home

Cultural and linguistic realities. Words are realities. Definitions and functions

Realities

Objects or phenomena of material culture, ethnonational characteristics, customs, rituals, as well as historical facts or processes that usually do not have lexical equivalents in other languages.

Explanatory Dictionary by Efremova. T. F. Efremova. 2000.

See what “realities” are in other dictionaries:

- (from medieval Latin realis real). Objects of material culture that serve as the basis for the nominative meaning of the word... Dictionary of linguistic terms

realities- 1. Words or expressions denoting objects, concepts, situations that do not exist in practical experience people speaking a different language. 2. Various factors studied by external linguistics and translation studies, such as state... ...

realities- linguistic a) words denoting objects and phenomena of a particular culture, and not found in other cultures b) lexical units of the source language, describing objects of material or spiritual culture, characteristic only of a given language... ... Universal additional practical explanatory dictionary by I. Mostitsky

realities- (lat. realia) pl. something that matters for practicality, life, reality, real facts, real science, real knowledge... Macedonian dictionary

REALITIES OF OPEN SPACE-TIME: TOWARDS UNDERSTANDING OUR HISTORICAL SYSTEM- text by I. Wallerstein, published in a number of sources in the mid-1980s. According to Wallerstein, time and space are external realities less dependent on us than geohistorical phenomena created by society. There are numerous... ... Sociology: Encyclopedia

Realities (national)

Realities (national)- objects, phenomena, traditions, customs that make up the specifics of a given social community, ethnic group. Realities are also called words and phrases denoting them. Most national realities refer to non-equivalent vocabulary... Brief dictionary of translation terms

national realities- 1. Objects, phenomena, traditions, customs that make up the specifics of a given social community, ethnic group. Realities are words and phrases that denote them. Most national realities refer to non-equivalent vocabulary. 2.… … Explanatory translation dictionary

American realities Americana Genre Drama Soap opera Creator Michael Sitzman Starring Anthony LaPaglia Ashley Greene Emilie de Ravin ... Wikipedia

words-realities- words denoting objects, phenomena and concepts that exist in the practical experience of native speakers of the source language, but are absent in the practical experience of native speakers of the target language and therefore do not have equivalents in it. Wed. realities... Explanatory translation dictionary

Books

Russian socio-economic system: realities and vectors of development. Monograph, Savchenko P.V.. The monograph reveals the phenomenon of the socio-economic System, the realities and vectors of development of the socio-economic System of Russia, its common and identical features, man as the core and goal...

Each language reflects the phenomena and processes occurring in the world, as well as specific objects and processes that exist among each people in the territory of their residence. Although the vision of the world is the same for all nations, nevertheless, in the culture of each nation there are concepts, phenomena, objects that are unique to this nation, associated with its historical, geographical, socio-political, and other conditions of existence. When studying the national and cultural content of language, features of the social structure, customs, art, science, literature, everyday life, and epic, many scientists attached special importance to realities. Questions of the relationship between culture in the broadest sense of the word and information embedded, stored and communicated in words as elements of language have long attracted not only linguists, but also representatives of other sciences. All features of the life of a people and their state, such as natural conditions, geographical location, the course of historical development, social structure, trends in social thought, science, and art are necessarily reflected in the language of a given people. Therefore, we can assert that language is a reflection of the culture of a nation; it carries within itself the national cultural code of a particular people. Every language contains words whose meaning reflects the connection between language and culture, called the cultural component of the semantics of a language unit. These words include, first of all, real words.

Download:

Preview:

The concept of “realities” as a linguistic phenomenon

In translation theory, the term “reality” is used in two senses. On the one hand, it refers to any facts characteristic of a given people. These facts include cultural and everyday objects, historical events, geographical names, as well as proper names. On the other hand, realities are words and phrases denoting these facts. Despite the duality of the use of the same term in relation to the objects of reality and to the linguistic signs denoting these objects, the term “reality” in the meaning of “reality-word” has firmly entered translation studies and at the same time retained its substantive meaning. Perhaps the main reason for its use is the inconvenience of the too long phrase “linguistic unit denoting reality.”

As a linguistic phenomenon, realia belongs to the category of non-equivalent vocabulary. The term “word equivalent” was created by L.V. Shcherba. He emphasized that such a group of words denotes one concept and is a potential equivalent of a word.

Scientist L.S. Barkhudarov noted that all types of semantic correspondence between lexical units of two languages can be reduced to three main ones: complete correspondence, partial correspondence, lack of correspondence. In cases where the correspondence of a particular lexical unit of one language in the vocabulary of another language is completely absent, it is customary to speak of non-equivalent vocabulary. This term was introduced by E.M. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov. They considered non-equivalent vocabulary to be “words that serve to express concepts that are absent in another culture and in another language, words related to private cultural elements, i.e. to cultural elements that are characteristic only of culture A and absent in culture B, as well as words that have no translation into another language, in a word, have no equivalents outside the language to which they belong. It is noted that characteristic feature non-equivalent words is their untranslatability into other languages using constant correspondence, their inconsistency with some word of another language.

In linguistics, there are several definitions of realities. According to definition O.S. Akhmanova , realities are “various factors studied by external linguistics, such as the state structure of the country, the history and culture of a given people, linguistic contacts of speakers of a given language, etc. from the point of view of their reflection in a given language.”

HELL. Schweitzer gave the following definition of realia: “units of the national language, denoting unique referents characteristic of a given linguistic culture and absent in the compared linguistic cultural community.”

S. Vlahov and S. Florin considered as realities words and phrases that name objects characteristic of the life (everyday life, culture, social and historical development) of one people and alien to another, being carriers of national and / or historical flavor, they, as a rule, do not have exact correspondences (equivalents) in other languages, and, therefore, cannot be translated on a general basis, requiring a special approach.

The very word “reality” -Latin adjectiveneuter, plural (realis, -e, plural realia - “real”, “real”), which, under the influence of similar lexical categories, became a feminine noun. In philology, the concept of reality is understood as an object, a thing that materially exists or existed, often connecting in meaning with the concept of “life”; for example, “the realities of European (social) life.” According to dictionary definitions, this is “any object of material culture”, “in classical grammar, various factors... such as the government structure of a given country, the history and culture of a given people, linguistic contacts of speakers of a given language, etc. from the point of view of their reflection in given language”, “objects of material culture that serve as the basis for the nominative meaning of a word”.
Realia-subject, even within the framework of regional studies, has a broad meaning, which does not always fit into the framework of reality-words, being an element of extra-linguistic reality; reality-word as an element of the vocabulary of a given language is a sign with the help of which such objects - their referents - can receive their linguistic appearance. Apparently, in order to clarify this issue, some authors try to clarify the concept by using, along with the term “reality” and “reality-word”.

Concept “Reality” should be distinguished from the concept of “term”.Realities are characteristic of the sublanguage fiction and funds mass media, are inextricably linked with the culture of a particular people, are commonly used in the language of this people and alien to other languages. The terms are devoid of any national connotation, relate mainly to the field of science, are created artificially, solely to name an object or phenomenon, with the spread of which they become widely used. First of all, the similarity between reality and the term is striking. Unlike most lexical units, terms denote precisely defined concepts, objects, phenomena; as an ideal, these are unambiguous words (and phrases) devoid of synonyms, often of foreign origin; among them there are those whose meanings are limited historically. All this can be said about realities. Moreover, at the junction of these two categories there are a number of units that are difficult to define as a term or as a reality, and there are many that can “legally” be considered both terms and realities. A.D. Schweitzer even has the concept of “term-reality”.
A term usually spreads with the spread of the thing of which it is the name. As if to his home, he enters the language of every people, which in one way or another becomes acquainted with its referent. One cannot demand “nationality” from a term: regardless of its origin, it is the property of all humanity, which uses it as its legitimate “property”. Reality always belongs to the people in whose language it was born. Unlike terms, it penetrates into other languages in general regardless of the familiarity of the corresponding people with the object it denotes, most often from literature or through media channels. Having appeared in the vocabulary of another language, it can stay there for some time and then disappear, or it can gain a foothold and turn into a borrowed word, thereby enriching or clogging the language. Moreover, there are realities that, without being terms, have an international distribution and are used almost as widely as terms. But here, too, they are distinguished from the latter by the scope of their application, as well as the presence of a national or historical connotation.
The terms differ from reality and in origin. Many are created artificially to name certain objects (the Latin and Greek languages are often used as building material) or by consciously rethinking existing words, while realities always arise through natural word creation. And this is quite understandable: realities are folk words, closely related to the life and worldview of the people who create them. An important feature of realities, which G.V. Chernov pointed out back in 1958, is, in contrast to terms, their common use, popularity, “familiarity” with all or most native speakers of the source language and, conversely, “foreignness” (V.P . Berkov)native speakers of their target language.
Some realities also have the characteristics of proper names, others stand on the border between both categories, and it would be no less correct to say that many of the proper names can also be realities. In fact, the close features of many realities and proper names in some cases make their delimitation almost impossible. Often the boundary has to be drawn based only on spelling: a proper name is written with a capital letter, a realia with a lowercase letter; and regarding German language, where common nouns are also written in capitals, even this sign loses its significance. Vinogradov V.S. believes that a proper name is always a reality. In speech, it always names a real or fictitious object of thought, a person or place, one of a kind and inimitable. Each such name usually contains information about the local and national affiliation of the object it designates. S. Florin and S. Vlahov consider proper names as an independent class of non-equivalent vocabulary, “which has its own characteristics and methods of transmission during translation, which, of course, often coincide with the methods of “translating” realities.” For the most part, they have in common with reality a bright connotative meaning that determines the ability to convey national and historical flavor. Nevertheless, we are forced to agree with the scientist Vinogradov that proper names are realities, since they name objects of reality that are unique in their kind. For example, such proper names as Father Frost, the Frog Princess, Koschey the Immortal are indeed objects known in Russian culture and absent in the cultures of other countries, and therefore have every right to be called realities.

