For historic terminologists the term is most definitely not the word. The term is characterized by monosemy, univocity, precision of definition; its meaning can only be referential, hence it becomes nothing but a label attached to the thing it represents. Terminology, which claims to be purely onomasiological, aims at standardizing specialized languages. In recent decades some terminologists have moved closer to linguistics, and in particular corpus linguistics, to elaborate another terminology, based on discourse observation – and hence semasiological –where terms can be polysemic, have synonyms or be context-dependent. For them, the primary objective is no longer standardization but the description of specialized discourses. These new terminologists have advanced the discipline by bringing it closer to linguistics and observing real facts rather than invoking ideals. But their dismissal of all basics of classic terminology may have gone too far. By examining them one after the other we intend to show that these basic principles are still worthwhile, from a linguistic and social point of view, especially when tools need to be created. Rather than insisting on the differences between currents, we prefer to claim that they complement one another.