On conveying the English lexeme "public" into Ukrainian

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

ON CONVEYING THE ENGLISH LEXEME “PUBLIC” INTO UKRAINIAN

V.V. Mykhaylenko

(Ivano-Frankivsk King Danylo Galytskiy University of Law)

Translation is traditionally defined as the product of a linguistic-textual operation in which a text in one language is reproduced in another language. This transformation is said to be subject to and influenced by a variety of different extra-linguistic factors and conditions. And Translation plays a very important role in stabilizing a Global Home with thr Global Language. The complexity of the translation of socio-political discourse and its dominant lexemes stems from the correlation of “linguistic-textual” and “extra- linguistic contextual” factors which provide instruments for investigating translation. The present paper is aimed at determining the components of the lexical meaning of the English adjective “public” registered in socio-political discourse (economy, communication, society, and governance) and their transference into Ukrainian, wherein they are verbalized by the lexemes of specific discourse registers. Our hypothesis is that «публічний» is a transliteration which under the influence of its wide combinability and frequency in socio-political discourse reveals a number of semantic components at the same time retaining its Latin dominant one. We must also pay attention to the manipulation of “public” pertaining to `state' and “public” pertaining to `people' in the socio-political discourse translation. The English lexeme “public” `not pertaining to state-supported school can also represent the concept “private” (5.1), i.e. “public school” or “public” `not pertaining to private `. Further on the Ukrainian contextual semantics of socio-political discourse made the author look for an exact lexeme representing a component of «публічний» corresponding to the given context. This is the way of expanding the semantic domain of `публічний' in the Ukrainian Language worldview. Otherwise Ukrainian «публічний» can be perceived as a foreign borrowing in Ukrainian discourse. The article discusses the controversy surrounding the issue of equivalence in translation studies and criticizes the thesis that translation and equivalence depend upon semantic correlations of the Source Language and the Target Language. A multidisciplinary approach to the socio¬political discourse translation blazes the way to the correlation of cross-linguistic and cross-cultural practice of translation to meet the demands of globalization.

Key words: socio-political discourse, translation, discourse register, transformation, distribution, context factor.

Михайленко В.В. Про передачу англійської лєксєми “public” на українську мову. Традиційно переклад визначається як лінгво-текстуальна трансформація, при якій текст мовою оригіналу відтворюється мовою перекладу. Це перетворення відбувається під впливом безліч різних позамовних чинників. Складність перекладу суспільно-політичного дискурсу та його домінантних лексем зумовлена співвідношенням лінгво-текстуальних і позамовних контекстних умов, які виступають інструментами перевірки валідності перекладу. Дана робота спрямована на визначення компонентів лексичного значення англійського прикметника “public”, зареєстрованих в соціо-політичному дискурсі (економіка, комунікації, суспільство і управління) та їх передачу українською мовою, в якому вони вербалізуються певними лексемами під впливом конкретного дискурс-регістру.

Ключові слова: соціо-політичний дискурс, переклад, регістр дискурсу,трансформація, дистрибуція, фактор контексту

Михайленко В.В. О передаче английской лексемы “public” на украинский язык. Традиционное определение перевода - осуществление лингво-текстуальной трансформации, при которой текст на языке оригинала экономика, коммуникации, общество и управления) и их передачу на украинский язык, в котором они вербализуется определёнными лексемами под влиянием конкретного дискурс-регистра воспроизводится на языке перевода. Это преобразование происходит под влиянием множества различных внеязыковых факторов и условий. Сложность перевода общественно-политического дискурса и его доминантных лексем обусловлена соотношением лингво-текстуальных и внеязыковых контекстных условий, которые выступают инструментами проверки валидности перевода. Настоящая работа направлена на определение компонентов лексического значения английского прилагательного “public”, зарегистрированных в общественно-политическом дискурсе.

Ключевые слова: социо-политический дискурс, перевод, регистр дискурса, трансформация, дистрибуция, фактор контекста.

A study of political discourse is theoretically and empirically relevant only when discourse structures can be related to properties of political structures and processes. Primarily political discourse structures must be investigated in their contexts which are defined in terms of participants' mental models of communicative events [van Dijk 2008, p. 203-204; 225-226; Chilton 1997, p. 206-30]. Political discourse is interpreted here as a spoken or written act of communication used in formal or non-formal political contexts that relates to, deals with or describes any political event, organisation or actor [Banhegyi 2014, p.140]. The analysis of political discou [see professional discourse: Kong 2014, p.1-3] discourse within Translation Studies offers numerous approaches and a wide range of analytical methods.

