Terminology 17:2 (2011), 181–197. doi 10.1075/term.17.2.01ter
issn 0929–9971 / e-issn 1569–9994 © John Benjamins Publishing Company
The cognitive dynamics of terminological
variation
Maribel Tercedor Sánchez
This paper explores the role of situated and embodied cognition in multidimen-
sionality as a dynamic phenomenon that triggers terminological variation. Ter-
minological variation is crucial as the linguistic gate that gives access to different
dimensions of the same concept. We approach the phenomenon of terminologi-
cal variation from the ways of seeing proposal (Croft and Cruse 2004: 137) and
focus on how a situated and dynamic perspective can trigger the activation of
concept properties that have a perceptual or functional basis. Additionally, we
discuss how this contributes to the shaping of terminological variants from the
perspective of process-oriented or frame-based terminology management (Faber
et al. 2005, 2006; Tercedor and López 2008). Our findings are illustrated by
examples from the EcoLexicon knowledge base.
Keywords: terminological variation, multidimensionality, dynamicity,
situatedness, embodiment, perception, functional aspects, cognition
1. Introduction
Rising interest in situated and embodied cognition has had resonance in both nat-
ural and social sciences, and this is also reflected in the field of Terminology. For
example, the sociocognitive shift in Terminology (Temmerman and Kerremans
2003) has led to scientific research on how terms are used in discourse from ver-
bal, situational and cognitive contexts. Research in specialized communication has
demonstrated that terminological variation is a common phenomenon that deals
with the different ways of naming the same concept, with the resulting conceptual,
social, and pragmatic nuances. In the process-oriented approach to terminology
management (Faber et al. 2005, 2006; Tercedor and López 2008), after analyzing
existing thesauri and terminological databases in the area of Environmental Sci-
ence, it was concluded that “synonyms were not represented in a consistent way.
Sometimes they were part of the main entry term, and other times they appeared

182 Maribel Tercedor Sánchez
in separate entries without any reference to the most frequently used term” (Faber
et al. 2006: 190).
In this article, we adopt a dynamic approach to terminological variation that
reflects how we, as text producers, interact with the world. Terminological vari-
ants are one of the linguistic means used for that interaction, and are the result
of motivated selection by the speaker. In line with Rogers (2004: 221), when we
use the term ‘dynamic’, we mean that “the same object may be referred to in a text
from various perspectives if different characteristics of the concept representing
that object are activated, or if different relations to other concepts are established.”
However, it should be stressed that ‘dynamic’ also means ‘situated’, an in situ ac-
tivation of concepts and properties that is modeled by both linguistic and non-
linguistic contexts (Faber and Tercedor 2001). Because situated conceptualizations
(Barsalou 2005: 626) are the basis for a cognitive dynamic representation of termi-
nological variation, it is paramount to establish what exactly shapes the situated
aspects in the naming processes.
Our view is that one important type of data comes from the distinction be-
tween functional and perceptual properties. Evidence from neurophysiological
studies points to this distinction in the brain. For example, Hart and Gordon
(1992) reported a patient with brain damage that retained knowledge of the func-
tional properties of animals, but had impaired knowledge of their perceptual attri-
butes. This suggests that functional information may be especially salient, offering
evidence that contrasts with early accounts of acquisition of concepts based on
perceptual categories (Clark 1973). Later accounts of the conceptualization pro-
cess point to the role that image-schemas play in the functional acquisition of
concepts (e.g., Mandler 1992).
The need to carry out research on the cognitive motivations for terminologi-
cal variation has been stressed by various scholars (e.g., Freixa 2006; Bowker and
Hawkins 2006). Cognitive aspects, such as experience, also appear to play a role
in the perception and representation of certain types of variants, such as dialect
variants (Sumnel and Samuel 2009). In this article, we explore the cognitive moti-
vations for terminological variation. More specifically, we consider cognitive op-
erations such as situatedness or embodiment as a gate for terminological variation.
Our research question is the following: Can the cognitive dynamics of terms be
studied and codified by the close study of terminological variants as one of its
manifestations? In other words, can terminological variation be studied as a situ-
ated and dynamic phenomenon?
Our basic hypothesis was that multidimensionality can be systematically stud-
ied as a dynamic cognitive phenomenon that shapes the forms of terminological
variants. In our study, we found that patterns of multidimensionality showed a
perceptual/functional distinction.