Realities can be ethnic, everyday, cultural, and historical. They can also be a deviation from the literary norm; these include, for example, dialectisms, elements of reduced style (colloquial speech), jargon. But no matter how different the realities are, recreating them in the target language is quite difficult and problematic. The process of translating realia is ambiguous in many respects, since in the source text these ethnic components are not explained by the author and exist as something natural and taken for granted. Realia are nothing more than carriers of the historical and cultural linguistic component and translators should not forget about this. These are extremely specific concepts and definitions characteristic exclusively of one individually considered people, language group, or ethnic minority. The realities of one people are usually not found in the language of another and are unique in their own way in another linguistic form. The category of realia includes many proverbs, sayings, idiomatic expressions, phraseological units, words and phrases that denote individual national features, phenomena, and objects that are not found among other ethnic groups. Provided that the linguistic unit is small world, reflecting a certain real fragment or an idea about this fragment of reality, then the concept of reality, in ethnocultural terms, stands much higher than the meaning of the usual linguistic structural component! It is in the process of a translator’s activity that different linguistic systems, as well as completely dissimilar civilizations and cultural communities, collide and become closely united. Against this background, the process of translating realities stands out especially clearly. As has already been mentioned by many theoretical researchers in the field of translation studies, the reality is the “impossibility of translation in translation.” In this case, it is impossible to do without footnotes and comments, but, unfortunately, they will not be a solution to the problem. In many cases, even commonly used language components may become part of cultural terminology or may not belong to this category at all. Translation of realities is impossible without the translator having extensive knowledge of not only language, but also background knowledge.

Thus, realia represent a very interesting and unusual layer of language vocabulary. Semantization of these words is extremely important for foreign language learners, because... they usually cause difficulties in understanding. According to N.I. Parozskaya, the study of words - realities is also of interest in connection with the interpretation of texts. The category of realities is not simple and ambiguous; it requires a special approach to their classification and translation.

So, reality is different from the termin that it is characteristic of the sublanguage of fiction and the media, is inextricably linked with the culture of a particular people, is commonly used in the language of this people and is alien to other languages. The term is devoid of any national connotation, relates mainly to the field of science, is created artificially, solely to name an object or phenomenon, with the spread of which it becomes widely used.

In light of the above, wewe accept the definition of reality given by scientists S. Vlakhov and S. Florin. In our opinion, their concept of this type of lexical units is the most complete and detailed. Scientists gave this definition taking into account the translation of real words, which is of great interest to us.

Realia is a term that symbolizes an object, a certain thing that exists or previously existed. As a rule, realities strictly relate to a particular people, their culture and customs. WITH scientific point From this point of view, this phenomenon does not have any individual lexical meanings, but in some cases there are also specific names for certain features in different nations.

Features of realities

Let's consider the term in a narrower sense. Realia is part of a language, culture and folk characteristics, which cannot be translated. These can be popular sayings, the meaning of which is clear only to native speakers of the language in which they are written. Realities also include single untranslatable words that are understandable only to a narrow circle of people. It is noteworthy that within the area of use of one language, different realities can be formed. What are they and what do they sound like? It's actually simple. This category includes adverbs, phrases and the so-called “jargon”, which is characteristic only of a specific group. A striking example is the United States of America, where each administrative unit has its own linguistic features that are incomprehensible to visitors who also speak English.

How realities come into being

Linguists and philologists have long established that reality is an exclusively artificial phenomenon, invented by man on purpose. In almost every language of the world, certain words, adverbs, phrases and statements were specially created that are simply impossible to translate normally into another language of the world. A similar technique found its application in science, literature, poetry, songwriting, and then gradually migrated into our everyday speech. This is precisely why the well-known translation difficulties arise. It is noteworthy that it is in the Russian language that a huge number of realities are found, which foreigners interpret each in their own way, but none of the options corresponds to reality.

Unique words that appear in everyday speech

To make it clearer to the reader what we are talking about now, let us explain what social realities are. These can be statements and words that we use every day. They have no meaning according to the version explanatory dictionary, and generally they cannot be found on these pages. Social realities include abbreviations: registry office, housing office, recreation center, collective farm. These can also be names of things, national dishes, dances and other traditions that are not translated into other languages. These are borscht, sundress, banknote, etc. Among foreign similar names we list well-known dance rituals: Spanish jaleo, Italian tarantella, Mexican lambada and salsa. We can find similar phenomena in Eastern cultures. Just look at karate, which is practiced by the majority of the world’s population, as well as meditation, judo and other martial and spiritual arts.

The past of the peoples of the world

We have all come across words and expressions that seem to sound in our native Russian language, but are still incomprehensible to us living in the 21st century. And all because they represent long-forgotten realities. Our ancestors used them, but due to changes in language, they were erased from the memory of mankind. Thus, we can say that historical realities are a catchphrase, untranslatable expressions that carry a purely social meaning, often created using archaisms. You can meet them in diaries and notes of people who lived in ancient times, in original documents, in books and newspapers that were published then. In literature published in the twentieth century, this phenomenon is quite rare, even if the works were published from the manuscripts of Dostoevsky, Pushkin or Lermontov.

Conclusion

Many scientists say that reality is an equivalent part of the lexicon that cannot be translated. However, due to the fact that any written sources (be it a code of laws or prose) are constantly rewritten from one language to another, everything needs to be translated. If some reality is missed, the adequacy of the text will instantly be lost. Translation is extremely complex, and most often it is what causes a slight change in the meaning of the source.

Material prepared by K. A. Piksaykina

The question of whether language can be a reflection of culture occupies one of the central places in linguistics. The answer to it depends on how the problem of the ability of language to reflect reality, of which culture is a part, is solved. The values of one national community, which are completely absent from another or are significantly different from them, constitute a national sociocultural fund, which, one way or another, is reflected in the language. The study of the sociocultural background and the vocabulary that reflects it seems necessary in order to more fully and deeply understand the original and reproduce information about these values in translation using the language of another national culture.

Sociocultural information that is characteristic only of a certain nation or nationality and reflected in the language of a given national community is called background information by V. S. Vinogradov. The latter includes specific facts of history, features of the state structure and geographical environment of the national community, characteristic objects of material culture, folklore concepts - everything that in the theory of translation is usually called realities.

Realities in translation studies mean not only the facts, phenomena and objects themselves, but also their names. Concepts that reflect realities are of a national character and belong to the category of non-equivalent vocabulary, which E. M. Vereshchagin and V. G. Kostomarov define as words that serve to express concepts that are absent in another culture and in another language, words related to private cultural elements, as well as words that have no equivalents outside the language to which they belong.

The vocabulary of any language forms a system due to the fact that each word and, accordingly, each concept occupy a certain place in it, outlined by relationships to other words and concepts. The very nature of isolating specific links of the real world, their grouping, as well as transmission in another language depends on the presence of corresponding names in the language. And in this regard, in the process of translation from one language to another, the so-called problem of lacuna arises quite naturally and naturally.

Lacuna (from Latin lacuna - depression, depression) is the absence in one of the languages of the name of a particular concept. Conditions of socio-political, socio-economic, cultural life and the way of life of the people, their worldview, psychology, traditions, etc. determine the emergence of concepts that are fundamentally absent from speakers of other languages. Accordingly, in other languages there will be no single-word dictionary equivalents to convey them. L. S. Barkhudarov, I. I. Revzin, V. Yu. Rosenzweig and a number of other researchers were interested in the problem of the lacuna.

Gaps are conventionally divided into motivated and unmotivated. Motivated gaps are associated with the lack of reality itself among a particular people. Motivated gaps are identified in the area of so-called non-equivalent vocabulary. They are usually given with explanations during translation.

Unmotivated gaps cannot be explained through the absence of realities: the corresponding realities exist, but the people, for cultural and historical reasons, did not seem to notice them, did not formulate concepts about these realities, and left them unnamed. For example: in Russian: the husband’s mother is the mother-in-law, the wife’s mother is the mother-in-law, in English there is no differentiation: mother-in-law; respectively: father-in-law, father-in-law, father-in-law.

During the translation process, the meaning of such words usually becomes clear from the context. Therefore, there is no need for the translator to provide appropriate explanations or footnotes.

