Legal Terms in the 1936 and 2013 Lithuanian Dictionaries of International Words: A Comparative Study

The article analyses and compares the legal terms and their adjectival components recorded in the Lithuanian dictionaries of international words published in 1936 and 2013 (DIW 1936 and DIW 2013). The aim of studying the collected material is to evaluate the significance of these dictionaries for the legal language of the respective periods of independent Lithuania. A comparable number of legal terms and adjective components was recorded in both dictionaries (DIW 1936 – 738, DIW 2013 – 748). It may be concluded that DIW 1936 was a meticulously prepared and valuable source of legal terminology for its time, whereas the impact and significance of DIW 2013 for legal language are considerably lesser, because, firstly, the relative frequency of legal terminology decreased in DIW 2013 compared to DIW 1936, and secondly, during the latter period, legal terminology had already been extensively recorded and disseminated across a wide-ranging publicly accessible specialised sources.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Terminologija
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.35321/term32-06
Primary Topic
linguistics and terminology studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Legal Terms in the 1936 and 2013 Lithuanian Dictionaries of International Words: A Comparative Study

Dalia Gedzevičienė
Terminologija
linguistics and terminology studies
article

Legal Terms in the 1936 and 2013 Lithuanian Dictionaries of International Words: A Comparative Study

Dalia Gedzevičienė
article en

Abstract

The article analyses and compares the legal terms and their adjectival components recorded in the Lithuanian dictionaries of international words published in 1936 and 2013 (DIW 1936 and DIW 2013). The aim of studying the collected material is to evaluate the significance of these dictionaries for the legal language of the respective periods of independent Lithuania. A comparable number of legal terms and adjective components was recorded in both dictionaries (DIW 1936 – 738, DIW 2013 – 748). It may be concluded that DIW 1936 was a meticulously prepared and valuable source of legal terminology for its time, whereas the impact and significance of DIW 2013 for legal language are considerably lesser, because, firstly, the relative frequency of legal terminology decreased in DIW 2013 compared to DIW 1936, and secondly, during the latter period, legal terminology had already been extensively recorded and disseminated across a wide-ranging publicly accessible specialised sources.

Terminologija(32)
Lithuanian Social Research Centre (LT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
linguistics and terminology studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Legal Terms in the 1936 and 2013 Lithuanian Dictionaries of International Words: A Comparative Study — Dalia Gedzevičienė · Terminologija (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS