In Croatian anatomical terminology, Latin terms for muscles are deeply rooted, as opposed to the proposed domestic equivalents, which are part of the efforts to standardize domestic medical terms. This paper analyzes the prevalence of Croatian terms for muscles in university textbooks in the field of anatomy published in the last 10 years. Anatomy is the first exact medical field dating back to the ancient period, which is why its terminology stems from Greek and later Latin [1]. Latin has been the foundation of this terminology, ensuring precision and consistency across different languages. Terms in Latin are internationally recognized and hold the status of standardized international terminology for their clarity and universality [2]. Latin is still used in anatomical terminology because it is a dead, and thus not evolving, language, that does not exclusively belong to one country or people [3]. Building upon this foundation of Latin-based terminology, the classification of muscle terminology follows specific categories that further ensure precision and clarity in anatomical descriptions. These categories include action (Levator scapulae), attachment (Mylohyoid), characteristic (Semimembranosus), direction of fibres (Rectus femoris), eponym (Sphincter of Oddi), function (Masseter (to chew), location (Brachialis), meaning (Cremaster (suspender), numerical (First lumbrical), position (Serratus anterior), shape (Quadratus lumborum), simile (Latissimus dorsi), size (Peroneus longus), structure (Gracilis) [4].2 While Latin has historically dominated this field, modern efforts have focused on incorporating localized terminology to make medical language more accessible and culturally relevant for medical experts and laypeople. Studies have been conducted in various languages, including Croatian, comparing the prevalence of medical terminology in the native language versus Latin. In the Croatian context, it is worth highlighting the work of Kocijan, Di Buono, and Mijić [5], who proposed a model designed with NooJ for analyzing medical terminology that uses dictionaries and morphological grammars to identify Latinisms and Croatinized terms. To name a few other examples, Lysanets and Bieliaieva [6] analyzed the use of Latin terminology in medical case reports; Bujalkova and Džuganová [7] compared Latin and English corpora of medical terminology, highlighting both similarities and differences between them; Sokolova [8] conducted an analysis of
1st International Workshop on Terminological Neologism Management (Neoterm 2025), June 18, 2025, Thessaloniki, Greece ∗ Corresponding author.
mpavic@ihjj.hr (M. Pavić)
© 2025 Copyright for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). 2 This study does not analyze whether Croatian muscle terminology reflects these categories, but this aspect could be explored in future research. the Latinization of anatomical terminology in Russian and English, offering a classification of Russian and English anatomical terms based on their similarity to Latin equivalents.
Regarding attempts to replace loanwords with native terms, Ladan [
However, physicians mostly adopt original terms, while linguists specialize in studying and
adapting medical terminology. Despite attempts to create Croatian terms that would be more
understandable to the general population, these efforts remain isolated and have generally not gained
widespread acceptance [
This has led to the development of Croatian equivalents for anatomical terms, providing
linguistically adapted alternatives to long-established Latin terminology. One key aspect of
understanding anatomical terminology is the role of terminological variation, which bridges
Croatian and Latin muscle terms, ensuring their alignment and broader comprehensibility.
Terminological variation is considered an almost inherent feature of medical language because
differences in the level of expertise among participants in communication require linguistic
adaptation of terms [
This paper analyzes the prevalence of Croatian muscle terminology within academic literature, focusing specifically on the contexts in which Croatian terms appear in university anatomy textbooks published in the past 10 years. The analysis focuses on how these terms are distributed across the structural components of the textbooks – such as headings, subheadings, main text ‒ and examines to what extent these terms have been adopted, as well as the challenges of their practical implementation in a domain historically dominated by Latin.