The problem of “eliminating gaps of various types” is closely related to the problem of translating lexical units with national markings - linguistic realities. From the standpoint of linguistic and regional studies and translation studies, the realities were subjected to the most detailed study. In terminological terms, a distinction is made between “reality-object” and “reality-word” that denotes it. In linguistic literature, the term “realia” is used both in the meaning of the word-reality and as an object-reality, as well as to designate an element of the vocabulary of a particular language.

In comparative linguistic and regional studies, realities are words denoting objects or phenomena related to the history or culture, economy or way of life of the country of the language being studied, which differ completely or partially from the lexical concepts and words of the language being compared.

The realities in linguistic and regional studies include, firstly, onomastic realities, which include:

Geographical names (toponyms), especially those with cultural and historical associations;

Anthroponyms – names of historical figures, public figures, writers, scientists, artists, popular athletes, characters in fiction and folklore;

Names of works of literature and art, historical facts and events in the life of the country, names of state public institutions and many others.

Secondly, realities denoted by appellative vocabulary:

Geographical terms denoting features of the natural geographical environment, flora and fauna;

In their research, E.M. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov turned to reality, using the terms “background” and “connotative words”, “non-equivalent vocabulary”, or “words with a cultural component”, understanding by them lexical units, a kind of semantics which reflects the characteristics of culture.

The researcher of regionally-oriented vocabulary G.D. Tomakhin, who compared the American version of English and the Russian language and the cultures behind them, uses the terms “denotative realities” and “connotative realities.” Denotative realities, according to G.D. Tomakhin’s definition, are those facts of language that designate objects and phenomena characteristic of a given culture that have no correspondence in the compared culture. Connotative realities, as opposed to denotative ones, denote objects that are no different from similar objects of comparable cultures, but received in a given culture and the language serving it additional meanings, based on cultural and historical associations unique to a given culture.

To designate word-realities in translation studies, researchers have introduced concepts such as:

Non-equivalent vocabulary - words that have no equivalents outside the language to which they belong (G.V. Chernov, A.V. Fedorov);

Exotic vocabulary - lexical units denoting geographical and historical realities (A. E. Suprun);

Gaps (lacunae) are situations that are common in the culture of one people, but not observed in another culture (I. I. Revzin, V. Yu. Rosenzweig);

Barbarisms are words with the help of which it becomes possible to describe foreign customs, features of life and everyday life, and create local color (A. A. Reformatsky);

Ethnocultural vocabulary (ethnolexemes) are lexical units that characterize a system of knowledge about the specific culture of a certain people as a historical and ethnic community of people (L. A. Sheiman);

Alienisms are words from little-known languages that emphasize stylistic function exoticisms (V.P. Berkov).

In addition to ordinary realities, the researcher identifies associative realities that find their materialized expression in the components of word meanings, in the shades of words, in emotional-expressive overtones, in internal verbal form, etc., revealing informational discrepancies of conceptually similar words in the languages being compared.

S. Vlahov and S. Florin define realia as a special category of means of expression, including words and phrases naming objects that are characteristic of the life, everyday life, culture and history of one people and alien to another. Researchers note that when translating realities require a special approach, since they do not have exact correspondences in other languages, being carriers of national and/or historical flavor.

In general, the above definitions characterize the concept of “words-realities” that we are considering as linguistic units denoting elements of a “foreign” culture that have a national, historical, local or everyday connotation and do not have equivalents in other languages and cultures.

Having compared the existing definitions of the term “reality” in linguistics and translation studies, we will consider it as a linguistic unit. There is no consensus on the question of which category of linguistic units realia belongs to. However, most authors (A.V. Fedorov, S. Vlahov, S. Florin, etc.) believe that realities can be expressed in individual words and phrases that are semantically equal to words.

The grammatical form of a reality as a word depends on its belonging to a certain part of speech and on the characteristics of the grammatical structure of the language. According to the observations of S. Vlahov and S. Florin, most realities are nouns, which is natural, since, based on the definitions discussed above, realities most often name objects and phenomena. Realities should also be considered denominative adjectives, the meaning of which is directly related to the meaning of realia. Non-derivative realities are extremely rare among other parts of speech.

Distinctive features When compared with terms, realities can be considered to have a national and historical coloration and a connection primarily with fiction. The lexical categories under consideration also differ in the way they penetrate into other languages: the term becomes widespread along with the object whose name it is, reality penetrates into another language more often from literature and through media channels.

By their origin, realities arise through natural word creation, while terms are created artificially, most often based on words from Latin and Greek origin, or by rethinking existing words.

It should be noted that in certain cases there is a transition of realities into terms and vice versa; there is also a category of units that can be considered both terms and realities (A.D. Schweitzer), therefore, when distinguishing concepts, one should rely on the context.

Realia and proper names are so closely connected that in some cases it is possible to assign a lexical unit to one or another class of vocabulary only based on spelling. A number of authors, including V. S. Vinogradov, include proper names in the category of realia, while others (S. Vlahov, S. Florin) consider realia as a class of non-equivalent vocabulary. Some authors argue that the names of holidays and fairy-tale creatures can be both realities and proper names in different conditions.

Appeals form a special group of realities. It should be noted that only those that are carriers of national color within the original language can be considered true realities. A number of realities may represent deviations from the literary norm. First of all, they should be sought among dialectisms. S. Vlahov and S. Florin call realities of this type local as opposed to national. There are relatively few realities among the elements of the reduced style, and they are practically not found among the deviations that arose as a stylistic device of the author.

Realities, being the names of objects, concepts, cultural, everyday and historical phenomena of a certain people and country, reflect one or another segment of reality, therefore, are closely related to extra-linguistic reality. The extra-linguistic background created by the so-called “situational realities” - allegories, word-realities, allusions, hints - should be reflected in the translation text.

Summarizing the above, we can draw the following conclusions:

Realities are words and phrases naming objects, phenomena, objects that are characteristic of the life, way of life, culture, social and historical development of one people and unfamiliar or alien to another people, expressing national and (or) temporal flavor, not having, as a rule, exact correspondences in another language and requiring a special approach when translating;

Realia are one of the classes of non-equivalent vocabulary;

Realities are characterized by flexibility: without losing their status, they can simultaneously belong to several lexical categories;

Many realities are exponents of connotative meanings;

The main criterion for distinguishing realia from other classes of lexical units is its national and (or) temporal coloring.

Literature

1. Barkhudarov, L.S. Language and translation / L.S. Barkhudarov. – M.: International relations, 1975 – 190 p.

2. Berkov, V.P. Modern Germanic languages / V.P. Berkov. – M.: AST, Astrel, 2001. – 336 p.

3. Vereshchagin, E. M. Linguistic and cultural theory of the word / E. M. Vereshchagin, V. G. Kostomarov. – M.: Russian language, 1980. – 320 p.

4. Vinogradov, V. S. Introduction to translation studies (general and lexical issues) / V. S. Vinogradov. – M.: Publishing House of the Institute of General Secondary Education RAO, 2001. – 224 p.

5. Vlahov, S. Untranslatable in translation / S. Vlahov, S. Florin. – M.: International Relations, 1980. – 344 p.

6. Revzin, I. I. Fundamentals of general and machine translation / I. I. Revzin, V. Yu. Rosenzweig. – M., 1964.

7. Reformatsky, A. A. Introduction to linguistics / A. A. Reformatsky. – M.: Aspect Press, 2008. – 536 p.

8. Chernov, G.V. Theory and practice of simultaneous translation / G.V. Chernov. – M.: Librocom, 2009. – 208 p.

9. Fedorov, A. V. Fundamentals of the general theory of translation (linguistic problems): Textbook. allowance for institutes and foreign faculties. languages / A. V. Fedorov. – 5th ed. – St. Petersburg: Faculty of Philology of St. Petersburg State University; M.: LLC Publishing House “Philology Three”, 2002. – 416 p.

Introduction……………………………………………………………..2

1. Definition of linguistic reality…………………………………….

1.1 The place of realities in language…………………………………………….5

1.2 Understanding the realities………………………………………………………6

1.3 Realia as a linguistic unit……………………………………8

2. The problem of classifying realities…………………………………11

3. Methods of conveying realities during translation…………………………19

2. Realities in socio-political discourse and methods of their translation…………………………………………………………………………………

2.1 Understanding socio-political texts………………25

2.2 Translation of realities in socio-political articles…………26

Conclusion……………………………………………………………..38

List of references………………………………………………………41

Introduction.

Questions of the relationship between culture in the broadest sense of the word and information embedded, stored and communicated in words as elements of language have long attracted not only linguists, but also representatives of other sciences. All the big and small features of the life of a given people and their country (such as natural conditions, geographical position, the course of historical development, the nature of the social structure, the trend of social thought, science, art) are certainly reflected in the language of this people. Therefore, it can be argued that language is a kind of reflection of the culture of a nation; it carries within itself the national cultural code of a particular people. It contains words in the meaning of which a special part can be distinguished, reflecting the connection between language and culture, and which is called the cultural component of the semantics of a linguistic unit. These words, first of all, include real words. It should be noted that these linguistic units have received sufficient attention from both domestic and foreign researchers. As S.I. Vlakhov and S.P. Florin note, they drew attention to such “untranslatable” elements almost half a century ago (in 1960 their article “Realities” was published). Later, their book “The Untranslatable in Translation” was published, which presented a complete description, classification and methods of translating realities. Realities-Americanisms constitute the main object of research by G.D. Tomakhin. In textbooks on translation theory by L.S. Barkhudarov, V.N. Komissarov, V.N. Krupnov, L.K. Latyshev, T.R. Levitskaya, A.M. Fiterman, M.M. Morozova, A.V. .Fedorov also provides information about culturally marked words. Problems of the relationship between language and culture are also considered by E.M. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov. The roles of words-realities in work of art N.I. Pamorozskaya and V.S. Vinogradov pay attention.