Translation Studies has long been intrigued and fascinated by political discourse and as politics is increasingly done in supranational contexts, translation is inevitably part of international

negotiations, struggles and political power games [Banhegyi 2014, p. 139]. And Translation plays a very important role in stabilizing a Global Home with thr Global Language [House 2015, p. 370-386]. There has been many an attempt to define translation, variously using key concepts such as equivalence or semiotics as bases [see: 2008, p. 17; Boase-Beier 2015, p. 3]. In our case translation is defined as the result of a linguistic-textual operation in which a text in one language is re-produced in another language”. That linguistic-textual operation is said to be “subject to, and substantially influenced by, a variety of different extra-linguistic factors and conditions. J. C. Catford [Catford 1978] underlines its interdisciplinary character [House 2014, p. 1-14] it is an activity of `enormous importance in the modern world and it is a subject of interest not only to linguists, professional and amateur translators, and language teachers, but also to electronic engineers and mathematicians [Bell 1997, p. vii]. Unfortunately, there is not a word of social and political discourse translation. The complexity of the field of translation studies is argued to stem from this interplay of “linguistic-textual” and “extra-linguistic contextual” factors, all of which provide “starting point[s] for investigating translation” [Boase-Beier 2015, p. 1-2].

The paper is aimed at determining the components of the lexical meaning of the English adjective “public” registered in socio-political discourse and their transference into Ukrainian, wherein they are verbalized by the lexemes of specific discourse registers. We attempt to prove that the way of transferring English “public” into Ukrainian «публічний (-а, -e, -і)» depends upon the discourse register. The illustrations are selected from BBC News, and Ukrainian newspapers of 2015-2016.

Discourse studies may use a vast amount of methods of observation, analysis and other strategies to collect, evaluate data, to test hypotheses, to develop theory and to acquire knowledge [van Dijk 1997, p. 23; see the discourse definition: Mykhaylenko 2015, p. 154-156]. Since practically all text and talk indirectly has socio-political conditions and consequences, we therefore again require a more or less arbitrary set of criteria according to which discourse may be categorized as (mainly) political, viz., when it has a direct functional role as a form of political action in the political process [see: Carbo 1984; Dillon 1990; Holly 1990; Maynard 1994; Seidel 1998]. Context models are structured like any other model represented in episodic memory. More specifically, contexts feature such categories as a Setting (Time, Location, Circumstances, Props), Events, Participants and their various types of social, professional, communicative roles, the Actions they currently engage in, as well as current Cognition (aims, knowledge, opinions, emotions, etc.).

Political discourse has been the subject of increasing interest in recent decades with the development of ideological and rhetorical criticism focusing on US presidential speeches, especially after the events of 9/11 [Romagnuolo 2009, p.1-3; Фесенко 2015, p. 264-266]. Indeed, extensive research literature already exists in the field of American presidential rhetoric. The same cannot be said for studies of political texts available in translation. Currently, translation studies seems to be more concerned with the politics and the politicization of translation than with the translation of political texts, that have been examined more from a synchronic perspective than a diachronic one.

Translation is an incredibly broad notion which can be understood in different ways, for example, one may talk of translation as a process or a product, and identify such sub-types as literary translation, technical translation, subtitling and machine translation; moreover, while more typically it just refers to the transfer of written texts, the term sometimes also includes interpreting [see: Mykhaylenko 2015, p.234,479]. The referred definition introduces further variables, first the `sub-types', which include not only typically written products such as literary and technical translations, but also translation forms that have been created in recent decades, such as audiovisual translation, a written product which is read in conjunction with an image on screen (cinema, television, DVD or computer game). Roman Jakobson's discussion on translation centres around certain key questions of linguistics, including equivalence between items in SL and TL and the notion of translatability [Jakobson 1959]. These are the issues which became central to research in translation in the 1960s and 1970s [Hatim 2004, p.7-8]. Translation Studies has evolved to such an extent that it is really a perfect interdiscipline, interfacing with a whole host of other fields. The aim may still be to describe translation phenomena, and in some cases to establish general principles, but the methods of analysis are more varied and the cultural and ideological features of translation have become as prominent as linguistics. We must add that many political concepts used in the FUSSR still undergo a kind of decomposition of their meaning and the component `Soviet' is becoming archaic of `historical', as for its original component pertaining to Western civilization it is ousting a 'soviet' shade from the meaning structure [see: Richardson 1998, p. 173-188].

