Term-formation, Translation, Interpreting, Lexicography

The paper dwells on Latvian terminology of the 21st century. It is coined mostly on the basis of English counterparts. There are many sources of this new terminology: Latvian branch and domain experts, professional EU institutions’ Brussels and Luxembourg based translators and terminologists, professional Latvia based translators and terminologists. But numerous terms are coined by random translators, journalists, media representatives, tradespeople, e. g. small shop owners, car dealers, etc. Finally, numerous new nonce terms are coined on the spur of the moment by interpreters, some of which are picked up by their audience and thus gain currency. This leads to a very chaotic terminology scene: often one English term has many established Latvian counterparts (available in official databases), while some terms have none and the English term is used in a grammatically changed or even unchanged form. Still other terms have ‘established’ Latvian counterparts in the shape of overextended definitions. These terms often breach basic principles of term-formation and contribute to terminological chaos, ambiguity and legal uncertainty. It also makes the work of lexicographers most complicated: dictionaries and databases could standardize terminology, but the descriptive approach to lexicography presumes reflecting lexis that is being used. A ray of hope can be seen in a gradual acceptance of metaphorical terminology.