There are different types of correspondences between the elements of the SL and TL lexical systems.
I. A word of SL and a word of TL may be identical in their meaning. Such words are called equivalents (the corresponding Russian term is ). To this group usually belong proper names such as 'London - ', 'Galsworthy - ', etc.; terms such as 'a morpheme - ', 'logarithm - ', etc.; names of the months, days of the week; numerals. Equivalents are usually monosemantic words and they are easily translated.
II. The meanings of a SL word and a TL word may coincide partially (, ). There are three variants within this type.
1. A word in one of the languages may have more meanings than the corresponding word of the other language, so that the meaning of the latter is as it were included in the meaning of the former, e.g. the English noun "finish" and the Russian noun "" both denote "the conclusion, end", which completely exhausts the meaning of the Russian word. The English word "finish", however, also denotes "that which finishes, completes or perfects", which corresponds to the Russian words "", "", "". Thus the meaning of the word "finish" includes the meaning of the word "", but is not exhausted by it. This is the first variant of semantic relations characterized by partial coincidence of meanings.
2. The second variant of semantic relations between partially corresponding words may be described as intersection. It means that both the words have some meaning (or even meanings) in common, but at the same time each word has some other meanings which do not coincide. E.g.: the English word "cup" and the Russian "" both mean "a drinking-vessel", besides which the word "cup" means "an ornamental vessel offered as a prize for an athletic contest" (in Russian - ""), while the Russian "" denotes also " , ", which corresponds to the English word "pan". Thus the meanings of these two words ("cup" and "") intersect in one point only - i.e. they both denote a drinking-vessel.
3. The third variant of relations within this type is somewhat more complicated. The fact is that different peoples reflect reality in different ways, and these differences find their manifestation in the languages which the peoples speak. It is well known that for the English it seems quite necessary to differentiate between a hand and an arm, while in Russian we usually do not feel it so very important and use the word "" to denote both the notions indiscriminately (cf. also "watch" and "clock" - "", "mirror" and "looking glass" - "", etc.). On the other hand we usually differentiate between "" and "", while for the English there exists one notion ("cherry"), as well as both "" and "" are indiscriminately called "strawberry"; we think that "" and "" are quite different things and Englishmen always call it "a bud", no matter whether it is going to form a leaf or a blossom.
|
|
|
It does not mean, of course, that we cannot express the difference between a hand and an arm in Russian or that Englishmen do not see any difference between a leaf bud and a blossom bud. They do, but traditionally some aspects of reality are reflected as differentiated notions in the mind of one people and as undifferentiated notion in the mind of another people. Theoretically speaking every language can express everything, but it differs from other languages in what it should express.
This group of words demands special attention because it often causes trouble in the process of translation (for instance, try to translate the following sentence into Russian: "They both married their cousins").
In all the cases when the meanings of words coincide partially there arises a problem of choosing the right variant of translation. This choice should be based on two factors: on the knowledge of possible semantic relations between the words of SL and TL and on the information derived from the context.
III. Finally in one of the languages there may exist words which have no correspondences in the other language at all ( ). They are usually proper names which are not used or even known in other countries (personal names such as Aubrey, Hope, , , etc.; place-names such as Hindley, Catmose, , , etc.), and names of specifically national notions and phenomena (such as lobby, muffin, drugstore, , , , , etc.).