The Croatian terms for muscles were obtained from the Anatomical Glossary with a
Croatian-EnglishLatin Dictionary (2015)3, and a table of Latin terms and Croatian equivalents was created. 4 Croatian
terms that are translations or adaptions of Latin terms have been excluded (e.g., mišić soleus, mišić
pronator, mišić sfinkter, mišić supinator). The glossary is aligned with Nomina Anatomica, an
internationally recognized standard for human anatomical nomenclature. This standard succeeds the
Terminologia Anatomica, a parallel listing of Latin terms and their English equivalents that designate
the structures of the human body, published in 1998 by the Federative Committee on Anatomical
Terminology (FCAT) and approved by the International Federation of Associations of Anatomists
(IFAA) [
In the next step, a corpus of university textbooks in the field of anatomy published in the past ten years was collected, in which the presence of Croatian muscle terms was manually validated.6 These publications were selected because this timeframe reflects the ongoing efforts to modernize and standardize Croatian anatomical terminology, along with efforts to integrate Croatian terms into the professional and academic language. By focusing on these recent publications, the study captures the dynamic nature of language evolution and the integration of newly coined terms that may replace or complement the traditional Latin-based nomenclature.
The analysis has focused on the field of muscles for several reasons. First, since muscles are a fundamental component of medical education and practice, their terminology is frequently used, providing ample material to assess the acceptance and practicality of Croatian alternatives within the professional community. Second, Croatian terms for muscles are not widely used, making it valuable to investigate their acceptance in university textbooks. The limited use of Croatian terms for muscles highlights a potential gap between the standardized terminology and its adoption in professional and academic contexts.
This study relies on a qualitative, context-based analysis of academic textbooks rather than a quantitative corpus-based approach.7 Relevant textbook sections were manually examined to assess the contextual use and visibility of Croatian versus Latin muscle terminology.
In Croatian university anatomical publications, Latin and Croatian terminology coexist, reflecting a
dynamic interplay between scientific tradition and contemporary academic conventions. The
analysis of muscle terminology in these texts reveals various trends and discrepancies in the choice
of terms, indicating the broader influence of context, established academic norms, and the
3 In Croatia, efforts to standardize anatomical terminology in the national language culminated in projects such as
HRANAFINA – Croatian Anatomical and Physiological Terminology, conducted in 2012 and 2013 and funded by the
Croatian Science Foundation under the program Building Croatian Professional Terminology (STRUNA). Its primary goals
were the systematic development of Croatian anatomical and physiological terminology in collaboration with relevant
experts in specific fields and the promotion of the use of Croatian anatomical and physiological terminology in spoken
and written forms. The project resulted in the creation of the comprehensive resource Anatomical Glossary with a
Croatian-English-Latin Dictionary [
While some patterns emerge regarding when Latin terms are used, when Croatian terms are applied, and when both appear together, inconsistencies remain. Notably, Croatian muscle terms are predominantly found in titles and subtitles, often without their Latin equivalents (e.g., trbušni mišići ‘abdominal muscles’, mišići ramenog obruča ‘shoulder muscles’, mišići nadlaktice ‘upper arm muscles’, međurebreni mišići ‘intercostal muscles’). This suggests that Croatian terms are considered sufficient in certain contexts, particularly regarding broader anatomical groups. However, when muscles are classified or described in greater detail, Latin terminology is preferred, reflecting its long-standing role in the international scientific community. An example of this is the classification of back muscles as autohtoni mišići leđa ‘musculi dorsi proprii’, where Latin terms are used for further specification (mm. interspinales, mm. intertransversarii, m. erector spinae, mm. transversospinale).
Interestingly, a variant is often found where the Croatian term is listed first, followed by its Latin equivalent in parentheses. For example, the Croatian term dvoglavi mišić is used first, acknowledging the established Latin term biceps in parentheses, which is much more widely known and used in the global medical literature. This form of bilingual presentation highlights the effort to introduce Croatian terminology while retaining the familiarity of Latin terms, ensuring clarity for readers accustomed to the international nomenclature.
