The place(s) of diachrony in Terminology: where to start from to carry out a terminological-diachronic study today?

Abstract

This paper brings theoretical reflections on the different views of diachrony within the scope of five terminological schools, based on the conceptions of ‘term’, ‘concept’ and ‘variation’ adopted by each of them in their respective theoretical framework. As each of the terminological approaches considers diachrony from a particular place, this paper shows that, consequently, diachrony occupies different places in Terminology. Among these approaches, there is also the diachronic terminology (DT). Although it is not a theory per se – and, for this reason, it is associated with one of these schools (or more) depending on the objectives of the terminological work – DT has been adopted by several investigations in the area as a field of study apart from the others (Picton, Condamines, & Humbert-Droz, 2021). Given the relatively recent interest devoted to DT and the thematic diversity of research carried out in light of this perspective (Humbley, 2011), there are different investigative lines associated with it. This work therefore proposes schemes that organize these approaches, which have been found in research carried out so far (Curti-Contessoto, 2022), and some specificities attributed to ‘diachrony’. The discussion woven in this paper is important since there is still a lack of theoretical contributions, especially in the sense of systematizing the different diachronic approaches that exist in Terminology – something that is one of the obstacles that currently most need attention (Picton, 2018). Then, this paper intends to contribute in this sense, bringing our reflections on the subject in Brazilian Portuguese since there is a mainly theoretical gap in relation to DT in Brazil, as well as possible paths for research in the area and future perspectives.