Terms for a Language Name: linguonym/linguanym, glossonym/glottonym, logonym, etc.

Abstract

Language names have never attracted due attention in the linguistics literature. It happens not because authors believe that they do not matter very much, but because they take them for granted. The present paper does not deal with names of individual languages and their implication; it is concerned with terms for a language name as such. One of the principal problems associated with terms for a language name is their abundance. In order to identify the most preferred from the extant diversity, various authors employ various criteria, among them, formal and semantic equivalence with the notion, their age, frequency of occurrence, etc. I consider socioterminology, preferring a descriptive approach, a truly adequate platform for analyzing the aforementioned features.

Chronologically, the earliest of all is the term linguonym (Lat. lingua ‘language’ + Gr. ὄνυμα ‘name’). Initially, it occurred in A. Duličenko’s paper published in 1973 in an Esperanto journal. The term sometimes gets criticism owing to the fact that it is a centaur (Latin+Greek) coinage (similar centaur formations are numerous in linguistics, and not only). As for its parallel version linguanym, it is made of the same constituents, with a single difference that the initial vowel of the second constituent is syncopated in it (which as a rule, occurs rarely in onomastic literature). Another notable characteristic feature is the fact that it is rather infrequent in the literature.

Much more frequent among other items are the terms glossonym  (Ion. Gr. γλῶσσα ‘language’ + ὄνυμα ‘name’) and glottonym (Att. Gr. γλῶττα ‘language’ + ὄνυμα ‘name’). There is only this, a minimum difference between them. As for their occurrence in scholarly circulation, glottonym is the earliest of the two, attested in H. Kahane and R. Kahane’s paper published in 1976.

A certain attempt to avoid terminological diversity and heterogeneity was an attempt to introduce of the term logonym (Gr. λόγος ‘word’ + ὄνυμα ‘name’) by P. Laurendeau; however, the term failed to gain much currency.

As for ენის სახელწოდება ([en.is saxelc’odeba.Ø] ‘language.GEN name.NOM’) as a terminological unit, its advantage is that it is Georgian, although a multi-word term; another problematic aspect is associated with the fact that the notion in point comprises names for both a language as such and its genetic and areal groupings, besides, names for language varieties. During the discussion, following my presentation at the 3rd International Conference on Terminology in 2022, Dr. Natela Muzashvili suggested a new coinage ენათწოდება ([ena.t.c’odeba.Ø] ‘language.PL/GEN-title/name.NOM’) ,which is devoid of the afore-mentioned shortcomings, pertaining to its multi-word counterpart, and is prospectively a rather handy terminological item to refer to a language name in Georgian.