In the case of individual muscles, Latin terms are almost universally used. Examples such as musculus orbicularis oculi, musculus orbicularis oris, musculus buccinator, and musculus risorius are listed with their Latin terms as primary designations. Nevertheless, there are instances where both Latin and Croatian terms are presented together. For instance, mišić zapirač (musculus sphincter), kružni mišić (musculus orbicularis), četverokutni mišić (musculus quadratus), ravni mišić (musculus rectus), plosnati mišić (musculus planus), and poprečnotrnasti mišić (m. transversospinalis) demonstrate a bilingual approach to describing muscle structure. However, exceptions also exist, where only Croatian terms are used. For example, potključni mišić and mali prsni mišić are listed solely in Croatian, bypassing the Latin equivalents subclavius and pectoralis minor.
When examining muscle groups, Croatian terms are again more commonly used. Terms such as trbušni mišići ‘abdominal muscles’, mišići ramenog obruča ‘shoulder muscles’, mišići nadlaktice ‘upper arm muscles’, and međurebreni mišići ‘intercostal muscles’ are frequently seen in educational and clinical contexts. However, the classification of individual muscles within these groups is typically provided in Latin. For example, in the context of abdominal muscles, Latin terms such as musculus rectus abdominis or musculus obliquus externus abdominis are more commonly used in detailed descriptions.
The use of function-related terms such as pregibač/flexor, ispružač/extensor, and odmicač/adductor further underscores the complexity of bilingual terminology. While some textbooks adhere to the use of Croatian equivalents, other maintain the use of Latin terms. An example illustrating the use of Latin terms is the following sentence: Tetiva za II. I IV. prst u svezi je s tetivama m. extensor indicis i m. extensor digiti minimi u središnjem i distalnom dijelu šake te na dorzumu prstiju. ‘The tendon for the 2nd and 4th fingers is connected to the tendons of the extensor indicis and extensor digiti minimi muscles in the central and distal parts of the hand, as well as on the dorsal side of the fingers’.
Furthermore, inconsistencies can also be found in the subtitles for muscle groups. While some headings are entirely in Croatian, such as mišići ramena ‘shoulder muscles’, mišići nadlaktice ‘upper arm muscles’, others incorporate Latin terms, such as mišići podlaktice ‘forearm muscles’, which includes the Latin equivalent musculi antebrachii.
Most of the Croatian muscle terms identified in the analysis correspond to the standardized translations of the Latin terms. Examples include bočni mišić (musculus iliacus), dvoglavi mišić (musculus biceps), kružni mišić (musculus orbicularis), mišić zapirač (musculus sphincter), and mišić pregibač (musculus flexor).
In addition, the comparative examination of selected Croatian university textbooks reveals both similar and differing practices in the use of Croatian and Latin muscle terminology. A general pattern emerges in which Latin nomenclature dominates in core anatomical descriptions, particularly for specific muscle terms, while Croatian terminology is more prevalent in section titles, group names, or introductory overviews. This is evident in several textbooks, including Anatomia humana (Jalšovec, 2018) and Anatomija: Osnove građe tijela čovjeka (Jalšovec, 2018), where muscle groups are consistently named in Croatian, while individual muscle terms appear almost exclusively in Latin. Only a few exceptions are noted (e.g. potključni mišić for musculus subclavius, or mali prsni mišić for musculus pectoralis minor). Textbooks such as Anatomija (Rotim, 2017) demonstrate a more deliberate integration of Croatian terms. Priručni anatomski atlas (2023) presents a middle ground, with initial chapters displaying both Croatian and Latin terms side by side, particularly in image captions and illustrations. However, as the text progresses, Croatian terms appear only in subheadings or are omitted altogether, with Latin terminology prevailing in the main narrative. In Anatomija čovjeka (Marušić & Grković, 2024), the influence of the latest Terminologia Anatomica (2020) is evident, with systematic inclusion of both Croatian and Latin terms in section titles and throughout discussions. However, the degree of Croatian-Latin integration varies significantly. Some textbooks treat Latin as the default, occasionally supplemented with Croatian (Jalšovec), while others (Rotim, Marušić) show a more consistent effort to promote Croatian terminology, often placing it in primary position.
