Université de Montréal - Thèse sous forme numérique

34independent from language. If concepts belong to langue and not to parole, as Wüster‘sfour-word model (1968) seems to suggest (Figure 5), then equivalence can be equated atthe systemic level. In his model, elaborated from that of Saussure (1972 [1916]), Wüsterconsiders the concept (A) and the sign (B) as two separate entities united arbitrarily andplaces the concept in the upper part of the diagram representing the language system.Thus, by placing langue as the level of organization at which the relationship ofequivalence obtains, the textual level, at which equivalence is also formulated inlexicography, seems to be neglected.Recently, however, the question on the level of organization at which therelationship of equivalence obtains in terminology has been debated in Rogers (2007).She argues that terminologists are increasingly using running texts to extract lexicaldata and when they move between text and system they do not necessarily find the sameequivalents. This suggests that, as in lexicography, the intertextual type of equivalenceis also taken into account in some kinds of terminology work.Le Serrec et al. (2009) is a case in point. The authors use a term extractor(TermoStat) as well as a lexical aligner (Alinea) to identify and extract relevantequivalents for pre-defined candidate terms extracted from a climate change corpus.When searching for equivalents in corpora, the authors observed that: 1) ―a term inlanguage L1 can have more than one equivalent in the corpus of language L2‖; 2) ―aterm that belongs to a given part of speech may be rendered by a term that belongs to adifferent part of speech‖; 3) ―terms expressed in language L1 may be translated by ananaphora (a more generic term or a pronoun) in language L2‖ (Le Serrec at al. 2009: 83-84). The third observation clearly illustrates that the intertextual type of equivalence isradically different from the interlingual type.