Regularities of proper name from English into Russian

№English proper nameRussian proper nameCharacteristics1The Lord of the Rings: The Two TowersВластелин колец: Две крепостиOmission, word-by-word translation, 8-4, article+N+Prep+article+article+number+N -

Regularities of proper name from English into Russian

Дипломная работа

Иностранные языки

Другие дипломы по предмету

Иностранные языки

Сдать работу со 100% гаранией

Ministry of Education and Science of Russian FederationCaucasus State Technical University, Intercultural Communication and Tourism Department












Course Project on Lexicology:of proper name from English into Russian













, 2011



Introduction. Theoretical part of the course project

.1 The problem of defining a proper name

.2 Transformations. Practical part of the course project

.1 One-summit titles of the films

.2 Two-summit titles of the movies

.3 Multi-summit titles of the moviesof authoritiesAAppendix BC




Nowadays there are thousands of proper names. In the world there are many companies and companies, products and substances, plants and animals, all of them have their own proper names and in modern linguistics the problem of translation of proper names from English into Russian plays the rather important role. television occupies the great part of our life and exists in cultures of all nations, we decided to carry out the research of the proper names in this sphere, because the name produces the first impression, but not the content. The televisions proper names play an important role in our life, that determines the topicality of our course project.object of our research is proper names.subject of our course project is the regularities of translation of proper names from English into Russian.purpose of our course project is to study find out the regularities of translation of proper names from English into Russian.achieve the given aim some tasks were put forward:

·to analyze the term proper name ;

·to study the approaches to the translation of this phenomenon;

·to give a classification of proper names;

·to study the English titles of films and their translation into Russian;

·to carry out the research and give a conclusion.material for the course projects research will be selected from the website.methods used in the present research include contrastive analysis, componential analysis, observation, comparison, summarizing.


I. Theoretical part of the course project


.1 The problem of defining a proper name


In this written work weve dealt with the peculiarities of translation of the proper names. In order to prepare the theoretical basis for the work we needed to analyze the very term proper name and all the approaches to the translation of this phenomenon.English online encyclopedias give the follows materials concerning the proper names: Proper nouns (also called proper names) are the names of unique entities. For example, "Janet", "Jupiter" and "Germany" are proper nouns [1:34]. Well, here weve met three problems. They are:

·we deal with the films titles and they are not only nouns,

·they cannot be always unique, because there are more than two films with the same title,

·and it is logical, that in order to be unique one must use more than one word in the title to overcome the problem, but it leads to the usage of other parts of speech.lack of objectiveness caused the referring to the other sources. For example Matthews said that the specific nature of names is often described in conditions of the differences between proper nouns and common nouns. As he said common noun, is a name whose application is not restricted to arbitrarily distinguished members of a class [4:234]. For example, a scent or a woman is a common noun that may be used in reference to any aroma or any female. But if they are linked together Scent of a woman it is the title of a film, a proper name, but in the referred literature there is no evidence to prove the obvious fact. Well, let us to return to the problem and now to look at the definition of proper name by this scholar. To his mind proper noun is understood as the name of a specific individual or of a set of individuals distinguished only by their having that name [4:235]. Again weve met almost the same problems, but still one of them is denied. The strong point of this definition is as follows: the author allows the possibility of repetition. Of course there are no more details of this approach but it answers our question and allows the films with the same title exist.prove this idea, weve referred to another scholar, who defined the concept more convincingly. Kiviniemi considered the criterion of the uniqueness of the proper names as doubtful due to the fact that several different persons or films in our case may have not only the same first name but also the same family name [3:43]. Thats why we can also say that there is a scientific approval of a fact that two compound, i.e. of more than one word film titles can exsist and be unique in the sense of regarding to two different pictures as well as in the case with two namesake. It means that such a coincidence of the combination of words in the title is not a hundred-percent unique element. remark mostly orientated on personal names and cannot be used for the films titles as successfully. He said that proper names are connected to language use and according to our general onomastic knowledge. Kiviniemis main message is as follows: it's not difficult to distinguish conventional names from common nouns or other proper names even when they are not within a context [3:51]. From the first sight it really is not difficult, especially if we deal with the famous titles as The Lord of The Rings or some kind extra fiction ones as Star Trek. But if we meet something like The Bitter Tears we can recognize the proper name only being acquired with it. Furthermore the confirmation of this concept also goes doubtfully with our topic: proper names differ from common nouns not only orthographically and referentially, but also morphosyntactically and semantically [3:52]. Weve proved that the idea is worthless for our work with the previous example.the authors opinion concerning the function of proper names worth some attention to pay. Kiviniemi stated, the only function of proper names is identification [3: 39]. In other words he estimated the proper names only as some linguistic marks which only function is denotative function (which is the relationship between the word and the referent). He also added that, from this point of view, names' ability to be descriptive is totally improper.

Having searched the definition in related literature we faced with the three problems and only one was solved, so weve tried to find the answer among the material presented in foreign sites and succeed a bit.first source which caught our attention was Babich who presented the problem very briefly and poor. He says:

Proper names (or nouns) are capitalized in English. Here are some examples:of the week: Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday: January, February, Marchof companies: Amazon, Coca Cola, Google, towns: England, Canada, San Francisco: The Grand Canyon, The Empire State Building, The Underground, films, prizes: the Bible, the Oscar, the Nobel Prizeof people: Tim Smith, Jennie Baker, Theodore Rooseveltpeople: Aristotle, Napoleon, Shakespeare [11:56]to the lack of details and the general poverty of the so-called definition it almost cannot be considered as wrong. It also solves the two previous questions: now we can state that a proper name can include not only nouns (The Empire State Building), and contain more than one word according the example. Furthermore the article declares some kind of classification which includes our topic, the films titles. But the article arises two new questions. They are: why should one divide names of people and famous people [11:56], and if proper names (or nouns) are capitalized in English, why some of elements of them are not the Nobel Prize.first question is so doubtful, that falls into two sub questions: are famous peoples names like Aristotle not names or these persons are not people? What made the author to divide names of people and famous people? And the second sub question from what point should one be considered as famous, because Aristotle, Napoleon, Shakespeare lived long ago and David Cameron is our contemporary but he is still famous all over the world.weve answered our two questions but have get two more as well, thats why we used another article from Arbekovas book.

Proper nouns are a special type of names. In fact, when someone asks us our name, it is such a type of name we use in reply, i.e. Paul or Mohandas or Teresa or any such name.

·Names of people - like those just mentioned;

·Brand names - like Penguin Books, Tata Indica, Lux or Dell;

·Geographical names - Asia, River Nile, Mount Everest, the British Isles;

·Names of institutions - St. Michaels School, Bank of England, European Union;

·Names of books and films - Utopia, Wuthering Heights, My Fair Lady.of this kind are called Proper Nouns [9:132].part proved itself as useful, because here the author solves the problem of personal names and considers that no division for personal and famous names is needed: when someone asks us our name, it is such a type of name we use in reply, i.e. Paul or Mohandas or Teresa or any such namepart of the article was quite useful too, because it is devoted to capitalization:

Capitalizationthat in the examples above the first letter of every proper name is a capital (upper case) the convention in English., this can be a problem. What about th

Похожие работы

1 2 3 4 > >>