Socio-political discourse register as a constituent of the professional discourse paradigm has an interdependent system relating to ideology and social relationship and can be oriented among professional peers and different professionals, be targeted to laymen or be used as a regulatory force to control the practice of professionals themselves [cf. Kong 2014:, p. 1-3]. Though taking into consideration the specific feature of the socio-political discourse held between politician/MP/governor/minister/employer, etc. and elector/community member/citizen/employee, etc. this register can be specified as a professional-lay discourse, such as communication between lawyers and their clients, or between advertisers and their potential customers [Linell 2009, p. 143-145]. In the paradigm of the socio-political discourse four registers are differentiated: economy, communication, social life and governance. We must admit, that the boundaries among them are not watertight, because speeches of public figures represent a variety of issues just to meet their hearers' anticipation.

Translation Studies has shown intense interest in analysing the translation of political texts as well as the ideology expressed and the power relations involved in the translation of such texts. [Banhegyi 2014, p. 141-142] For terminological precision, it must be noted that in Translation Studies political discourse is also termed as discourse in situations of conflict [Salama-Carr 2009, p. 1-11]. Juliane House considers translation as a linguistic act, as intercultural communication, as a social act in context and as a cognitive process [Hatim 2004, p. 370-386]. Translation must be viewed as a socially situated activity. He proposes adopting the framework of communities of practice to study discourse and translation.

Democratic principles become fundamental in Ukraine involving society, personalities, and concepts which are subjected to publicity [Сербенська 2013, p. 225]. The dominant components of the lexical meaning of the Ukrainian adjective «публічний» constitute its semantic nucleus: громадянський, доступний, суспільний, відкритий, призначений для людей `common for the society, common for the community accessible, social'. Thus, the Ukrainian adjective «публічний (-а, -е, -і)» can co-occur with the following nouns: `життя, професія, особа, характер, точка зору, справа, дискусія, дебати, форум, комунікація, мовлення, заклад, місце, середовище, арена' Nearly all manifestive words with a positive connotation came from Latin. According to E. Borisova's opinion, this is the reflection of the route of these loan words - they entered, for example, Russian political discourse via Western liberal ideology [Borisova 1998, p. 126-128]. In Ukrainian socio-political texts the adjective «публічний (-а, -е, -і)» became also popular.

O. Serbenska investigated its use in І. Franko's works: публічні потреби, публічні цілі; публічна арена, публічна діяльність, публічна справа, публічна моральність, публічний діяч', etc. The Ukrainian dictionaries define two dominant components in the lexical meaning of the adjective «публічний»: прилюдний і громадський - відвідання, користування для широкого загалу, також: діяльність (see: Словник української мови за ред. І. К. Білодіда; Словник української мови за ред. А. Мельничука).

The Latin lexeme `public' is borrowed into Ukrainian through transliteration, i.e. when the Latin orthographic form of a word is transferred into Ukrainian with the help of the Ukrainian (Cyrillic) letters. Traditionally this type of transformation [see the definition: Mykhaylenko 2015, p. 474] is referred to lexical ones. Ya. I. Retsker does not consider transliteration to be a type of translation, it is rather a true borrowing [Рецкер 1974]. If borrowing is taking of words directly from one language into another without translation then we must agree with the thesis that Latin “public” borrowed into Ukrainian «публічний» in one original meaning. There is no denying the fact that frequency of usage «публічний» in Ukrainian occurs due to the English “public” wide combinability with nouns expressing various concepts in various discourse registers.

Our hypothesis is that Ukrainian «публічний» is a transliteration which under the influence of its wide combinability and frequency in socio-political discourse reveals a number of semantic components at the same time retaining its Latin dominant one [cf.: Шаблій 2019, p. 139-158]. Further on the Ukrainian contextual semantics of socio-political discourse made the author look for an exact lexeme representing a component of «публічний» corresponding to the given context. This is the way of expanding the semantic domain of «публічний» in the Ukrainian Language worldview. Otherwise Ukrainian «публічний» can be perceived as a foreign borrowing in Ukrainian discourse. A. Umanets points out that translation of language units succeeds when their transformation analogues and contextual modifications resume an adequate reaction of the recipient, and parameters of translation adequacy of translation (parameters of adequacy of transmitting the semantic information; parameters of adequacy of transmitting the emotional evaluative information; parameters of adequacy of transmitting the expressive information; and parameters of adequacy of transmitting the aesthetic information) [Уманець 2009, р. 131-132].