Real work is devoted to the study of the realities of socio-political articles in the online edition of Euronews based on their classification, transmission in translation and lexicographic description.

Subject of this course work are linguistic realities and methods of their translation; this problem is one of the most controversial in translation studies.

Object of study are lexical units containing background information that are found in socio-political articles.

Relevance This topic is that the translator is faced with the problem of translating realities very often. Realities, relating to non-coinciding elements of language, denoting concepts that are alien to other cultures, always present a particular difficulty in the translation process. These difficulties, on the other hand, provide interest in this problem. The object of the study is lexical units containing background information that are found in socio-political articles in the online edition of Euronews.

Methodological basis research are works devoted to the problems of words-realities.

Purpose is to analyze the ways of conveying English realities when translating original texts from English into Russian. Based on the purpose of the study, the following tasks were solved:

1. On theoretical level:

Define the concept of the term “reality”;

Consider existing classifications of realities;

Consider techniques for conveying realities during translation.

2. On a practical level

Identify English realities in newspaper articles

Determine whether the identified realities belong to certain lexical categories;

Identify ways to convey realities;

Correlate the realities in the original texts with the realities in the translated texts.

Goals and objectives determined structure works: introduction, theoretical part, practical part, conclusion, list of references. The introduction defines the topic, object, relevance, goals, objectives, methodological basis, structure of the work.

Chapter one is devoted to realia as a linguistic phenomenon. It also provides an overview of existing classifications of realities and methods of translation.

The second chapter presents a classification of the realities identified in the socio-political articles of the Euronews online edition, and also analyzes the methods of their translation.

The conclusion contains conclusions from the study.

1. Definition of linguistic reality:

1.1 The place of realities in language.

As a linguistic phenomenon, realia is classified as non-equivalent vocabulary. They are part of background knowledge and are of significant interest when studying the interaction of language and culture. According to O.S. Akhmanova, the term reality can be defined as

“1.... various factors studied by external linguistics, such as the government structure of a given country, the history and culture of a given people, language contacts of speakers of a given language from the point of view of their reflection in a given language;

1. objects of material culture."

Schweitzer A.D. By realia he understands “units of the national language that denote unique referents characteristic of a given linguistic culture and absent in the compared linguistic cultural community.”

The word “reality” itself is a Latin adjective of the neuter gender, plural (realis-e; plural realia - “real”, “real”), which turned into a noun under the influence of similar lexical categories. In reality, the closeness between language and culture is most clearly manifested. In general, reality is a very complex material, linguistic, grammatical and lexical concept. In terminological terms, one should distinguish between “reality-object” and “reality-word” that designates it. In linguistic literature, the term “realia” is used both in the meaning of the word-reality and as an object-reality, as well as to designate an element of the vocabulary of a particular language.

1.2 Understanding reality

From the standpoint of linguistic and regional studies and translation studies, the realities were subjected to the most detailed study. In comparative linguistic and regional studies, realities are words denoting objects or phenomena related to the history or culture, economy or way of life of the country of the language being studied, which differ completely or partially from the lexical concepts and words of the language being compared. The realities in linguistic and regional studies include, firstly, onomastic realities, which include:

Geographical names (toponyms), especially those with cultural and historical associations;

Anthroponyms - names of historical figures, public figures, writers, scientists, artists, popular athletes, characters in fiction and folklore;

Names of works of literature and art, historical facts and events in the life of the country, names of state public institutions and many others.

Secondly, realities denoted by appellative vocabulary:

Geographical terms denoting features of the natural geographical environment, flora and fauna;

Some words (including general terms) related to government, the socio-political life of the country, jurisprudence, military affairs, art, the education system, production and industrial relations, life, customs and traditions. In their research, E.M. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov turned to reality, using the terms “background” and “connotative words”, “non-equivalent vocabulary”, or “words with a cultural component”, understanding by them lexical units, a kind of semantics which reflects the characteristics of national culture.

The researcher of regionally-oriented vocabulary G.D. Tomakhin, who compared the American version of English and the Russian language and the cultures behind them, uses the terms “denotative realities” and “connotative realities.” “Denotative realities,” according to G.D. Tomakhin’s definition, are those facts of language that designate objects and phenomena characteristic of a given culture that have no correspondence in the compared culture. “Connotative realities,” as opposed to denotative ones, denote objects that are no different from similar objects of comparable cultures, but which have received additional meanings in a given culture and the language that serves it, based on cultural and historical associations inherent only to a given culture. To designate word-realities in translation studies, researchers have introduced such concepts as

- “non-equivalent vocabulary” - words that have no equivalents outside the language to which they belong (G.V. Chernov, A.V. Fedorov);

- “exotic vocabulary” - lexical units denoting geographical and historical realities (A.E. Suprun);

- “barbarisms” - words with the help of which it becomes possible to describe foreign customs, features of life and everyday life, and create local color (A.A. Reformatsky);

- “ethnocultural vocabulary”, “ethnolexemes” - lexical units that characterize the system of knowledge about the specific culture of a certain people as a historical-ethnic community of people (L.A. Sheiman);

- “alienisms” - words from little-known languages that emphasize the stylistic function of exoticisms (V.P. Berkov).

V.S. Vinogradov calls all specific facts of the history and state structure of a national community, features of its geographical environment, characteristic everyday objects of the past and present, ethnographic and folklore concepts realities, classifying them as non-equivalent vocabulary. In addition to ordinary realities, the researcher identifies “associative realities”, which “find their materialized expression in the components of word meanings, in the shades of words, in emotional-expressive overtones, in internal verbal form, and the like, revealing informational discrepancies between conceptually similar words in the languages being compared ". S.I. Vlakhov and S.P. Florin define realia as a special category of means of expression, including words and phrases naming objects that are characteristic of the life, way of life, culture and history of one people and alien to another. Researchers note that when translating realities require a special approach, since they do not have exact correspondences in other languages, being carriers of national or historical flavor.

Having compared the existing definitions of the term “reality” in linguistics and translation studies, we will consider it as a linguistic unit.

1.3 Realia as a linguistic unit

There is no consensus on the question of which category of linguistic units realia belongs to. However, today there are many opinions that realities can be expressed by individual words and phrases that are semantically equal to words. The grammatical form of a reality as a word depends on its belonging to a certain part of speech and on the characteristics of the grammatical structure of the language. According to the observations of S.I. Vlakhov and S.P. Florin, most realia are nouns, which is natural, since, based on the definitions discussed above, realia most often refers to objects and phenomena.

In order to clarify the content of realia as a translation term, it should be considered against the background of other classes of vocabulary. Realities have the greatest number of common features with terms. Both realities and terms are unambiguous words and phrases devoid of synonyms that name objects, concepts, and phenomena. Among both classes there are units of foreign language origin, as well as units with historically limited meaning. The distinctive features of realities when compared with terms can be considered national and historical coloring (while the term is completely devoid of this feature) and a connection primarily with fiction. The lexical categories under consideration also differ in the way they penetrate into other languages: the term becomes widespread along with the object whose name it is, reality penetrates into another language more often from literature and through media channels. By their origin, realities arise through natural word creation, while terms are created artificially, most often based on words of Latin and Greek origin, or by rethinking existing words.

It should be noted that in certain cases there is a transition of realities into terms and vice versa; There is also a category of units that can be considered both terms and realities, therefore, when distinguishing concepts, one should rely on the context.

Realia and proper names are so closely connected that in some cases it is possible to assign a lexical unit to one or another class of vocabulary only based on spelling. A number of authors, including V.S. Vinogradov, include proper names in the category of realia, while others (S.I. Vlakhov, S.P. Florin) consider realia as a class of non-equivalent vocabulary. Some authors argue that the names of holidays and fairy-tale creatures can be both realities and proper names in different conditions. Appeals form a special group of realities. It should be noted that only those that are carriers of national color within the original language can be considered true realities.

A number of realities may represent deviations from the literary norm. First of all, they should be sought among dialectisms - realities of this type are called by S.I. Vlakhov and S.P. Florin local as opposed to national. There are relatively few realities among the elements of the reduced style, and they are practically not found among the deviations that arose as a stylistic device of the author. Realities, being the names of objects, concepts, cultural, everyday and historical phenomena of a certain people and country, reflect one or another segment of reality, therefore, are closely related to extra-linguistic reality. The extra-linguistic background created by the so-called “situational realities” - allegories, word-realities, allusions, hints - should be reflected in the translation text. Summarizing the above, we can draw the following conclusions:

Reality is an object, a thing that materially exists or existed. In linguistics and translation studies, realia are words and expressions denoting these objects, as well as stable expressions containing such words. Realities are characteristic of the sublanguage of fiction and the media, are inextricably linked with the culture of a particular people, are commonly used in the language of this people and alien to other languages;

Realities are characterized by flexibility: without losing their status, they can simultaneously belong to several lexical categories;

Many realities are exponents of connotative meanings;

The main criterion for distinguishing realia from other classes of lexical units is its national and (or) temporal coloring.

