Science, dénomination et partage du pouvoir: le cas des éponymes

Abstract

Although eponymy has continued to be very productive in the terminology of some domains, it has yet to merit the attention of linguists and, in particular, terminologists who seem to consider it as properly belonging to the realm of logic, much like the proper noun. Furthermore, the general impression of an attitude of near-hostility of language users toward eponymous terms contrasts with the domain-specific welcome that has been reserved for them. In medicine, for example, eponyms have often been greeted with hostility because they are perceived as a destabilising factor in medical terminology, which is in the main based on composition and, therefore, offers some measure of ready intelligibility. In natural history they seem quite at home in the binomial system popularized by Linnaeus whereas in physics (and mathematics) the situation is one of indifference. However, despite what one may still consider as a generally unfavourable climate, eponymy will continue to maintain itself for at least two reasons. First, it significantly extends the naming capacity of natural languages. Second, it plays a central role in the regulatory process of science by providing a means for sharing the spoils of scientific enterprise.