Both lexemes «публічний» and «державний» occur in the Ukrainian discourse register `Economy' and they are used as synonyms but the context can serve as a finer discriminator of the functional meaning [see: Pshenitsyn 2011, p. 242-255]. The first one retains a shade of a foreign borrowing, while the other is a true native word and can compete as a better equivalent of the “public” in the process of translation [see the use of the contrastive analysis: Mykhaylenko 2015, p. 154-146], for instance:

1.1. UK public finances see smaller surplus.

1.2. The arm-wrestling with the NFU about how to allocate public money for farming deserved more exposure generally in the media.

1.3. Державні фінанси -- це регульовані у визначеному правовому полі потоки коштів.

1.4. 23 травня в Українському кризовому медіа центрі відбулася презентація політичного порядку денного «Реформа системи контролю за використанням публічних фінансів».

See also: public debt of economy/sector - публічний борг/сектор - державний борг/сектор економіки. In the English discourse register `Economy' the lexeme “public” is the only possible nomination.

In the discourse register of 'Communication' the Ukrainian lexemes «публічний», «громадський», «відкритий» correspond to the English “public”, for instance:

2.1. They can provide trusted news and platforms for independent public debate for all people in society.

2.2. Since the 1920s, people across the United States have launched public broadcasting services in their own communities to champion the principles of diversity and excellence of programming, responsiveness to local communities, and service to all.

2.3. Про перехід на новий сайт повідомив Андрій Баштовий, керівник цифрового напрямку ««Громадського телебачення». Він написав на сторінці громадської організації у ««Фейсбуку».

2.4. НТУУ ««Київський політехнічний інститут» запрошує на відкритий виступ архітектора Microsoft - Марка Збіковскі.

2.5. Публічний виступ як важливий засіб комунікації переконання

See also: public broadcasting discoursе/speech/style/text/monologue/dialogue/internet - публічний, мовлення/спілкування/дискурс/ виступ/показ/текст/діалог/монолог/інтернет - відкритий/громадський.

The English lexeme “public” in the discourse register `Social Life' corresponds to the Ukrainian lexemes «публічний», «громадський», «комунальний», «державний», «суспільний», cf.:

3.1. It reaches the largest and broadest audiences and has a key role in the public life of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

3.2. A group of public personalities of Armenia and Artsakh condemn the readiness of the authorities to hand territories.

3.3. Український проект виявився одним із кращих з-поміж 276 учасників. Ідеться про роботу громадського об'єднання «Місто-сад», її автор - Євгенія Кулеба.

3.4. Делегація Запорізької області презентувала у столиці представникам Європейського інвестиційного банку проект з модернізації системи громадського транспорту в регіоні.

3.5. Найбільше допікає Україні високий рівень корупції в державних органах влади та суспільному житті.

See also: public life/personality/organization/events/intrigue/demand - публічний/суспільний /громадський/комунальний/

The English lexeme “public” in the discourse register `Governance' may have the following Ukrainian equivalents: «публічний» and «державний», cf.:

4.1. The present Government is focusing on good employment practice. In both the long and the short term, the public authorities will require professional and dedicated staff.

4.2. On September 20, the Partnership for Public Service will announce our 15th annual Samuel J. Heyman Service to America Medals honorees, including our second annual People's Choice award winner. Join us online as we stream this year's “Oscars of government service” live from Washington, DC.

4.3. Public colleges and universities typically operate under the supervision of state governments and are funded, in part, by tax dollars and subsidies from the state.

4.4. It is of utmost importance to train public servants in all spheres of government who are not only specialists in their respective disciplines, but also understand how government processes work.

4.4. Активація системи у тестовому режимі та весь процес подання в таку систему декларацій держслужбовцями унеможливлює притягнення їх до кримінальної відповідальності за вказання недостовірних даних в деклараціях та незаконне збагачення.

4.5. Про це, зокрема, йшлося на національному форумі ««Сталий розвиток регіонів: Україна та світ», який зорганізували Національна академія державного управління при Президентові України та Канадський інститут урбаністики за підтримки Мінекономрозвитку і торгівлі. See also: public administration/management/personality/power - публічний/державний/ громадський.

