We need to approach this topic with the premise that the presence of foreign words in Turkish terminology is not a problem. The correct goal here is to keep the comprehensibility of the terminology by the public at the highest level. I cannot think of any action that would serve the opposite of this goal as much as changing the entire terminology from top to bottom. Because we are in contact with world languages and the societies that speak these languages, there has been and will continue to be a two-way exchange of terms between Turkish and other languages. There can be no non-fantastic explanation for fighting against this.
There are some problems with certain terms that entered Turkish previously. While these have lost their importance or undergone changes in the languages they were taken from, they have remained exactly the same in our language and have lost their connection with the current reality. In this case, since the term has no equivalent in any language, reconsidering it can be beneficial in terms of the term’s comprehensibility.
Expressions that have been terminologized using Turkish words are highly valuable for the richness of Turkish and should remain as they are. Expressions of foreign origin that have settled into Turkish terminology are also included in this.
For terms that need to be reconsidered, when Turkish expressions are used, attention can be paid to whether there is an oddity that would subjectively prevent the usage from settling, and expressions that are thought not to gain widespread use when Turkified can be Turkified with foreign words.
.jpg)
Examples:
“Zootekni” (Zootechny) has settled in the Turkish literature but has lost its feature of fully corresponding to the foreign literature because it probably entered Turkish from French at the time, and the expression in Turkish is neither Turkish nor does it have an equivalent left considering the global literature. If “hayvan yetiştiriciliği” (animal breeding) is chosen as its Turkish equivalent, there is no situation that would prevent its usage from spreading to the general public; in fact, as an expression already in use, it is a good candidate.
“Hayvan refahı” (Animal welfare) has settled in the Turkish literature and perfectly corresponds to the English terminology. The word is not of Turkish origin, and it has an equivalent like “hayvan gönenci” (animal prosperity), but these do not constitute a situation that takes priority according to this algorithm, and in addition, since the word “gönenç” is a term with a very weak probability of gaining widespread use, it makes more sense to continue using the existing expression.
“PLF” (precision livestock farming) is a term whose Turkish equivalent has not yet settled. Since it is a term consisting of three words, its Turkification is important. Among the current expressions encountered, although the word “hassas” in the expression “hassas hayvancılık” is suitable in terms of the meaning of being able to distinguish even the smallest changes, it might also bring to mind a meaning like being sensitive to animals, so its widespread use might become difficult. The word “keskin” (sharp), which could be used instead, sounds too harsh. Another alternative could be the word “ince” (fine/thin), but in this one, the other meanings of the word might prevail. Among these options, “hassas” again emerges as the strongest candidate, but it is not very possible to have a clear idea until it fully settles into the terminology.