NATO Conference on Terminology Management

NATO Conference on Terminology Management 19-20 November 2015

Are ISO Terminology Standards Fit for Terminology Management at the NATO?

Hendrik J. Kockaert1,2 & Frieda Steurs1,2,3

KU Leuven1, University of the Free State2, UCO3

Abstract

The NATO Terminology Office (NTO) advocates clear and unambiguous communication among its members and partners, following the NATO Policy for Standardization: "NATO documents must contain NATO agreed terminology." It is the NATO Terminology Programme (NTP) that provides standardized terminology, stamped with the "NATO Agreed" status to all NATO terms. This paper investigates in which way the NTO could apply terminology standards issued by ISO TC 37 with a view to pursuing this advocacy. Intensional definitions (ISO 704), instrumental in developing (multilingual) concept systems, will be tested on a sample of terms and definitions in the NATO terminology database. It will be demonstrated that ISO 24156-1, a terminology standard on concept modelling, is useful in implementing the Unified Modeling Language (UML) in multilingual concept systems with a view to consolidating and mapping agreed terminology, hence to communicating clearly. This paper will argue for NATO terminology management by adopting ISO standards. NATO Conference on Terminology Management 19-20 November 2015

Are ISO Terminology Standards Fit for Terminology Management at the NATO?

Hendrik J. Kockaert1,2 & Frieda Steurs1,2, 3

KU Leuven1, University of the Free State2, UCO3

Extended abstract

Following the NTO’s objective to pursue clear and unambiguous communication between NATO’s members and partners, the NATO Terminology Office (NTO), which is part of the NATO Standardization Office (NSO) is instrumental in assisting the NSO to provide standards. Like ISO standards, NATO standards are essential in that they contribute fundamentally towards mutual understanding among experts. In such standards, Clause 3 “Terms and definitions” lists the crucial terms and their definitions: this clause is the backbone of understanding each standard, because it is the result par excellence of a mutual consensus among terminologists and experts involved in drafting standards.

In a case study, this paper will select a sample of NATO terms and check in which way the basic terminology standard ISO 704 (2009), which explains the principles of writing terminological definitions, is applied, or can be applied better in current and future NATO standards. In particular we will test whether the use of intensional definitions, also called terminological definitions, is beneficial to consolidating NATO standards. In this paper, it will be demonstrated that intensional definitions are a trustful basis for mapping concepts in concept systems. In such systems, hierarchical relations between superordinate and subordinate concepts are clearly linked to their definitions, hence are an adequate means of visualizing concept relations. The principles of writing intensional definitions will be clearly applied to the sample terms, showing the principles and pitfalls of formulating such definitions. As an example, the definition of Terminal Attack Control (ATP-3.3.2.2) will be discussed, and an ISO 704 based terminological definition will be proposed,1 arguing for the benefits of doing so.

Next, this paper intends to demonstrate in which way ISO 24156-1(2014) can be applied to show relations between concepts in multilingual concept systems. A concept system will be built with a view of showing the usefulness of positioning concepts in a relational system. One of the benefits of such a system is to see to what extent terms and definitions refer – or not – to different concepts, when mapped to each other in a multilingual context.

In ISO 24156-1, a user-defined UML profile has been defined for modelling concepts and relations in a concept system, which is defined as a set of concepts structured according to the relations among them. Generic relations, or type of relations, i.e. relations between concepts that are described by means of intensional definitions will be modelled in such concept systems. Concept models using UML may be drawn in dedicated modelling software tools, which can interpret the semantics behind the elements of a concept model. Consequently, it should be possible to semi-automatically transform UML concept models into natural-language definitions. This principle also applies to concept models consisting of generic relations, which could be transformed into intensional definitions (or at least into parts thereof). This papers explores the opportunities of converting user-defined UML concept models into intensional definitions, which would be beneficial to the terminological activities of NTO.

As an example, a concept system of Close Air Support Aircraft categories will be developed to support the objectives of this paper and its opportunities in the context of the application of ISO 704 and ISO 24156-1 to NATO standards.

1 Definition: “Consists of at least one aircraft (fixed/rotary wing/RPA) attacking a surface target. The control begins with a CAS briefing from an FAC/FAC trainee, also known as the “9-Line Briefing” (ATP 3.3.2.1 standard) and ends with a “cleared hot,” “continue dry,” “cleared to engage” or an “abort” call on a final attack run. No more than two controls (lead aircraft and wingman) can be counted per CAS briefing per target.” References:

ISO 704. 2000. Terminology work – Principles and methods. Geneva: International Standards Organisation.

ISO 24156-1. 2014. Graphic notations for concept modelling in terminology work – Part 1: Guidelines for using UML notation in terminology work. Geneva: International Standards Organisation.

Kockaert, Hendrik, Georg Löckinger, & Gerhard Budin. 2014. Intensional definitions. In Kockaert, Hendrik & Frieda Steurs [eds.] Handbook of Terminology, 60-81. Amsterdam/New York: John Benjamins Publishing Company.