2. The problem of classifying realities

Today, researchers offer various classifications of realities, based on certain principles. E.M. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov, taking the material of the Russian language as a basis, commented on seven groups of words endowed with national-cultural semantics:

1. Sovietisms are words that express those concepts that appeared as a result of the restructuring of social life in Russia after the October Revolution (for example: Supreme Council, deputy).

2. The words of the new way of life are closely related to Sovietisms (for example: cultural park, subbotnik, registry office, record book).

3.Names of objects and phenomena of traditional life (for example: cabbage soup, bagel, felt boots, accordion).

4. Historicisms, that is, words denoting objects and phenomena of previous historical periods (for example: fathom, foot, verst, caftan, district).

5. Vocabulary phraseological units(for example: hit with your forehead, find out all the ins and outs).

6. Words from folklore (for example: good fellow; by leaps and bounds; betrothed); miracle-yudo; firebird, brownie).

7. Words of non-Russian origin, so-called Turkisms, Mongolisms, Ukranisms (for example: taiga, bazaar, lasso, robe, raisin, pilaf). .

Judging by the above groups, E.M. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov characterizes realia as vocabulary containing background information. According to V.S. Vinogradov, the content of background information covers, first of all, specific facts of the history and state structure of the national community, features of the geographical environment, characteristic objects of material culture of the past and present, ethnographic and folklore concepts - that is, everything that is in the theory of translation usually called realities. Those concepts that reflect realities are of a national character and are materialized in the so-called non-equivalent vocabulary. V.S. Vinogradov examines the problem of realities based on Latin American material. This scientist divides the stock of lexical units that convey the background information under study into a number of thematic groups:

1. Vocabulary naming everyday realities

a) Housing, property.

b) Clothes, accessories.

c) Food, drinks.

d) Types of work and occupations.

d) Banknotes, units of measure.

e) Musical instruments, folk dances and songs, performers.

g) Folk holidays, games.

h) Appeals.

2. Vocabulary naming ethnographic and mythological realities

a) Ethnic and social communities and their representatives.

b) Deities, fairy-tale creatures, legendary places.

3. Vocabulary naming the realities of the natural world

a) Animals.

b) Plants.

c) Landscape, landscape.

4. Vocabulary naming the realities of state administrative structure and public life (current and historical)

A) Administrative units and government institutions.

b) Public organizations, parties and the like, their functionaries and participants.

c) Industrial and agricultural enterprises, trading establishments.

d) Main military and police units and ranks.

e) Civil positions and professions, titles and ranks.

5. Vocabulary naming onomastic realities

a) Anthroponyms.

b) Toponyms.

c) Names literary heroes.

d) Names of companies, museums, theaters, restaurants, shops, beaches, airports.

6. Vocabulary reflecting associative realities:

a) Vegetative symbols (for example: madroño-poetic symbol of Madrid).

b) Animal symbols (for example: kabure - a bird of prey, the feathers of which, according to legend, have magical powers).

c) Color symbolism (for example: green - the color of hope (Panama, Chile), a symbol of the future; yellow - the color of mourning (Spain, the Middle Ages).

d) Folklore, historical and literary-book allusions. They contain hints about the lifestyle, behavior, character traits, deeds of historical, folklore and literary heroes, historical events, myths, legends and the like.

e) Linguistic allusions. They usually contain a hint of some phraseological unit, proverb, saying, catchphrase or current expression. Associative realities are associated with a wide variety of historical and cultural national phenomena and are embodied in language in a very unique way. Such realities were not reflected in special words, in non-equivalent vocabulary, but were “fixed” in the most ordinary words (for example: colors, symbols). Connotative realities are contrasted with denotative - lexical units, the semantic structure of which is entirely filled with background lexical information. Connotative realities find their materialized expression in the components of word meanings, in shades of word meanings, in emotional and expressive overtones, in the internal form of a word, revealing informational discrepancies between conceptually similar words in the languages being compared. Thus, the words “sun”, “moon”, “sea”, “red” and the like, embodying universal human background knowledge, are accompanied in literary texts of a particular language by regional background knowledge, background information determined by associative realities.

So, V.S. Vinogradov examines and systematizes the stock of lexical units that convey background information, and notes that “the proposed and, apparently, incomplete classification of such units irrefutably demonstrates how deeply the roots of the national culture go into the folk language and how widely they ramify in it ".

In a number of works by researchers of culturally marked vocabulary, realia words represent a separate category of non-equivalent vocabulary. The most detailed classification of word-realities is proposed in the monograph by S.I. Vlakhov and S.P. Florin:

SUBJECT DIVISION

A. Geographical realities:

1. Names of objects of physical geography, including meteorology.

2. Names of geographical objects associated with human activity.

3. Names of endemics (names of animals and plants).

B. Ethnographic realities:

a) Food, drinks.

b) Clothes.

c) Housing, furniture, dishes.

d) 2. Labor:

a) Working people.

b) Tool. Transport.

c) Labor organization.

d) Others.

3. Art and culture:

a) Music and dancing.

b) Musical instruments.

c) Folklore.

e) Other arts and objects of art.

f) Performers.

g) Customs, rituals.

h) Holidays, games.

i) Mythology

j) Cults-servants and followers.

4. Ethnic objects:

a) Ethnonyms.

b) Nicknames.

c) Names of persons at the place of residence.

5. Measures and money.

a) Units of measures.

b) Monetary units.

B. Socio-political realities.

1. Administrative-territorial structure:

a) Administrative-territorial units.

b) Settlements.

2. Bodies and holders of power.

a) Authorities.

b) Bearers of power.

3. Social and political life:

a) Political organizations and political figures.

b) Patriotic and social movements.

V) Social phenomena and movement.

d) Titles, degrees.

e) Institutions.

f) Educational and cultural institutions.

g) Estates and castes.

h) Class signs and symbols.

4. Military realities.

a) Divisions

b) Weapons.

c) Uniforms.

d) Military personnel.

LOCAL DIVISION

A. In the plane of one tongue

1. Their realities are mostly the original words of a given language:

a) National realities - they call objects that belong to a given people, a given nation, but are foreign outside the country.

b) Local - do not belong to the language of the corresponding people, but either to a dialect, its adverb, or to the language of a less significant social group.

c) Microlocal - realities, the social or territorial basis of which is narrower than even the most narrowly local ones: a word can be characteristic of one city or village without losing its characteristics and, therefore, requiring the same approach when translated.

2. Foreign realities are either borrowings or transcribed realities of another language:

a) International are realities that appear in the vocabulary of many languages and are included in the corresponding dictionaries and usually retain their original national coloring.

b) Regional - those that crossed the borders of one country or spread among several nations (not necessarily neighboring), usually with a referent, thus being integral part vocabulary of several languages.

B. In the plane of a pair of languages - realities are considered from the point of view of translation:

1. External realities are equally alien to both languages.

2. Internal realities - words that belong to one of a pair of languages, and, therefore, foreign to the other.

TIME DIVISION

A. Modern

B. Historical - depending on the degree of assimilation, they are divided into

1. Familiar (vocabulary).

2. Unfamiliar (non-dictionary).

Fashionable and episodic realities are closely related to historical ones. “Fashionable - unexpectedly they burst into the language, capture the attention of wide circles of society, primarily young people, and are usually soon forgotten. Episodic realities are non-dictionary realities. Authors and translators introduce them, depending on the requirements of the context, once or several times, in a word, episodically, but they do not become widespread and are not fixed in the language.”

So, the classification proposed by Bulgarian scientists is based on several principles. S.I. Vlakhov and S.P. Florin take into account not only the thematic principle, but also consider the principle of local division (in the plane of one or several languages) and the principles of temporal division. Taking the above classification as a basis, V.N. Krupnov creates his own classification of nationally marked words. It coincides in almost everything with the one discussed above and is supplemented by only one group - the group advertising realities. As V.N. Krupnov himself notes, “it is no coincidence that it is believed that there is a special “language of advertising.” In terms of translation, advertising realities present exceptional difficulties for the translator.

The classification proposed by G.D. Tomakhin reflects the realities of American reality:

I. Ethnographic realities. The realities of everyday life. Speech etiquette and standards of behavior

1. Realities of everyday life. Housing.

2. Clothes.

3. Food, drinks.

4. Household establishments.

5. Realities of transport.

6. Communications: mail, telegraph, telephone.

7. Rest, pastime.

8. Customs and traditions, holidays.

9. Measures, money.

10. Routine behavior.

11. Speech etiquette.

II. Geographical realities

1. Classification of geographical realities (names of coastline features, names of relief features, hydrographic names.).