However, some discrepancies were noted across all textbooks with terms that diverge from the Terminologia Anatomica (TA). For instance, musculus iliocostalis is known as bočno-rebreni mišić, which is not a standard translation in TA. Similarly, musculus semitendinosus is listed as polutetivni mišić, a term not used in the TA.
In some cases, Croatian terms fail to fully capture the appearance, function, location, or location of the muscles, which may lead to misunderstandings or hinder the widespread adoption of these terms within the scientific community. This suggests that Croatian muscle terminology is still undergoing refinement and standardization to ensure greater consistency and clarity. The dual usage of Croatian and Latin terms reflects the strong influence of international anatomical standards and ongoing efforts to integrate Croatian terminology into academic discourse. However, the persistent inconsistencies highlight the challenges in fully integrating and standardizing Croatian terminology within medical discourse.
The findings underscore the complexity of integrating localized terminology into an internationally standardized framework. The use of Croatian terms in academic publications reflects ongoing efforts toward linguistic adaptation, yet inconsistencies in their usage reveal the absence of clear guidelines or a unified approach. This highlights the importance of further refining and promoting Croatian anatomical terms to preserve linguistic identity and enhance consistency in education and professional communication.
Although a certain degree of tolerance for Latin is necessary in medical terminology, it is crucial to prioritize the development of a structured medical lexicon in which Croatian terms are the primary choice [16]. Investigating the acceptance of Croatian muscle terms in university textbooks can shed light on factors influencing their integration, such as educational practices, cultural preferences, and the perceived utility of Croatian equivalents compared to Latin terms.
Overall, it can be concluded that Croatian terms for muscles are used in university textbooks and are largely consistent with established anatomical norms. The presence of these terms in scientific literature, medical education, and clinical practice signals their growing integration. While Latin terms continue to dominate in certain contexts, particularly for international consistency, Croatian muscle terms have been successfully adopted and standardized across various academic and professional settings.
This research provides initial insights into the patterns of terminological preference and usage, offering a basis for more systematic, corpus-driven studies in the future. To build on these findings, future research should focus on conducting surveys among practitioners to evaluate the adoption and practical utility of Croatian muscle terms in educational and clinical environments. Additionally, a more comprehensive study based on a fully aligned glossary and corpus-based methodology could be a valuable next step to deepen the understanding of how Croatian muscle terms are integrated into professional practice.
This work has been funded by the European Union NextGenerationEU within the project Semantic Frames in the Croatian Language.
During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used GPT-4 in order to: Grammar and spelling check. After using these tool(s)/service(s), the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the publication’s content. [15] P. P. Chmielewski, New Terminologia Anatomica highlights the importance of clinical anatomy,
Folia Morphol 79/1 (2020) 15–20. [16] L. Hudeček, M. Mihaljević, Načela normiranja hrvatskih naziva: s primjerima iz medicinskog nazivlja, in: N. Ledinek, M. Žagar Karer, M. Humar (Ed.), Terminologija in sodobna terminografija, 2009, pp. 97‒110.
autohtoni mišići leđa Latin equivalent musculi capitis musculi dorsi musculi abdominis musculi membri superioris musculi membri inferioris musculus biceps musculus rectus inferior musculus rectus superior musculus iliacus musculus ilicostalis musculi abdominis musculi intercostali musculi dorsi proprii musculus biceps musculus triceps musculus quadriceps musculus orbicularis musculus abductor musculus adductor musculus rotator musculus extensor musculi auriculares musculus obliquus externus abdominis musculus pectoralis major musculus pectoralis minor musculus subclavius musculus rectus abdominis musculus triceps brachii musculi intertransversarii musculus brachialls musculi lumbricales manus musculi interossei palmares musculus quadriceps femoris musculi thoracis musculus abductor pollicis brevis musculus flexor pollicis brevis