix that are unnatural and artificial for the language (although nothing has changed in terms of formation), e.g. mesats’q’obe, medasavlete, meshabate, metetreule, mederepne (mek’oridore), megolpe, megole, etc.
თარგმანზე ორიენტირებული ტერმინოგრაფია (ISO-ს სტანდარტებზე ორიენტირებული მიდგომა)
The translation of technical texts always differs from any other type of linguistic activities since the translator of technical texts requires knowledge in specialized dictionaries, encyclopedias and technical literature in both languages together with linguistic competence. Accordingly, on the one hand, the problems are associated with collecting the said dictionaries and literature and selecting such special terminology from this data that is required for the specific translation; on the other hand, if such terminology does not exist, the translator should offer terminological units for further use based on the analysis of the relevant concepts of the field. “The Terminological Standard” is a document that describes different approaches to terminology management. The terminology management means fulfilling various tasks including data collection, development, storage, revision and dissemination. The documents titled as “Terminology, Foreign Languages and Content-Oriented Resources” prepared by the technical committee of the International Organization of Standards (ISO/TC 37) serve the said purpose. The paper discusses the section SC 2 of the documents TC 37 the main task of which is describing and structuring the terminographic and lexicographic work methods. Accordingly, the composition of the paper is as follows: 1. The description of the interrelation between lexicography and terminography; 2. The overview of the main parameters of translation-oriented terminography (based on ISO 12616: 2002 and ISO/AWI 12616-1); 3. The future prospects.
Every new event, new subject, new form of life becomes the cause of appearing new words in a language. Sometimes neologisms are created according to the word formation pattern of the native language, while in some cases they are directly introduced in a language. We aim to present and analyze neologisms attested in the works by modern Georgian writers and define their orthography. When studying literary neologisms several types have been distinguished at this stage: 1. Neologisms based on the material of the native language, e.g. mits’ert’ildeba, gmgherian, guldamertskhlebuli, etc.; 2. Neologisms created by combining foreign prefixes and Georgian lexical units sup’ermokhutsi, sup’erachrdili, etc.; 3. Compound neologisms adopted from foreign languages, e.g. psevdoint’elekt’uali , lanchboksi , etc. The paper represents the cases of using literary neologisms at large.
სამეცნიერო-ტექნიკური ტერმინოლოგიური ლექსიკის სტანდარტიზაციის მდგომარეობა საქართველოში
“The Classification Code of International Bases of Scientific Publications” was translated and published in a limited edition by the Institute Techniform at Georgian Technical University and Arn. Chikobava Institute of Linguistics at the Georgian National Academy of Sciences. When working on the publication the difficulties of creating and establishing Georgian scientific-technical terminology became apparent, especially when these activities are not regulated by any state agencies. Several international organizations and commissions are working on the issues of standardization of scientific-technical terminology. Among them the UNESCO Information Centre of Terminology INFOTERM (founded in Vienna, 1971) is very important. The Organization of International Standardization ISO is working on developing standards for scientific terminology. As a result of the wrong approach to the development of the state language and the creation of the terminological vocabulary, we have adopted an unprofessional attitude towards the terminology used in official documents and scientific literature – the attempt to establish one and the same concept with different terms. There are a number of such examples in the Georgian legislative-normative documents, scientific journals, school textbooks, and specialized dictionaries. The paper deals with the terminological differences that are found in the classification code of the scientific fields of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development on the website of Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation and the Georgian versions of the publications by Georgian Technical University. In some cases, this difference is synonymous and sometimes it expresses quite different meanings. In Georgia, various research institutions, non-governmental organizations and firms are working on the terminological publications; However, the quality of these products in terms of the standardization, completeness and redevelopment of the terms is disputable. In addition, most importantly, the terminological work is being conducted chaotically, without any responsibility. Under the terms of state regulations, the creation of terminology will be given its own value, importance, and attention, and will be controlled by the country’s authorities. Technically developed small countries have the relevant experience, and it is necessary to study and share it.
ქართული საენათმეცნიერო ტერმინოლოგიის განვითარების გზა საარქივო მასალებისა და პირველი ტერმინოლოგიური ლექსიკონების მიხედვით
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.
სამედიცინო ტერმინ-ეპონიმთა ჯგუფები და ფუნქციონირება ქართულში
A proper name is often turned into a basis for creating new terms in different scientific or technical fields. This method is especially common in medical terminology that is one of the signs of internationalization of terms. The medical eponyms are English, German, French, Italian, Russian and other surnames, but in rare cases they are derived from Georgian anthroponyms, e.g., turmanidzis malamo “Turmanidze ointment”, tarkhnishvilis repleksi “Tarkhnishvili reflex”, tarkhnishvilis metodi “Tarkhnishvili method”, viguru-tarkhnishvil-shark’os simp’t’omi “Viguru- Tarkhnishvili-Sharko symptom”, Abuladzis kherkhi “Abuladze’s method”, q’ipshidzis simp’t’omi “Kipshidze symptom”, sarajishvilis mikstura “Sarajishvili mixture”, etc. Eponyms should be studied according to several aspects, on the one hand, with regard to their structural and semantic groups, on the other hand, the issues of functioning and adaptation. In terms of the structure, there are mono and poly lexical eponyms, the main component of which is a proper name: a. A researcher’s or a doctor’s surname who discovered, studied, or described a disease; b. A patient’s surname who was first diagnosed a disease (Hartnup disease, HeLa cells); c. A historical person’s or artist’s name or surname (the Hippocratic face, Stendhal syndrome, Van Gogh syndrome), the names of mythological, biblical, or literary characters (the Achilles reflex, Job syndrome, Oedipus complex, the Werther effect, Robin Hood syndrome, Munchausen syndrome); d. A geographical name where a disease is prevalent or first discovered (Stockholm syndrome, Paris syndrome, Jerusalem syndrome, Japanese encephalitis), etc. A common name has a classifying function. We can distinguish several groups: the designations of organs or their parts, types of pathologies and anomalies, reactions and reflexes, symptoms, syndromes, viruses or microbes, diseases, treatment methods, medical equipment and medicines.
თარგმანში დაკარგულები: საცხოვრებლის, საცხოვრისის თუ საბინაო პოლიტიკა?
The breakdown of the Soviet Union and the transition to a new economic formation, like in other fields, led to major changes in urban planning as well. The specialized vector was directed to studying practices available in international languages, mainly in English, and to adapting them to their reality. Naturally, this process should be followed by the formation of national concepts and terminology; however, despite the urgent need, such an activity is still weak and underdeveloped. It is often impossible to match an English term and its Georgian translation. One of such terms is „Housing Policy”. Residence is a key issue in urban and social policy, and it has not lost its significance even in post-Soviet Georgia, which is evidenced by the increased number of recent studies and public discussions about the issue. The ambiguity of the concept and the abundance of the relevant Georgian terms that often led to confusion are very apparent. The present paper is an attempt to answer the following questions: What is the meaning of the term „Housing Policy”? What is the existing lexical experience in the Georgian language, and which Georgian variant is more relevant for the said English terms – satskhovreblis, satskhovrisis, or sabinao polit’ik’a?
The paper introduces the main moments of the life and activity of a meritorious teacher and a mathematician, author of the first Georgian mathematical terminology dictionary and of Georgian Language books in the fields of Mathematics and Finance, Joseb Avalishvili. The paper contains a short overview of the dictionary.