We must also pay attention to the manipulation of “public” pertaining to “state” and “public” pertaining to “people” in the socio-political discourse translation [see: Foster 2007; Chadwick 2007; Baker 2006; Baker 2006; see also: Banhegyi 2014, p. 142]. The English lexeme “public” `not pertaining to state-supported school' can also represent the concept “private” (5.1), i.e. “public school” or “public” `not pertaining to private `, i.e. “public law” (5.2.), for instance:

5.1. The charity says a growing trend for partnerships between state and private schools has helped boost the prospects of athletes like swimming gold medallist Adam Peaty who attended state school but used training facilities at Repton public school.

5.2. Public law refers to an act that applies to the public at large, as opposed to a private law that concerns private individual rights, duties, and liabilities.

The phrase “public school” is translated into Ukrainian as `приватна школа' (pryvatna shkola) or the translator with the help of transcription retains the British ethnic-cultural component - - «паблік скулз» (5.4.) [Влахов 1980]. And the phrase “public law” is rendered as `публічне право' (publichne pravo), where the constituent “public” becomes a legal term in the legal discourse (5.5.)

5.4. Прихильники англійської освіти вважають, що справжній британський характер протягом століть виховувався саме у «паблік скулз», які зробили Британію могутньою державою.

5.5. Як відомо, проблема розмежування публічного і приватного права існує у правовій науці вже більше двох тисячоліть, від часів Римської імперії.

“It is a commonplace”, Matyas Banhegyi writes, that “in linguistics that texts exist in their social context” [Banhegyi 2014, p. 140] but in translation, particularly, in interpreting under the pressure of time limit the translator/interpreter translates mainly on the sentence level or text fragment, where s/he cannot define any contextual characteristic and cannot resort to the context. Moreover in case of public the instruments of transcription or transliteration are preferred by the translator/interpreter. C. Schaffner calls for a systematic approach to the research of the translation of political texts and urges the following: (1) the status of translations (overt or covert translation, i.e. is the target text identified as translation or not? and the general practice of performing such translation work should be established before effecting any kind of analysis, (2) translated texts under scrutiny should be published in the original languages not only in English for the sake of clarity, (3) mistranslations or instances of translation shifts or losses should be analysed in their social-political context so that such shifts can possibly reveal ideological structures (i.e. socially accepted ideology) and (4) that the entire translation process, not only the end-product, should be reviewed in the scope of analyses [Schaffner 2005]. R. T. Bell also tries to arrange the translation process and organize it within the systematic language model [Bell 1997; see also: Fawcett 1997] which, in our opinion, will nol be able to retain the intended meaning of the ST without its context.

Conclusion and perspective

english lexeme public ukrainian

1. The article discusses the controversy surrounding the issue of equivalence in translation studies and criticizes the thesis that translation and equivalence depend upon semantic correlations of the Source Language and the Target Language.

2. A multidisciplinary approach to the socio-political discourse translation blazes the way to the correlation of cross-linguistic and cross-cultural practice of translation to meet the demands of globalization.

3. Translation as a cross-cultural practice of communication requires also cross-cultural competence of the speaker/interpreter. One has to be sure what the equivalents are and what terms have been used in other branches of human endeavor in similar contexts.

References

1. Влахов С., Флорин С. Непереводимое в переводе / C. Влахов, С.Флорин. - М. : Международные отношения, 1980. - 343 с. Рецкер Я. И. Теория перевода и переводческая практика : Очерки лингвистической теории перевода / Я. И. Рецкер. - М. : Международные отношения, 1974. - 216 с.

2. Сербенська О. Образотворчі засоби в публічному тексті (матеріали до словника / О. Сербенська // Теле- та Радіожурналістика. - 2013. - Випуск 12. - С. 225-238.

3. Уманець А. В. The Use of Translation Transformations in the Process of Translating English Text Clippings / А. В. Уманець // Наукові праці Кам'янець-Подільського національного університету імені Івана Огієнка : Філологічні науки. - Випуск 18. - Кам'янець-Подільський : Аксіома, 2009. - С. 130-133.

4. Фесенко І. Особливості перекладу політичних промов та текстів / I. Фесенко // Наукові записки Національного університету «Острозька академія». Серія «Філологічна». - Вип. 55. - 2015. - С. 264-266.

5. Шаблій О. А. Терміноелементи-латинізми «офіційний», «публічний» та «цивільний» як «псевдодрузіперекладача» (у перекладі з української на німецьку мову) // Studia Linguistica. - 2009. - № 2. - Київ : Київський національний університет ім. Тараса Шевченка, 2009. - С. 370-377.

6. