• Задать вопрос менеджеру

Twitter новости

Обучение письменному иноязычному общению на основе ИКТ http://t.co/IK2NAjncrk

Online-опрос

Антиплагиат онлайнДипломант
Яндекс.Метрика

Problems of translation of nonequivalent lexicon in the economical texts

Предмет:Политология
Тип:Курсовая
Объем, листов:40
Word
Получить полную версию работы
Релевантные слова:nonequivalent, tнe, english, texts, formal, lexicon, between, translation, obliged, use, informal, styles, strict, clearcut, description
Процент оригинальности:
98 %
Цена:300 руб.
Содержание:

INTRODUCTION________________________________________________3-5

CHAPTER ONE. THE NOTION AND CLASSIFICARION OF NONEQUIVALENT LEXICON_________________________________________6-20

1. 1. The language lacunas__________________________________________6-8

1. 2. The classification and essence of the non-equivalent lexical units_______9-20

CHAPTER TWO. THE PECULARITIES OF TRANSLATION OF THE NONEQUIVALENT LEXICON (IN THE TEXTS ON ECONOMIC SUBJECTS)________________________________________________________21-28

CONCLUSION________________________________________________29-32

VOCABULARY_______________________________________________33-35

BIBLIOGRAPHY______________________________________________36-39

SOURCES_______________________________________________________40

Вступление:

The present Term paper deals with problems of translation of nonequivalent lexicon in the economical texts from English into Russian and on the contrary.

The chosen problem has appeared to be very urgent, because linguistics lacks its precise description. There is a clear-cut between formal and informal styles of English, but there is no strict difference between spoken and written business English.

Obviously, businessmen do not communicate with their companions using intricate phrases and bookish words. Still, they are obliged to use some formal clich?s which may sound strange to non-business people, but are essential for conducting business.

The problem of translation of nonequivalent lexical units still excites minds of scientists. First of all, at the present moment in linguistics all the ways of translation of such lexicon into other language are not established. For the second, this interest can be also explained by the actuality of mastering by foreign languages in the modern conditions of globalization.

Comparing languages and cultures of different peoples it is possible to allocate elements conterminous and incoincident. Language, unconditionally, is an essential component of culture. Language plays the leading part in self-development of every separate language community.

Therefore the compared languages are more original, if it is less of cultural contacts were combined in their history. The subjects nominated as nonequivalent lexicon concern to incoincident elements.

Actuality of the given research is determined by the facts that in practice of translation the above-mentioned questions are still unresolved and insufficiently investigated.

A wrong choice of a way of translation of realities arise problems of misunderstanding. It in turn conducts to the impossibility of keeping of a national shade of borrowed unit of the original.

Thus, object of research of the given work is the lexicon of economical texts which has no direct analogue (equivalent) in language of translation.

The purposes of work are the following:

- to demonstrate various lexico-semantic transformations helping to fill in the semantic lacunas arising as a result of use of realities;

- to reveal the most widespread ways of translation of nonequivalent lexicon in economic texts.

The purpose of work defines research tusks which can be formulated as following:

- Studying filling the term "nonequivalent lexicon" in modern linguistics;

- The analysis of the lexical and grammatical maintenance of nonequivalent lexicon (realities);

- The analysis of translational conformity while translating of nonequivalent lexicon from English into Russian and from Russian on English.

In order to solve these tasks the author of the research has used

- methods of studying and analysis of theoretical literature and practical manuals on the problem;

- the methods of observation, description,

- means of syntactic and semantic analyses.

The general method that has been adopted to investigate factual material combines descriptive and comparative approaches.

The research will be performed in four interrelated steps.

1. Analysis of literature on the problem has logically been the first stage.

2. After it, theoretical basis of the research has been compiled.

3. Then the author has picked up examples of translation of non-equivalent lexical units illustrating grammatical, lexical and stylistic peculiarities of economical non-equivalent lexicon.

