History of terminology – Diachronic terminology
The emergence of a terminological conscienceness
organized by Danielle Candel (SHESL / HTL), Pascaline Dury (CeRLA) & John Humbley (ALTAE)
28 – 29 January 2027
Maison de la recherche, 4 rue des Irlandais, Paris 5e
Call for papers
This conference, which follows the second francophone conference on diachronic terminology (held in Lyon in 2023), is intended to take stock of research in terminology carried out in a historic or evolutionary perspective. Two collective works have been published as an outcome of this second conference (Dury and Picton eds., 2024, and Humbley and Dury eds., in press). The former focuses on short-term diachrony in a contemporary context using large corpora with a view to tracking terminology as it changes over time in various areas (scientific and technological but also in the field of research or in the corporate sector). The latter publication is more historic in scope. It covers states of terminology from the more distant past and how they may evolve. In addition to these two orientations, a further perspective illustrates terminology as it has emerged as a discipline (as reflected in the recent publication Warburton and Humbley eds. 2025).
Conference description
This conference continues the series inaugurated in 1988 in Brussels by Caroline de Schaetzen under the patronage of the Conseil international de la langue française (CILF). The second conference on diachronic terminology took place in Lyon in 2023 on the initiative of Pascaline Dury (CeRLA, Université Lumière Lyon 2). The topics announced for 2023 are still relevant today: State of the art, Goals in diachronic terminology research, Methods, Diachronicity and temporality, Interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity, Applications… In practice, there turns out to be some overlapping. For example Methods constitute a transversal orientation common to many fields of study…. In addition, related fields have proved of relevance to diachronic terminology, in particular lexicography and history. Another dimension of particularly relevance and which could well be further investigated is the challenge of interdisciplinarity.
Diachronic terminology has been attracting more attention of late, as witness several recent publications, generally joint efforts. For example, the Cahiers de lexicologie have devoted two recent issues to this theme: Science in words or how scientific terminology was formed in the Middle Ages (n° 126, Ducos et Vigneron eds., 2025), and Diachronic terminology: methodology and case studies (n° 118, Zanola ed., 2021). Mention should also be made of Diachronic Terminology in Terminology Science & Research, (vol. 28, Velicu ed., 2025) as well as a series of studies on the theories of terminology, often taken from a diachronic angle (Faber and L’Homme eds, 2022).
This new interest in diachronic terminology shows no signs of abating. And yet as a discipline and object of study, terminology was generally viewed from an almost exclusively synchronic angle, following the precepts of Eugen Wüster. Was this an ad hoc restriction justified by practical considerations in the field of industrial standardization where immediate communication clarity was at stake, or was it rather a theoretical stance? To answer this question, it may well be profitable to revisit the writings of the Vienna School (see Candel, Samain and Savatovsky, eds. 2022).
In their fields of practice, scientists are observed to be using terminology that changes over time. These changes may be evidence of a terminological awareness, of their thoughts on the terms they use and the interest which this inspires in them. This is the case of terms in short diachrony. In the case of long diachrony it is the corpus and/or the historian which establish the link. In the one case, it is a question of the history of terminology, in the other the emergence of a terminological awareness which implies recourse to diachronic terminology.
Papers are invited in one of three orientations, all of which encompassing the emergence of a terminological consciousness in an interdisciplinary framework.
- The history of terminology and diachronic terminology: their communalities
Among the research goals of diachronic terminology mention can be made of the search for those language markers which point to the evolution of a discipline, a science or a practice. This research orientation may well shed a linguistic light on historical facts. On the other hand, the goals of the history of terminology include the study of how it evolved into a discipline. It would seem that the relation between these two orientations, the history of terminology and diachronic terminology, should be obvious, simply a matter of common sense, but in fact they do not seem to have received the attention they deserved. Does the practice of terminology necessarily lead to questioning of the principles it is founded on? Can it be claimed, for example, that Diderot’s thoughts on the “langue des arts” or those of Lavoisier or Guyton de Morveau on the nomenclature of chemical substances may be instances of diachronic terminology, but also the forerunners of terminological consciousness?
In addition to this research in long diachrony, examples can be found of studies based on much shorter periods of time.
These short term diachronic studies are usually based on very large corpora, whereas long term diachrony, which generally focuses on the distant past, has to rely on much more limited corpus facilities, the more limited more we move back in time.
This question of corpora regarding the diachronic dimension also concerns very large digital corpora, large databanks and large language models. The methodological consequences of these innovations will be a major focus.
Indeed, it is imperative to take into account what is distinctive about the corpora analysed and the subsequent use made of them.
Diachronic terminology, as has been noted above, has two different configurations. The first aims at exploring texts divided up into chronological periods with the view to collecting a set of indices revealing changes in the terminology used, for example by examining samples at intervals of five, ten years. This set of indices sheds light on the scientific, technological or administrative changes made over the period in question. The second form of diachronic terminology is historical in orientation and aims at contributing to the study of the evolution of science and technology in the past. The nature and especially the size of historical corpora available is an important methodological difference between the two approaches and which would warrant further thought.
The conference also aims at exploring the links between “lexicography” and the couple “diachronic terminology/history of terminology”. Historical lexicography, as exemplified in French-language studies by the dictionaries of Middle French and the dictionary of medieval scientific French, is an important means of access to analysing the terminology of the past, and, in the form of the history of terms is a prerequisite to the history of terminology. Research on historical dictionaries (cf. Cetro 2022 for Félibien) highlight lexical choices, including in specialised contexts and hereby herald the awakening of a terminological consciousness.
