The paper considers several terminology related issues in the field of phonosemantics, paying particular attention to taxonomical organization of the primary terms within the conceptual apparatus in Latvian and English. Analyzing field terminology in contrastive perspective it can be concluded that there is a certain mismatch between terms in Latvian and English both regarding the semantic structure of the terms and their application. In Latvia, research in phonosemantics has been mainly conducted contrasting manifestations of sound imitation and sound symbolism in Latvian and English. Research results are mainly presented in English, whereas in Latvian field terminology is underdeveloped. There are no established Latvian counterparts for such terms as ‘linguistic iconicity’, ‘sound symbolism’ and ‘iconic relations between the signifier and the signified’. At present, borrowings and calques from English are used to describe the phenomena in question in Latvian. This approach has several significant drawbacks. First, borrowings from English cannot always be successfully integrated into Latvian due to differences in phonetic and grammatical structure. Secondly, there is no consistency in term use within the field in English, so borrowed or calqued terms may not accurately represent the concepts in question. In order to facilitate development of phonosemantics in Latvia, it is necessary to address the issues of terminology coinage and harmonization.