4. At last, generalisation of results of the research and drawing up final items will be performed in the conclusion.

The theoretical base of the given Term Paper was composed of the following works:

- On linguistics - S. Balli (1961), I. V. Arnold (1973), L. Blumfild (1968), I. R. Galperin (1974), J. A. Belchikov (1988), A. D. Schweitzer (1988), A. I. Alekhin (1991), A. A. Reformatorski (1999);

- On stylistics and the theory of translation - L. S. Barhudarov (1975), L. K. Latyshev (1986), V. V. Vinogradov (2001), T. A. Kazakova (2000), V. N. Commissarov (2001), etc. ;

- On lexicology - A. I. Smirnitsky (1996), M. V. Nikitin (1996).

Material for analytical part of the present work comprises a selection of passages of the articles on economical problematic.

The structure of the term-paper is as follows. It comprises two theoretical chapters, the analytical (practical) part, the conclusion and bibliography. The total volume of the research is 40 pages.

The practical significance of the research is in possible application of its results in translational practice. It can be also be of an interest for people studying problems of style in English and functional usage of formal and informal styles.

The results of the research can be taken into consideration by students and instructors of English and English stylistics. As well they can be used as material for special courses on business English for students of linguistic and economic departments.

Заключение:

As we saw, it is difficult to disadmit that fact, that separate layers of lexicon of language test the big influence of the culture. Especially brightly it is shown by consideration of non-equivalent lexical units.

Nonequivalent lexicon are the foreign words and the word-combinations designating subjects, processes and other realities of a life which at the given stage have no an equivalent.

"Lacuna units," therefore, refers to perceived or unperceived "gaps" in cross-cultural texts (in which there is a nonequivalent lexis) or other poorly understood cultural items.

Lacunae are single specific objects or events and specific processes and situations which "run counter to the usual range of experience of a speaker of another language. "

The "fundamental characteristics" of lacunae are as follows:

- lacunae are perceived by the recipient as something incomprehensible, unusual (exotic), strange (unknown), erroneous or inaccurate in a text.

We have examined lacunae relating to cultural space which include incongruities, between cultures, in "conceiving and assessing aspects of one's cultural milieu. " This includes a particular culture's typical "inventory of knowledge" which forms the "cultural identity" of the average citizen.

This lexicon embraces:

a) Perceptive lacunae: assessments of distance.

b) Ethnographic lacunae: culturally specific tastes in drink, food, clothing, interior decorating, eating out, etc.

c) Lacunae of cultural stock: incompatibilities between cultures in the volume and size of the inventory of knowledge, including a knowledge of one's own history, cultural and social symbols, color symbolism (blue jeans), and other implicit symbols which are "substantially more numerous. "

"Destiny" of non-equivalent words (refusal of them or loan and full absorption) in many respects depends on presence / absence in system of borrowing language of equivalent or close unit by meaning, one-word equivalents.

Hence, non-equivalent lexicon promptly provides this necessity usually denoting:

1) The words designating concepts or realities of culture, i. e. exotisms (privacy, head-hunter, duty-free);

2) The new words designating the borrowed concepts or realities, of "foreign" culture (bage, venture, the grant, impeachment, a pager) can be counted as semantic neologisms.

Essential feature of exotic lexicon is their weak (practically zero) word-formation efficiency, absence of derivatives. The semantic variation (the development of polysemy) is not essential for exotisms.

The meaning of the above-given English and Russian national notions has not been conveyed by way of translation proper. They have simply been explained in the target language. Sometimes each or some of the components, making up the unit of specific national lexicon, can also be directly translated. And yet it may turn insufficient for faithful rendering of their sense.

Semantic neologisms, on the contrary, in the case of actualization of their semantics are included in process of a derivation (the grant - грантовый; a pager - пейджинг - paging). Being unique names of the widespread subjects or the phenomena such words "get used" to borrowing language, occupying their own niche.

The intense development of science, macro economy has called forth the invention and introduction of an immense number of new words and changed the meanings of old ones, e. g. recorder, supermarket, pager, bage and so on.

The laws of efficient communication demand maximum signal in minimum time. To meet these requirements the adaptive lexical system is in need of the readjusting means.

The probability of their fastening in the language - recipient depends on "survivability" of concept designated by them or a designated reality (extra-linguistic conditions), and also on some structural features of words (linguistic conditions) – harmonic sounding, including lengths of a word, derivative opportunities, presence / absence of motivation, etc.

The border between exotisms and semantic neologisms due to extra linguistic factors is mobile.

As it may be observed, the non-equivalent units are rarely similar by their nature and meaning in either of the two languages.

Analysis of the translated economic texts demonstrates the following parity of non-equivalent and equivalent lexicon (Table 1):

We can assure that in the texts on the economic subjects non-equivalent lexicon dominate. We consider that it is rather logically, so as economical lexical units appear and intensively develop exactly in the English-speaking countries.

There are three ways of interpretation of non-equivalents in the practice of translation of the economic texts.

1. By direct borrowing (transliteration or transcription): financial sector (финансовый сектор), infrastructures (инфраструктуры), cyclical and structural perspective (циклическая и структурная перспектива), financial supervising (финасовый супервайзинг).

The translator should not abuse his right to use loan words and should avoid overburdening the Russian text with numerous and often unnecessary borrowings.

2. By translation loans: сomplex consulting (комплексный консалтинг), monitoring (мониторинг), buyers, providers, debtors, investments recipients (байеры, провайдеры, реципиенты инвестиций, creditors/debtors, investors, business partners (кредиторы/дебиторы, инвесторы, бизнес партнеры).

3. By descriptive or interpreting translation.

For example, the Counterparty Risk Management Policy Group II is translated as Группы по формированию стратегии в области руководства риском; the IMF and World Bank Executive Boards as Руководящие органы Мирового банка и Международного валютного фонда.

The lexico-semantic maintenance and a concrete definition of word define ways of translational transformations among which, according to the results of research, the most preferable and frequent are transcriptions and transliterations.

Список литературы:

1. Арнольд И. В. Стилистика современного английского языка. - Л. , 1973.

2. Балли М. Французская стилистика / Пер. с фр. К. А. Долинина. – М. , 1961.

3. Бархударов Л. С. Язык и перевод. - М. , 1975.

4. Бельчиков Ю. А. . Язык: система и функционирование: сборник научных трудов. – М. : Наука, 1988.

5. Беляевская Е. Г. Семантика слова. – М. , 1987.

6. Блумфилд Л. Язык. – М. 1968.

7. Бодуэн де Куртене И. А. Об общих причинах языковых изменений // Избранные труды по общему языкознанию: В 2-х т. -Т. 1 – М. , 1963.

8. Виноградов В. В. Введение в переводоведение (общие и лексические вопросы). - М. : Издательство института общего среднего образования РАО, 2001.

9. Виноградов В. В. Основные типы лексических значений слова // ВЯ. – 1953. -№5.

10. Вопросы теории и техники перевода: Сб. / Под ред. Б. Ларина. - М. , 1970.

11. Гальперин И. Р. Информативность единиц языка. - М. , 1974.

12. Казакова Т. А. Практические основы перевода. СПб. : «Издательство Союз», - 2000.

13. Кашкин И. А. «Ложный принцип и неприемлемые результаты», Иностранные языки в школе, М, 1952, № 2. C. 78-90.

14. Комиссаров В. Н. Лингвистика перевода. М. : Международные отношения, 1980.

15. Комиссаров В. Н. Общая теория перевода. М. : ЧеРо, 1999.

16. Комиссаров В. Н. Перевод в аспекте корреляции “Язык – речь”//Вопросы теории перевода. М. : Московский государственный институт иностранных языков им. Мориса Тореза, 1978. – С. 5-13.

17. Комиссаров В. Н. Современное переводоведение. – М. , 2001.

18. Комиссаров В. Н. Теория перевода. М. : Высшая школа, 1990.

19. Комиссаров В. Н. , Черняковская Л. А. , Латышев Л. К. Текст и перевод. М. : Наука, 1988.

20. Крупнов В. Н. В творческой лаборатории переводчика. М. : Международные отношения, 1976.

