Eponyms or Descriptive Equivalent Terms? The Question of Scientific Accuracy in Medical Discourse

Abstract

A large part of medical lexicon is made up of eponymous terms. These have often been an object of debate and disagreement among specialists and linguists. More precisely, some claim that eponyms should be maintained, while others are inclined to substitute them with descriptive equivalent terms. The aim of this work is to highlight the importance of linguistic accuracy in medical communication through the analysis of the main advantages and disadvantages involved in both the use of eponyms and descriptive terms. The work is divided into four main parts. The first part provides a classification of the various types of medical eponyms, according to the types of names they can include. The second part is an examination of the current controversy about eponyms, with a discussion of the main reasons in favour of and against their use in medical discourse. The third part focuses on positive and negative pragmatic aspects in the use of eponyms in medical discourse, while in the fourth and last part attention is paid to the inaccuracy of some descriptive denominations.