Socioterminology on Teletermino

2856

Some weeks ago we were presenting you a Telegram channel about terminology called Teletermino. We have been following teletermino’s debates very close and we want to share with you some remarkable ideas about socioterminology.

Socioterminology on Teletermino

Socioterminology was a framework for building theory that sees terminology as a complex system whose epistemological and methodological aspects work together to promote the terminology use in a certain social context.  This approach studies terminology through sociolinguistic perspective, which is a broad focus on the effect of “any aspect of society (including cultural norms, expectations, and context) on the way language is used, and the effects of language use on society”.

Socioterminology believes that terminology has evolved in response to the emerging needs from the science and technological development. With forming the standard principles of terminology (GTT), “socioterminology” was born as a sociolinguistic movement to protest against universality and to defend the plurality of language.

It aimed to fill the gaps and solve the problems arisen by the classical perspective. These problems are classified as “the quadruple crisis of classical terminology”, described by Yves Gambier (1994).

Socioterminology believes that the classical terminology is not sufficient and efficient in looking at both social structures and terminological functions. Socioterminology addresses terminology as a phenomenon  “effectively at the service of the society” (Rey 1988).

Socioterminology is defined by its relationship to terminology and sociolinguistics. It was a movement that was first developed in France and Quebec. Researchers whose approach is often characterized as “socioterminological” include Guilbert, Rey, Guespin, Corbeil, Gaudin, Gambier and Boulanger. Socioterminology argues that language and terminology should be studied and understood in their proper contexts; i.e. societies. That differs from the ideal model of Wüsterian approach which intended to prescribe a universal use of language.

Socioterminology is defined by its relationship to terminology and sociolinguistics.The early discussions started from the study on linguistic factors of term acceptance and then it developed to psychological and social factors. However the theoretical framework only developed after the early 1980s and the term socioterminology first used by Jean-Claude Boulanger in 1981-1982. Socioterminology offers a way of studying the normalization of language and the production of terms wherein the social and contextual elements have the prominent role. Besides, socioterminology suggests continuous analyses and observations on the behavior of terms and the acceptance or rejection of proposals.

“The changes in terminology were also partly triggered by changes in linguistics (Gaudin 2005). The development of sociolinguistics from the 1960s onward meant a new interest in the use of language in society; theoretical sociolinguistics emphasised the importance of discourse; and the need for cultural expertise in language planning was recognized”.

Terminology gradually became a branch of applied linguistics and was not confined to scientific and technical standardisation. New concepts emerged in the 1990s such as sociolinguistic enquiry, research into the implantation of official terms, and measurement of terminological implantation”.

Terminology became an increasingly important aspect of language planning, especially in Catalonia and Quebec. This, combined with a new interest in language politics, meant that the ‘social implications’ of the discipline increased”.

You can contact @teleTermino via 📩tele.termino@gmail.com


Written and adapted by Besharat Fathi a PhD student at Universitat Pompeu Fabra at IULA where she participates actively in some ongoing projects of the institute mainly related to terminology and specialised corpora.

Post prepared by Olga Jeczmyk: Translator-Interpreter, Social Media and Content Manager as well as Communication and Terminology Trainee. Terminology Coordination Unit of the European Parliament in Luxembourg.

Sources:

  • Bhreathnach, U. (2011). A best-practice model for term planning. PhD thesis. Dublin City University, Dublin.
  • Bhreathnach, U. (2012). “Term planning models and the Catalan case”. Revista de Llengua i Dret, núm. 58, 2012, p. 92-110. Available at: http://revistes.eapc.gencat.cat/index.php/rld/article/viewFile/115/106 (Accessed: 6 February 2017).
  • Fathi, B. “3 Lessons to Learn from the History of Terminology” Web blog post. Terminosophy. WordPress, 23 Jan. 2017. Available at: http://bit.ly/2kydO4L (Accessed: 6 February 2017).
  • Fathi, B. “Some Important Reasons for Studying Terminology” Web blog post. Terminosophy. WordPress, 2 Feb. 2017. Available at: http://bit.ly/2lauK4D (Accessed: 6 February 2017).
  • Gambier,Y. (1994). “Implications épistémologiques et méthodologiques de la socioterminologie”, ALFA, vol. 7/8, pp. 99-115.
  • Gaudin, F. (1993). “Pour une socioterminologie: des problèmes sémantiques aux pratiques institutionnelles, avant-propos de Louis Guespin”, préface de Pierre Lerat, Rouen, Publications de l’Université de Rouen, n° 182.
  • Gaudin, F. (2005). “La socioterminologie”. Langages, vol. 157, pp. 80-92.
  • Quirion, J (2003). “Methodology for the design of a standard research protocol for measuring terminology usage”. Terminology, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 29-49.
  • Rey, A. (1988). «Préface», Le MicroRobert, Langue française plus noms propres, chronologie, cartes, Paris, Le Robert.