21. Крупнов В. Н. Курс перевода. М. : Международные отношения, 1979.

22. Кудряшов. В. С. Семантико-прагматический аспект перевода реалий//Тетради переводчика. М. : Высшая школа, 1989. Вып. 23. – С. 40-48.

23. Латышев Л. К. Курс перевода: Эквивалентность перевода и способы ее достижения. - М. , 1986.

24. Латышев Л. К. Перевод: Проблемы теории, практики и методики. М. : Просвещение, 1988.

25. Левицкая Т. Р. , Фитерман А. М. Пособие по переводу с английского языка на русский. М. : Высшая школа, 1973.

26. Левицкая Т. Р. , Фитерман А. М. Проблемы перевода. М. : Международные отношения, 1976.

27. Левицкая Т. Р. , Фитерман А. М. Теория и практика перевода с английского языка на русский. М. : Изд-во лит-ры на иностр. яз. 1963.

28. Левый И. Искусство перевода. М. : Прогресс, 1974.

29. Лилова А. Введение в общую теорию перевода. М. : Высшая школа, 1985.

30. Любимов Н. М. Перевод – искусство. М. : Сов. Россия, 1977.

31. Миньяр-Белоручев Р. К. Общая теория перевода и устный перевод. - М. , 1980; Последовательный перевод. - М. , 1969.

32. Никитин М. В. . Лексическое значение слова. М. , 1983.

33. Никитин М. В. Курс лингвистической семантики. СПб. , 1996.

34. Реформатский А. А. Введение в языковедение / Под ред. В. А. Виноградова. – М. : Аспект Пресс, 1999.

35. Рецкер Я. И. О закономерных соответствиях при переводе на родной язык // Вопросы теории и методики учебного перевода: Сб. СТ. / Под ред. КА. Ганшиной и И. В. Карпова. - М. , 1950.

36. Смирницкий А. И. Лексикология английского языка. – М. ,1996.

37. Федоров А. В. Введение в теорию перевода. - М. , 1953.

38. Хорнби А. С. Конструкции и обороты английского языка // Хронби А. С. – М. : Буклет, 1994.

39. Чернов Г. В. Теория и практика синхронного перевода. - М. , 1978.

40. Швейцер А. Д. Теория перевода. - М. , 1988.

41. Ширяев А. Ф. Синхронный перевод. - М. , 1979.

42. Arnold I. V. Lexicology of modern English. M. , 1986.

43. Catford J. C. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. - London, 1965.

44. Dellinger Brett. Views of CNN Television News: A Critical Cross-Cultural Analysis of the American Commercial Discourse Style (Vaasa: Universitas Wasaensis, 1995).

45. Howarth, Peter Andrew Phraseology in English Academic Writing: Some implications for language learning and dictionary making. – T?bingen: Niemlyer, 1996.

46. W. van Humboldt. Sein Leben und Wirken, dargestellt in Briefen, Tagebuchern und Dokumenten seiner Zeit // Федоров А. В. Основы общей теории перевода. - М. , 1983.

47. Jakobson R. On Linguistic Aspects of Translation // On Translation / Ed. I. A. Brower. - Cambridge (Mass. ), 1959.

48. Juger G. Translation und Translationslinguistik. - Halle (Saale), 1975.

49. Kay, p. , Berlin, B. , Maffi, L. & Merrifield, W. R. The World Color Survey. Centre for the Study of Language and Information. 2003.

50. Nida E. Linguistics and Ethnology in Translation Problems // Word. - N. Y. , 1945. - No. 2.

51. Nida E. Toward a Science of Translating. - Leiden, 1964.

52. Neubert A. Text and Translation. - Leipzig, 1985.

53. Newmark P. Approaches to Translation. - Oxford, 1981.

54. Wodak Ruth, ed. , Language Power and Ideology: Studies in Political Discourse (London: Benjamins Publishing Company, 1989).

Dictionaries

55. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Oxford 1964.

56. The Longman Register of New Words. M. 1990.