Translation peculiarities of linguistic units within texts of political discourse
At the current stage of scientific development political discourse offering multifaceted investigation material attracts experts of various fields of research, which provides an interdisciplinary focus in the study of this phenomenon. The practical interest in the results of such research has been revealed since the initiation of international relations and has gained even more popularity with the rise of public interest in political events and the increase of their role in determining people’s lives in the modern geopolitical environment. The work proposes and develops the tenants of modern translation theories and linguopolitical paradigm of scientific knowledge, providing for the approach to offer the most adequate variant of translation of linguistic units from English into Russian within political discourse, both on the semantic and connotation levels with regard to peculiarities of national mentalities. Within the framework of political discourse, which includes the study of Mass Media political texts, scientists speak of both cognitive knowledge and emotional information transfer, reflecting the personal stance of the author. The current article reveals special characteristics of political texts, including clichés, expressive emotional influence on the public and linguistic creativity. Special attention in this work is also given to the suggestions of most adequate variants of translation for these cases.
Sergienko P.I. (2019). Translation peculiarities of linguistic units within texts of political discourse. Research Result. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, V.5 (3), 71-81, DOI: 10.18413/2313-8912-2019-5-3-0-7
While nobody left any comments to this publication.
You can be first.
Alekseeva, I.S. (2008). Tekst i perevod. Voprosy teorii [Text and Translation. Theory Questions], Moscow, Russia: Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija (in Russian).
Akhmanova, O.S. (1966). Slovar’ lingvisticheskikh terminov [Dictionary of linguistic terms] Moscow, Russia (in Russian).
Barkhudarov, L.S. (1975). Yazyk i perevod: Voprosy obschej i chastnoj teorii perevoda [Language and translation: Issues of the general and special translation theory], Moscow, Russia: Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija (in Russian).
Vinogradov, V.S. (2001), Vvedenie v perevodovedenie (obschie i leksicheskie voprosy) [Introduction into the translation theory (general and lexical issues)]/ V.S. Vinogradov. Moscow, Russia: Institut obshego srednego obrazovanija RAO. (in Russian).
Vishnyakova, O.D. (2015), Yazykovoj znak v referentsial’nom pole kul’turnoj pamjati sotsiuma [Language sign in the referential field of the cultural memory of society]// Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 19. Linguistics and Intercultural Communication. No.4. pp. 50-66.
Vishnyakova, O. D. (2018). Language as an instrument of semantic interpretation in the modern English language, Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 19. Linguistics and Intercultural Communication,2, 17-27 (in Russian).
Dijk, van T. (1989). Yazyk. Poznanie. Kommunikatsija [Language. Cognition. Communication]. Moscow, Russia (in Russian).
Dem'yankov, V. Z. (1999). Interpretation as a tool and linguistics object. Voprosy filologii, 2, 5-13 (in Russian).
Komissarov, V.N. (1990). Teorija perevoda (lingvisticheskie aspekty): Ucheb. dlja in-tov i fak-tov inostr. yaz. [Theory of Translation (linguistic aspects): a coursebook for institutes and faculties of foreign languages]. Moscow, Russia: Vysshaja shkola (in Russian).
Moreva, A.V., Grekova, O.M. (2018). Peculiarities and difficulties of translating euphemisms (based on the BBC news articles), Nauchnij resultat. Voprosy teoreticheskoj i prikladnoj lingvistiki. 4,90-102. (in Russian).
Minyar-Belorouchev, R.K. (1980). Obschaja teorija perevoda i ustnij perevod [The General Theory of Translation and Interpreting]. Moscow, Russia: Voenizdat. (in Russian).
Terentij, L.M. (2009). Diplomaticheskij diskurs: politika, nauka, iskusstvo [Diplomatic discourse: politics, science, art]. Moscow, Russia: Nauchnaja kniga (in Russian).
Chudinov, A.P. (2007). Politicheskaja lingvistika [Political linguistics]. Moscow, Russia (in Russian).
Shveitser, A.D. (1973). Perevod i lingvistika (Gazetno-informatsionnij i voenno-publitsesticheskij perevod) [Newspaper and military information translation] Moscow, Russia. (in Russian).
Sheigal, E.I. (2000). Semiotika politicheskogo diskursa: monografija [Semiotics of political discourse: monograph]. Moscow – Volgograd, Russia Peremena. (in Russian).
Yazykoznanie. Bolshoy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar (1998). [Linguistics. Big Encyclopedic Dictionary], Bolshaya Rossiyskaya entsiklopediya, Moscow, Russia. (in Russian).
Fairclough, N. (1996). Language and power. Longman.
Herman, E.S., Chomsky N. (2002). Manufacturing consent. The political economy of the mass media. New York. USA.
Lippmann, W. (1922), Public Opinion. New Work, USA: Harcourt.
Minyar-Beloroucheva, A., Sergienko, P., Vishnyakova, O, Vishnyakova, E. (2018) Modern technologies in teaching professionally oriented foreign language to the students of politics, ICERI2018 Proceedings. 11th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation November 12th-14th, 2018 — Seville, Spain. Edited by L. Gómez Chova, A. López Martínez, I. Candel Torres. — ICERI2018 Proceedings Indexed in Web of Science. — IATED Academy iated.org Seville, SPAIN, 7967–7975.
Moghaddas, B. Dekhnich, O. V. (2015). The Philosophy of Structuralism in Language and Linguistics. Nauchnyi rezul'tat, Voprosy teoreticheskoi i prikladnoi lingvistiki, 1,4 (6), 22-27. Retrieved from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/v/the-philosophy-of-structuralism-in-language-and-linguistics.
Ponton, D.M. (2011). For Arguments’ sake: speaker evaluation in modern political discourse, Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 110
Pym, A. (1993). Epistemological Problems in Translation and its Teaching: A Seminar for Thinking Students. Caminade.
Robinson, D. (2002). Becoming a Translator. An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Translation. N.Y.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2009). Society and discourse: how social contexts influence text and talk. Cambridge, UK: University Press.
Wodak, R. (1997). Critical Discourse Analysis/ Discourse as Social Interaction. Vol. 2. London, UK: Sage Publications.
.