4. Cultivated plants.

5. Natural resources and features of their development.

III. Realities of the education system, religion and culture

1. Education system.

2. Religion.

3. Literature.

4. Theater and cinema.

5. Media.

6. Fine arts.

7. Musical culture.

IV. Onomastic realities.

Thus, having considered various points of view on the problems of classifying words-realities, we can conclude that in the literature on this issue the method of grouping realities according to the thematic principle has been firmly established. In order to systematize realities, it is necessary to rely on the extralinguistic factor - thematic associations, since the main criterion for their identification is the semantic factor, identified in comparison with the lexical-semantic system of another language. Being words with a pronounced national specificity, realia pose great difficulties in translation.

3. Methods of conveying realities in translation

Various researchers offer various techniques for translating real words. The most common methods are transliteration, transcription, tracing, descriptive translation, approximate translation and transformational translation.

1. During transliteration, the graphic form of the source language is transmitted by means of the translated language, and during transcription, its sound form is transmitted. These methods are used when transmitting foreign-language proper names, geographical names, names of various kinds of companies, firms, ships, newspapers, magazines (for example: Bank of America, General Motors). Currently, the technique of transliteration and transcription when translating fiction is used much less frequently than before. This is quite justified - conveying the sound or letter form of a foreign language lexical unit does not reveal its meaning, and such words remain incomprehensible to a reader who does not know a foreign language without appropriate explanations.

2. Tracing - the transfer of foreign language realities by replacing its components - morphemes or words with their direct lexical equivalents in the target language (for example: brain drain - brain drain). This method has the same drawback as the first.

3. Descriptive (“explanatory”) translation. This method consists in revealing the meaning of a lexical unit of the source language with the help of expanded phrases that reveal the essential features of the phenomenon designated by this lexical unit (for example: landslide - victory in elections with a large majority of votes). This method is considered very cumbersome and wasteful. Therefore, it is not always possible to apply it when translating texts. Translators often resort to a combination of two techniques - transcription or tracing and descriptive translation, giving the latter in a footnote or commentary. This makes it possible to combine the brevity and economy of the means of expression characteristic of transcription with the disclosure of the semantics of a given unit, achieved through descriptive translation.

4. Approximate translation consists of finding the closest correspondence in meaning to the target language for a lexical unit of the source language that does not have exact matches in the target language. These kinds of approximate equivalents of lexical units can be called “analogues”. For example: know-how - production secrets. When using “analogs” in the translation process, one must keep in mind that in some cases they may create an incompletely correct idea of the nature of the object or phenomenon they designate.

5. Transformational translation. In some cases, the translator has to resort to restructuring the syntactic structure of the sentence, to lexical substitutions with a complete change in the meaning of the original word, that is, to what is called lexical-grammatical translation transformations. For example: glimpse - is used in the expressions to have, to catch a glimpse of something, which makes it possible to use a verb in translation and thereby use syntactic restructuring of the sentence.

It should be added that V.S. Vinogradov and A.V. Fedorov identify another method - hyponymic (from the English word “hiponymy”, composed of Greek roots). This method of translation is characterized by the establishment of an equivalence relationship between the original word, which conveys a specific concept - reality, and the word in the target language, which names the corresponding generic concept. For example: nopal (type of cactus) - cactus, kebrago (type of tree) - tree.

A unique classification of occasional correspondences that are created by a translator when translating without equivalent vocabulary is given by V.N. Komissarov. In the field of translation without equivalent vocabulary, in his opinion, the following types of occasional correspondences are used:

1. Correspondences are borrowings that reproduce the form of a foreign word into the target language. Such correspondences are created using translation transcription or transliteration.

2. Correspondences - tracing papers that reproduce the morphemic composition of a word or the components of a stable phrase in the source language.

3. Correspondences - analogues created by finding the unit closest in value.

4. Correspondences - lexical substitutions created when conveying meaning without an equivalent word in the context using one of the types of translation transformations.

5. The description is used if it is impossible to create a match using the above methods.

As we see, V.N. Komissarov does not define the methods of transmitting realities; he notes the correspondences that are obtained as a result of the use of one or another translation technique. S.I.Vlakhov and S.P.Florin reduce, generalizing, the methods of conveying realities to two: transcription and translation. “The purpose of translation is not at all to preserve the originality of the original language - we try to convey the originality of the author’s style, but by means of our own language.” General scheme techniques for conveying realities in a literary text, defined by Bulgarian scientists, is as follows:

I. Transcription.

II. Translation (replacement).

1. Neologism:

a) Tracing paper.

b) Half tracing paper.

c) Development.

d) Semantic neologism.

2. Approximate translation:

a) Generic correspondence.

b) Functional analogue.

c) Description, explanation, interpretation.

3. Contextual translation.

Thus, the presence of non-equivalent units does not mean that their meaning cannot be conveyed in translation or that they are translated with less accuracy than units with direct correspondence. The fact is that when translating realities, the translator is each time faced with the problem of choosing one or another method of conveying them. The choice of path depends on several prerequisites:

1.on the nature of the text;

2. on the significance of reality in the context;

3. on the nature of the reality itself, its place in the lexical systems of the target language and the source language;

4. from the languages themselves - their word-formation capabilities, literary and linguistic traditions;

5. from the readers of the translation (compared to the reader of the original) of the languages themselves - their word-formation capabilities, literary and linguistic traditions.

Therefore, non-equivalent vocabulary requires a creative approach and deep linguistic and cultural knowledge of the translator when transmitting it into other languages.

Conclusions.

1. So, based on the data presented, it can be argued that - realia are words and phrases naming objects, phenomena, objects characteristic of life, everyday life, culture, social and historical development of one people and unfamiliar or alien to another people, expressing the national and (or) temporal flavor, which, as a rule, do not have exact correspondences in another language and require a special approach when translating;

Realia are one of the classes of non-equivalent vocabulary;

Some realia are similar to proper names, sometimes realia are a deviation from the literary norm, these include, for example, dialectisms, elements of reduced style (colloquial speech), jargon.

2. There are several classifications of realities according to various criteria. Realias as translation units are divided into:

Abbreviations (DC, registry office, collective farm);

Words (borscht, sundress);

Phrases (house of everyday life, house of culture);

Suggestions (Not everything is Maslenitsa for the cat).

The distinctive features of reality are the nature of its content
(the connection of the designated object with a certain country, nationality, social community) and its belonging to a certain period of time. Based on these characteristics, researchers proposed a subject, temporal and local classification of realities.

3. The possibilities of translating realities actually found in translations come down to four main cases: transliteration or transcription, creation of a new (or complex) word based on elements already existing in the language, likening translation, clarified in context conditions and hyponymic translation (replacement of the specific concept for generic). The question of choosing between transcription (transliteration) and direct translation concerns mainly words that are still unfamiliar to native speakers of the target language.

Chapter II.

Realities in socio-political discourse and ways of translating them.

2.1 Understanding socio-political texts

The most popular translation is socio-political translation not only in Russia and in foreign countries.
The relevance of the topic of “socio-political translation” is that in modern conditions translation of socio-political texts acquires special significance, acting as a means of propaganda and a weapon of ideological struggle. The volume of socio-political texts published annually, aimed at foreign-language (English-speaking) audiences, is quite large and, as it grows, international relations, continues to increase. There are also speeches by government, party and public figures; publications of international, governmental and public organizations. Socio-political realities are translated both with the help of transcription and transliteration (king - tzar), and with the help of descriptions and selection of analogues (province - province). Some realities are borrowed and become the realities of another culture. For example, quite recently in our country there was no position of “prime minister,” but now this reality and, accordingly, the word have firmly taken root in our society. Most borrowings are due to changes in the socio-political structure of Russia in the last decades of the twentieth century and belong to the spheres human activity, which, in connection with this change, underwent a radical change and became more relevant: politics, law, economics, religion, new technologies.

Based on the classification of realia words, which we discussed in Chapter I, we list the most common ways of translating them:

1. a) transliteration; b) transcription;

2. a) tracing paper; b) semi-tracing paper; c) development; d) semantic neologism;

3. likening translation;

4. contextual translation;

5. hyponymic translation;

6. replacing the reality of the source language with the reality of the target language;

7. transfer of reality foreign to the source language and target language;

8. omission of reality. The decision on choosing a specific technique when translating realia will directly depend on the task facing the translator: to preserve the flavor of a language unit with possible damage to semantics or to convey the meaning of realia (if it is unknown), while losing its flavor.

