I. Shamsimukhamedov,
Candidate of Philological Sciences,
Head
Department of Advanced Training of the
Diplomatic Academy at the
University of World Economy and Diplomacy
Ministry of Foreign affairs of the
Republic of Uzbekistan
The author of this article has been directly and professionally involved with the issue of diplomatic terminology since the early years of Uzbekistan’s independence. During the formation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Uzbekistan, efforts began to implement the Law on the State Language across all ministries and departments. One significant initiative was the introduction of the Uzbek language into the Ministry’s operations. In the initial stages, the author, as a member of the Secretariat, was responsible for preparing Uzbek summaries of documents and correspondence received from around the world, which were then presented to the leadership. This work marked the beginning of dealing with diplomatic terminology.
Soon, the need arose to draft agreements, treaties, and other political documents in Uzbek. However, since such documents were typically prepared in Russian or English, the development of relevant terminology in Uzbek had not been addressed and remained an unexplored area of study.
A six-member working group was established to address this gap and support the implementation of the language law. Their task was to translate into Uzbek the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations, foundational texts in global diplomacy. These conventions encompass nearly all key diplomatic terms. Each group member received a section to translate. The most experienced members, A. Buribekov and the author, who both had backgrounds in translation and publishing, took the lead in editing and harmonising the translations. It was later felt that re-translating rather than editing the portions done by the other members would have been more efficient. Ultimately, the translation was completed primarily by these two individuals. The resulting translations and coined terms became foundational in the initial international treaties and agreements signed by Uzbekistan.
This, however, was just the beginning. The translation of the conventions and the creation of corresponding terminology did not imply that two individuals had single-handedly developed an entire system of diplomatic language. The research and standardisation of this field continued in the years that followed. Professionals understand the complexities of finding appropriate equivalents for terms and concepts that have no direct parallel in the target language. Some terms are easy to identify, while others require prolonged deliberation. Nonetheless, the timely completion of this work greatly benefited various departments within the Ministry, diplomats, and the authors themselves.
A. Buribekov continued to utilise this expertise in editing all official documents within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, while the author, as head of the editorial department of the Ministry’s Zhakhon news agency, relied heavily on it for preparing and translating political articles published in government newspapers. The author encountered similar challenges later while working at the Institute for Strategic and Interregional Studies under the President of Uzbekistan. At that time, R. Khakimov, a senior colleague at the institute, proposed translating the United Nations Charter into Uzbek. Leveraging years of experience, the author successfully completed the translation, which was published in thousands of copies by the Tashkent office of the United Nations. The author was recognised with a certificate from the UN Special Representative for officially translating the Charter into Uzbek.
The author spent nearly fifteen years as head of the international departments at two universities after serving in these political and diplomatic roles, continuing to confront challenges related to political and diplomatic language and correspondence.
These experiences form the foundation of the author’s motivation for creating a specialised dictionary of diplomatic terms. The publication of the Azerbaijani-language “Diplomatic Encyclopedic Dictionary” further inspired him. This inspiration was not only professional but also personal, driven by a deep sense of responsibility and the availability of favourable conditions for scholarly work.
Any meaningful project begins with a review of existing work to avoid redundancy. The author first consulted Professor G. Dadabaev, a linguist, to inquire whether any research had already been conducted in this field. Professor Dadabaev confirmed that no comprehensive studies had been done on political and diplomatic terminology in Uzbek.
Author approached the University of World Economy and Diplomacy in Uzbekistan for more clarity on the subject. With their full support and guidance, he gained access to preliminary research and resources. The next step was to liaise with officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for access to archival materials and support. It is worth noting that the Senate of the Oliy Majlis of Uzbekistan had recently instructed the Ministry to develop diplomatic terminology for high-level international documentation. In response, the Ministry established a Translation Centre, which later collaborated with the author on this endeavour.
A dictionary, in general, is understood as a reference work that offers meanings and translations of words. An explanatory dictionary, more specifically, provides in-depth definitions and explanations. The author aimed to produce such a dictionary in the diplomatic field, collecting terms, phrases, and definitions within international relations and presenting them in an accessible format.
The core of this effort was based on the authoritative three-volume “Diplomatic Dictionary” edited by A.A. Gromyko and published in the 1970s by Politizdat in Moscow. This dictionary, widely recognised for its scholarly merit, covers concepts in modern international relations, foreign policy, diplomatic history, conferences, treaties, and prominent diplomats. Alongside this Russian resource, the author consulted respected English-language dictionaries.
Author prioritised the most frequently used terms for initial translation given the enormity of translating entire dictionaries. These were reviewed by both linguistic and diplomatic experts, and then released for public use before proceeding to the next set.
Surprisingly, other comprehensive Uzbek-language sources—such as the “Russian International Dictionary of Words” (1972), the five-volume “Russian-Uzbek Dictionary,” the two-volume “Explanatory Dictionary of the Uzbek Language,” and the Uzbek Encyclopedic—contained little to no diplomatic terminology.
The dictionary was enriched based on the established cooperation with the Diplomatic Academy’s partner, the India-Central Asia Foundation, the MERI Group of Institutes. During the work on the dictionary, different sources on this topic published in India were also used. One of the results of this collaboration was the monograph “Cooperation and Interdependence of Central and South Asia”, jointly prepared and published by scholars from both countries.
On the subject of translation, it is important to consider the origin and adaptation of terms. Many diplomatic terms in Russian and other languages are borrowed directly from Latin, French, or English. While using international terms is sometimes practical, it is equally important to develop native equivalents that preserve linguistic purity. However, such an effort requires collective work from language commissions, academic institutions, and experts.
For instance, let us consider how to render common Russian diplomatic terms like “substitution,” “country of preference,” or “seniority” into Uzbek. This reflection underscores the necessity of structured, collaborative work in developing an accurate and comprehensive diplomatic vocabulary.
The increasing reliance on internet-based translation tools has also led to issues. These tools often provide only one literal translation without contextual usage or multiple meanings. They may result in “calque” translations—direct, unidiomatic renderings that lack nuance. In contrast, comprehensive dictionaries provide extensive definitions, examples, and alternative meanings, making them far superior for professional translation.
The creation of an “Explanatory Dictionary of Diplomatic Terms” in Uzbek represents a crucial step toward eliminating inconsistencies in political and diplomatic language. Without a standardised reference, there is no guarantee that terms used in various conferences, diplomatic correspondence, treaties, and official documents will remain consistent. In today’s interconnected world, the development of diplomatic terminology must evolve alongside the nation’s foreign policy and international engagement.
This endeavour is both a national priority and a professional duty for linguists, translators, and diplomats in Uzbekistan. The author emphasises that the successful development of a modern diplomatic lexicon in Uzbek will not only promote linguistic self-reliance but also ensure the accuracy, clarity, and credibility of the country’s voice in the global arena.