- Diachronic terminology and the challenge of interdisciplinarity
Interdisciplinarity is an integral part of diachronic terminology. The diachronist needs to have a command of the discipline or technology whose terminology is under study and the capacity to enter into a dialogue with the specialists of the field concerned. The role of subject field specialists who are not themselves linguists in their approach to the corresponding terminology is important as well. Interdisciplinarity characterizes the work of the terminologist who focuses on the overlap of terminologies in a descriptive or prescriptive perspective. Diachronic terminology may be called upon to play a role in various historical studies focusing on language as a vehicle for the transmission and creation of specialized knowledge by analysing discourse produced in specialised historic contexts. But taking part in parallel studies is not without confronting epistemological questions. This is indeed the case for any historical research carried out on the linguistic aspects of the expression of specialized knowledge. To what extent can one carry out research in the history of a language without appropriate training in history and historiography? How can collaboration between linguists and field specialists or historians of the history of science, or quite simply between linguists and historians?
Why is it that there seems to be so little teamwork between linguists and subject field specialists? There are of course concrete examples of linguists who also have training in another field, such as history or botany.
Are epistemological issues easier to synthesize in an individual rather than in a collective context?
Whatever the difficulties associated with interdisciplinarity, however, it would seem, after this brief overview, that diachronic terminology is per se an interdisciplinary field.
- How ideas evolve in science and technology and how the changes are formulated
An important focus of this conference is on the development of science and the contribution of specialized lexicography and conceptually orientated terminology. Specialised designations change over time and terminologies are enriched. These may be cases of natural evolution but for some countries an official body may make recommendations, field by field. This is the case of prescriptive terminology.
Research into historical terminology is closely linked to the history of ideas and to the emergence of new subject fields, their history, their evolution, their development.
Selected recent bibliography
Candel, Danielle, 2025, “Terminology in France, Evolution of its official framework”, in Kara Warburton and John Humbley, Terminology throughout History: A discipline in the making, John Benjamins Publishing Company, p. 460-475.
Candel, Danielle, 2022, “General principles of Wüster’s General Theory of Terminology”, Theoretical Perspectives on Terminology – Explaining terms, concepts and specialized knowledge, in Pamela Faber & Marie-Claude L’Homme eds, John Benjamins Publishing Company, p. 37-59.
Candel, Danielle, Didier Samain et Dan Savatovsky eds, 2022, Eugen Wüster et la terminologie de l’école de Vienne, SHESL, HEL Livres, 2.
Cetro, Rosa, 2022, La démarche terminologique d’André Félibien. La systématisation du lexique artistique en français, L’Harmattan Italia.
Ducos, Joëlle et Fleur Vigneron, 2025, Terminology Science & Research, Vol. 28, La terminologie diachronique (section thématique).
Ducos, Joëlle et Fleur Vigneron, 2025, La science par les mots ou comment former une terminologie scientifique au Moyen Âge, Cahiers de lexicologie, 126.
Dury, Pascaline et John Humbley (à paraître), Approches historiques en terminologie, Presses universitaires de Lyon.
Dury, Pascaline et John Humbley, 2025, « La terminologie diachronique comme interface disciplinaire », Velicu, Terminology Science & Research, 28 (https://journal-eaft-aet.net/index.php/tsr), p. 8-31.
Dury, Pascaline et Aurélie Picton eds, 2024, La dimension diachronique dans les langues de spécialité, Lexique n°35. https://edition-scientifique.univ-lille.fr/actualites/detail-actualite/parution-lexique-n35-decembre-2024.
Dury, Pascaline et Aurélie Picton, 2009, « Terminologie et diachronie : vers une réconciliation théorique et méthodologique ? », Revue française de linguistique appliquée, (2), p. 31-41.
Faber, Pamela et Marie-Claude L’Homme eds., 2022, Theoretical Perspectives on Terminology – Explaining terms, concepts and specialized knowledge, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 598 p.
Humbley, John, 2025, « La terminologie avant la lettre », Les Cahiers de lexicologie 126, p. 49-79.
Humbley, John, 2022, “The reception of Wüster’s General Theory of Terminology”, Theoretical Perspectives on Terminology – Explaining terms, concepts and specialized knowledge, Pamela Faber & Marie-Claude L’Homme eds., John Benjamins Publishing Company, p. 15-35.
Martin, Robert, 1998, « Le Dictionnaire du moyen français (DMF) », Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 142(4), p. 961-982.
Picton, Aurélie, 2009, Diachronie en langue de spécialité, définition d’une méthode linguistique outillée pour repérer l’évolution des connaissances en corpus : un exemple appliqué au domaine spatial. Thèse de l’Université de Toulouse II.
Samain, Didier (à paraître), dans Dury, Pascaline et John Humbley, Approches historiques en terminologie, Presses Universitaires de Lyon.
Samain, Didier, 2024, “Savez-vous quand on peut parler de terminologie ? », Le saviez-vous 18, HTL, htl.cnrs.fr/le-saviez-vous-18/#d5d0eeb0-0897-4220-bc61-036be90c4e2a, 10 avril 2024.
Selosse, Philippe ed., 2024, « La terminologie à la Renaissance », Le Français préclassique, 26, Paris, Champion.
Velicu, Anca-Marina, ed., 2025, La terminologie diachronique, Terminology Science and Research vol. 28.
Warburton, Kara & John Humbley eds., 2025, Terminology throughout History – A discipline in the making, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 678 p.
Please send your abstracts by 30 June 2026, at the latest, to the shesl2027@listes.u-paris.fr
Abstracts of approximately 250 words must include a bibliography.
Information https://shesl.org/en/conference2027 and shesl2027@listes.u-paris.fr