2.2 Translation of realities in socio-political articles

Analyzing the socio-political articles of the online edition of Euronews, we came across realities, the meaning of which was revealed with the help of transcription and likening translation. Let's focus on the transcription. Transcription is the transfer by graphic means (letters) of the target language of the phonetic appearance of a word with maximum sound proximity to the original. In the absence of letters that accurately convey the true sounds of a word, those closest in phonetic coloring are used. A word is usually transferred from Latin to Latin without graphic changes. When transferring from Cyrillic to Cyrillic, from Latin to Cyrillic or vice versa, transcription is invariably used as the most common and sometimes the only possible way of transmitting nationally colored units of speech. The desirability, according to S.I. Vlakhov and S.P. Florin, and often the necessity of using transcription when transmitting realities is due to the fact that with successful transcription, the translator can achieve the transmission of both semantic content and color. Considering socio-political vocabulary today, we can distribute it into the following groups, taking as the main criterion for classification the sphere of use of units of a given discourse: 1. Words of political discourse proper.2. Economic terms used in the socio-political discourse of the media.3. Religious terms used in the socio-political discourse of the media. Thus, let's consider the realities translated using transcription. 1) Safari The family, who lived in the southern Dutch city of Tilburg, had been on a safari in South Africa The family was returning from South Africa, where went on a safari. (14.05.10)2) Pope Benedict XVIThe Pope has used a visit to Portugal to repeat his opposition to gay marriage...Pope Benedict XVI, who is on a visit to Portugal, once again condemned same-sex marriage...In Rome, Pope Benedict XVI held an evening service in St. Peter's Basilica......on Saturday evening in the Vatican in St. Peter's Basilica, Pope Benedict XVI held the traditional Easter service. (04.04.10)3) JobbikLast month in Hungary the far right party Jobbik became the country's third strongest political force.…supporters of Jobbik, the far right party in Hungary, which became the third political force in the country... (06.05.10)4) Russia's famous Bolshoi theater has unveiled its new facade...the opening ceremony of the main facade of the State Academic Bolshoi Theater took place.5) Robin HoodGerman Robin Hood banker sentenced. German Robin Hood received a 22-month suspended sentence. (25.11.09)6) KremlinIn front of almost 700 journalists invited to the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin answered questions...President Vladimir Putin held a press conference for almost 700 Russian and foreign correspondents in the Kremlin... (23.12.05)7) Parsley...but when "Petroushka" was first performed in 1995...But when "Petroushka" was first performed in 1995...8) BuchenwaldIt is 65 years since Buchenwald was liberated.65 years ago the Nazi concentration camp Buchenwald was liberated (04/12/10)9) HolocaustJohn Paul II spoke about millions of Jews, were murdered in the Holocaust. John Paul II spoke about 6 million Jews killed during the Holocaust. (15.05.10)10) youth movement "Nashi"Russia's Nashi youth movement, very active already against...Participants of the action organized by the youth movement "Nashi"...(16.05.10)11) Verkhovna Rada The Dissolution of the Verhovna Rada...Collapse of the Verkhovna Rada We are glad... (Social Revolution, 01/20/10) However, a large number of realities found in English and American socio-political texts require the disclosure of their meaning when translating. So, for example, the likening translation when conveying the national color of realities is used quite often. When translating realities in this way, functional equivalents are selected that should evoke the same associations in the reader of the translation as in the reader of the source text. Simply transcribing such realities could lead to a loss of semantic equivalence. Techniques of likening translation can also be called explanation or description. Descriptive translation consists of conveying the meaning of an English word using a more or less common explanation. In addition, within the framework of likening translation, approximate translation is also possible, which consists in finding the closest correspondence in meaning in the target language for a lexical unit of the source language that does not have exact matches in the target language. These kinds of approximate equivalents of lexical units can be called analogues, but when using analogues in the translation process, one must keep in mind that in some cases they may not create a completely correct idea of the nature of the object or phenomenon they designate. Examples of approximate translation with a search for an analogue1) nuclear clock...has speeded up time by two minutes on its so-called “Doomsday Clock”....moved the hand of the symbolic “nuclear clock” “Doomsday clock”... (17.01.07)2) Metropolitan Kirill, Patriarch of Moscow and All RussiaThe leader of the Russian Orthodox Church was the first to publicly react to news of the attacks. Metropolitan Kirill, on behalf of the Russian Orthodox Church, expressed condolences...Patriach Kirill, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, led the prayers...at the Christ the Savior Cathedral in Moscow...Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus' led the night Easter service in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior... (04.04.10)3) Holy Fire Patriach Kirill then lit candles from the Holy Fire, using a flame flown from Jerusalem. Before the start of the service, Holy Fire was delivered to the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, which was brought late on Saturday evening by a special flight from Jerusalem. (04.04.10)4) matryoshka…or “Pot Luck” in English and “The Russian Dolls”…This is the film “Spanish Flu” and its sequel “Beauties” - the original title of the picture can also be translated as “Matryoshkas”. (18.05.07)5) ultra-right movement “Clean Hands”...right-leaning political groups...ultra-right movement “Clean Hands”... (14.05.10)6) Marshal of the SejmUnder Polish law, parliamentary speaker Bronislaw Komorowski is now acting president and the poll will take place by the end of June.Marshal of the Polish Sejm Bronislaw Komorowski, acting head of state, said on Saturday that the date of the presidential elections will be announced after consultations...7) Verkhovna RadaThe country's parliament has backed a vote of no-confidence in the government of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko .The Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian parliament) passed a vote of no confidence in the cabinet of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko.8) CongressThe men who ran America's economy have cast a key congressional committee...Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson warned Congress that...( 09.24.08)9) Communist regime...After the end of the communist system, we were free to express our ideas...However, as the head of the troupe, Janos Kisch, emphasizes, even under the communist regime, ballet dancers had the opportunity to speak out.10) Hitler YouthForced to join the Hitler Youth, the German-born Pontiff's visit is...It is known that during the Second World War, the future Pope, a German by nationality, was forced to join the children's Nazi movement "Hitler Youth". (28.05.06).11) representatives of the opposition of Thailand...where the red-shirts are strong......where the fortified camp of the “red shirts” is located...Pro-“Red Shirt” general shot in Thai capital. Shootout in Bangkok, a military adviser was wounded “ red shirts."A rogue general, backing the red shirt protest movement, has been shot in the head. Among the victims is the Red Shirts' military adviser, General Kattiya Swasdipo. (13.05.10)12) protest movement of fans of the Manchester United team, who chose the old colors of the club, gold and green. Manchester United: Debt, protest and the Green and Gold movement. Manchester United: debt, protests and the Gold and Green movement » (05.03.10)13) red banners with a hammer and sickleSome of the demonstrators even sang songs in honor of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, holding in their hands the Victory Banners. Participants in the action carried portraits of Stalin and Zhukov and red banners with a hammer and sickle … (05/09/10)14) leftist group “Revolutionary Struggle”Greek police suspect leftists. The police believe that the leftist group “Revolutionary Struggle” is behind the terrorist attacks.15) Capitol Hill President Barack Obama marched up capitol hill on Saturday to ensure his health care reforms would not fail......the American leader went to Capitol Hill to meet with members of the House of Representatives ahead of the vote...(03/21/10)16) Berlin WallTiananmen Square and the Berlin Wall 20-years on Tiananmen Berlin: 20 years later1989 saw two of the most dramatic events in recent world history, in June China ordered the crackdown on pro-democracy students at Tiananmen Square, while five-months later the Berlin Wall fell. Epochal events took place in these two countries 20 years ago: the fall of the Berlin Wall and the suppression of the demonstration in Beijing's Tiananmen Square. (29.10.09)17) House of the Prime Minister of Great Britain, number 10Number 10 is not a ‘des res’ according to author Kathy Lette, a friend of the Brown family. It is a fusty, musty, cramped, tiny, little flat...Number 10 is not a paradise nest... - This is a musty, old, cramped, tiny apartment. (13.05.10)18) German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said the euro zone’s economic woes could be the perfect opportunity to strengthen the European Union. If the euro collapses, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said in the West German city of Aachen, then the very idea of European unity will collapse. (14.05.10)He was joined by several heads of state and government including German Chancellor Angela Merkel...observed by the Russian President and leaders foreign countries, including the Chancellor of Germany. (05/09/10)19) Red SquareMoscow’s Red Square hosted the commemorations for the end of World War Two. Military parade in honor of the 64th anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War took place today on Red Square in Moscow 20) White HouseSpeaking from the White House Rose Garden, Obama said...21)...US President Barack Obama in his speech at the White House on Friday. (05/15/10) In addition, when analyzing socio-political articles, we came across such a stylistic device as periphrasis, which in the form of a free phrase or a whole sentence replaces the name of the corresponding object or phenomenon. A periphrasis usually highlights one of the features of phenomena, which seems characteristic and essential in a given particular case. Such highlighting of a new feature of the described phenomenon simultaneously shows the author’s subjective attitude to this phenomenon.1) Robin HoodBut apparently the intention was to take Green Tights Man back to his origins......where Robin Hood returns to his origins... (13.05.10)2) Frankism ...the murders were committed when miltary dictator Franco ruled Spain, but Garzon dropped the probe under pressure from state prosecutors...bringing him to justice for abuse of power during the investigation of the crimes of Francoism. (14.05.10)3) KremlinKremlin call for viginance after attacksRussian authorities promise tough measures in the fight against terrorism (29.03.10)Summarizing the study of the likening translation of realities in the texts of English newspapers, we note that translation using the selection of an analogue is to reveal the meaning of the lexical units of the source language with the help of expanded phrases that reveal the essential features of the phenomenon designated by a given lexical unit. Considering such techniques as periphrasis and transcription, it can be noted that they are more economical and quite common. Let’s make a classification of the above realities, referring to the classifications listed in Chapter I: 1. Units denoting the patriotic and social movement youth movement “Nashi” - NashiJobbik - Jobbik ultra-right movement “Clean Hands” - right-leaning political groups leftists - leftist group “Revolutionary Struggle” movement “Gold and Green” - the Green and Gold movement “Red Shirts” - red-shirts 2. Units denoting the state administrative structure Communism - communist system Francism - a period of time when miltary dictator Franco ruled Spain Hitler Youth - a period of time when Hitler ruled Germany 3. Units denoting bodies and bearers of power Marshal of the Sejm - parliamentary speaker Chancellor of Germany - German Chancellor Verkhovna Rada - Verhovna Rada Congress - congressional committee 4. Units denoting the administrative-territorial structure Capital Hill - capitol hill Number 10 - Number 10 Kremlin - Kremlin White House - White House Red Square - Red Square 5. Onomastic units Robin Hood - Robin Hood Petrushka - PetroushkaPope Benedict XVI - Benedict XVIMetropolitan Kirill - Patriach KirillBerlin Wall - Berlin WallHolocaust - Holoc austBuchenwald - Buchenwald 6. Units denoting traditional life Red banners with a hammer and sickle - Victory Banners Matryoshka - Russian Doll 7. Units related to religion Holy Fire - Holy Fire 8. Units related to national realities Safari - safari 9. Units related to the name of the theater Bolshoi theater - Bolshoi theater

