Why translated terms get locked in: network externalities, switching costs and path dependence in terminological choice

The replacement of translated terms has long been explained in terms of "established usage", but this explanation merely restates the outcome that requires explanation. Drawing on path dependence theory, this paper conceptualizes translated terms as coordination goods characterized by network externalities and examines how lock-in emerges, how it is sustained, and under what conditions it can be broken. The findings show that the value of a term increases with the scale of its use, while incumbent terms accumulate switching costs through learning, the existing literature, and institutional endorsement. Together, these factors turn terminological choice into a coordination game with multiple equilibria, in which the winning term is not necessarily the more accurate one. The contrasting cases of Internet and laser illustrate this mechanism: the recommended Chinese rendering of Internet introduced in 1997 failed to achieve lock-in in actual usage, whereas "激光" (jīguāng, laser), coined in 1964, displaced earlier alternatives within a few years. The difference between the two cases can be explained by three conditions: critical mass, the coercive force of institutional standards, and the word-formation advantages of the new term. On this basis, the paper proposes three criteria for correcting terminological lock-in and discusses their implications for terminological standardization and translators' choices.