In a paper, you qualify any term you invent to be specifically within that paper. If other people adopt your terminology they will refer to your paper.
[some discussion of the distinctions that lead to a new definition]
Herein, we will refer to this property of vector sets as "pseudo-orthogonality".
"Herein" means just in this paper. And then continue your discussion using the term pseudo-orthogonality.
If I need your result, I will cite your paper and its definition of the term in my paper. So I will say
We use the concept of pseudo-orthogonality as defined in .
Then my reference is
 Carla-Display, "The Clown Murder of Non-Prime Extracts of Large Numbers", Journal of Approximating Numbering Systems, v7.38, 2022, pp 3-11.
Or something like that.
Don't say "will be called", don't say "is called."
Don't raise any expectation your new terminology will be used anywhere else but within your paper.
It is up to other researchers to decide to use your terminology. You should do some due diligence in reading to ensure you are not renaming a known property; thinking you invented it is not enough itself, you want to be sure you did not re-invent it.
It is up to your reviewers to call you out if you have inadvertently done that. And by restricting the use of your definition just to within your own paper, it is still understandable even if you, your peer reviewers and the editor all failed to realize you re-named a known property.
Future lecturers or textbooks will say
What Carla-Display calls "pseudo-orthogonality" was first described in
2021 by Hurling-Cat as "proximate-orthogonality".