Conclusions.

An analysis of the system of realia words in socio-political articles and the methods of their transmission during translation allows us to draw the following conclusions: realia words are a very unique and at the same time quite complex and ambiguous category of the lexical system of any language. Being one of the most important groups of non-equivalent vocabulary, realia act as a kind of “keepers” and “carriers” of regional information, this determines their special role in socio-political discourse. There is no single definition of vocabulary that has a cultural component in its meaning. In the scientific literature, different terms are used for this: background vocabulary, culturally marked words, nationally marked lexical units, background information, realia. We adhered to the latter term in the study. The problem of a unified classification of words-realities remains unresolved, but all existing classifications are based on the subject principle.

In the translation of newspaper articles, the following methods of transmitting culturally marked units are encountered:

1. Approximate translation, that is, selection of analogues.

2. Translation using transcription.

3. Translation using paraphrase.

In terms of the frequency of use of various methods of conveying real words, approximate translation is most often used (53%), the method of transcription can also be called quite common (36%), and the least common is the method of periphrasis (10%). Frequent use of one or another method of translating realities does not always mean its effectiveness. For example, transcription in compliance with all the rules in most cases conveys only the sound form of the word, without affecting its meaning. Also transliteration, which conveys the graphic form of a given lexical unit, and which is used less and less when transferring non-equivalent vocabulary into another language. All of the above examples demonstrate the variety of techniques that can be used when translating realities. However, the use of this or that technique in practice is limited various factors(necessity or optionality of conveying color, targeting the text to a certain circle of readers/listeners), on which the choice of translation method ultimately depends. Since each of the methods of transmitting words-realities has its own advantages and disadvantages, it is necessary to use combined methods of translating culturally marked units, not limiting oneself to one method, but combining, for example, transcription and descriptive translation, or give an explanation or commentary for each reality. Omission or incorrect transmission of real words leads to incomplete disclosure of the full meaning of a given word, which does not allow a foreign language reader to understand connotative shades, hints and allusions.

Conclusion.

So, according to the analysis carried out in the first chapter, we found out that realities are words denoting objects or phenomena related to the history or culture, economy or way of life of the country of the language being studied, which differ completely or partially from the lexical concepts and words of the compared language. In translation studies, real words are designated by non-equivalent vocabulary, that is, these linguistic units have no equivalents outside the language to which they belong. In addition, realities are characteristic of the sublanguage of fiction and the media and are inextricably linked with the culture of a particular people. Today, we can distinguish several different classifications of the units under consideration, which are based on certain principles. Moreover, in the literature on this issue, the method of grouping realities according to a thematic principle has been firmly established. For the purpose of systematization, it is necessary to rely on the extralinguistic factor - thematic associations, since the main criterion for their identification is the semantic factor, identified in comparison with the lexical-semantic system of another language. Since the distinctive features of realia are the nature of its content (the connection of the designated object with a certain country, nationality, social community) and its belonging to a certain period of time, based on these characteristics, researchers have proposed a subject, temporal and local classification of realia.

The most common ways of conveying realities in translation are transliteration, transcription, tracing, descriptive translation, approximate translation and transformational translation.

During transliteration, the graphic form of the source language is transmitted by means of the target language, and during transcription, its sound form is transmitted. It is worth noting that with successful transcription, the translator can achieve the transmission of both the semantic content and the color of reality. The choice of transcription during translation also depends on the reader to whom the text is aimed, that is, it is necessary to take into account the degree of familiarity of reality, since it should not remain beyond his perception. One of the main advantages of transcription as a technique is maximum brevity, which in some cases is the main reason for transcription.

The use of transliteration in conveying realities is very limited; it can be discussed when translating concepts relating mainly to socio-political life and proper names.

To convey realia, the technique of tracing is also used, which consists of conveying non-equivalent vocabulary by replacing its constituent parts - morphemes or words (in the case of stable phrases) with their direct lexical equivalents in the target language. But tracing, along with transcription and transliteration, does not always reveal to a reader unfamiliar with the source language the meaning of the word or phrase being translated. The reason may be that these words or phrases in the source language often have meanings that are not equal to the amount meanings of their “tracing paper”, in which equivalents of the translated language are used and this, in turn, leads to the fact that the meaning of the entire lexical formation as a whole may remain undisclosed.

Another way to convey realities is descriptive translation. The meaning of descriptive translation is to reveal the meaning of a lexical unit of the source language using expanded phrases that reveal the essential features of the phenomenon denoted by this unit, that is, in other words, using its definition in the target language. Although descriptive translation reveals the meaning of the original non-equivalent vocabulary, it has one drawback, namely, descriptive translation is too cumbersome and wasteful.

To translate some realities, you can also use an approximate translation, the meaning of which is to find the closest correspondence in meaning in the target language for a lexical unit of the source language that does not have exact matches in the target language. This kind of selection of approximate equivalents of lexical units can be called “analogues”. In a number of cases, when transferring non-equivalent vocabulary, the translator has to resort to transformational translation, in other words, to restructuring the syntactic structure of the sentence, to lexical substitutions with a complete change in the meaning of the original word, or to both at the same time, that is, to what is called lexical-grammatical transformations. Among the types of transformational translation, one can distinguish narrowing, expansion, narrowing or expansion of the original meaning, and functional replacement.

Based on the above facts, in the second part of this work we analyzed articles of socio-political discourse, as a result of which it can be noted that the use of the realities of this linguistic layer continues to increase. In the translation of newspaper articles, we came across the following methods of conveying language units, which include approximate translation, transcription and periphrasis. In addition, the identified realities were classified into the following classification types - socio-political, religious, everyday, as well as onomastic units. Translation of real words is a creative procedure that requires the translator to have a good level of cultural and regional training. The work covered only some aspects of the role of words-realities in socio-political discourse.

Bibliography.

1. Akhmanova O.S. Dictionary of linguistic terms. M.: Soviet encyclopedia, 1966 – 607 p.

2. Schweitzer A.D. Translation and linguistics. - M., 1973 – 212 p.

3. Vlahov S.I. Florin S.P. The untranslatable in translation. M.: International relations, 1986 – 416 p.

4. Tomakhin G.D. Realities-Americanisms. M.: Higher School, 1988 – 239 p.

5. Fedorov A.V. Fundamentals of the general theory of translation. M.: Higher School, 1983 – 303 p.

6. Vereshchagin E.M., Kostomarov V.G. Language and culture: Linguistic and regional studies in teaching Russian as a foreign language. M.: Russian language, 1973 – 248 p.

7. Vinogradov V.S. Lexical issues in the translation of literary prose. M.: Moscow University Publishing House, 1978 – 172 p.

8. Krupnov V.N. In the translator's creative laboratory. M.: International relations, 1976 – 192 p.

9. Barkhudarov L.S. Language and translation. M.: International relations, 1975 – 240 p.

10. Komissarov V.N., Chernyakovskaya L.A., Latyshev L.K. Text and translation. M.: Nauka, 1988 – 192 p.

11.Florin S.P. Translation torment. M.: Higher School, 1983 – 184 p.

12. Ziborova G.M. Difficulties in translating socio-political texts from English into Russian. M.: Higher School, 2000 – 228 p.

What else to read

Abstract: History of the development of hygiene 1. The development of hygiene in primitive and slave societies. The emergence and development of hygiene has a centuries-old history...

Formation of estimated liabilities and reserves for vacations As in 1s 8 Hello, dear blog readers. Lately, in my consulting work, I have quite often...

Puff khinkal in a pressure cooker Puff DAGESTAN KHINKAL Puff khinkal is often prepared in Dagestan. A very tasty, but high-calorie, masculine dish....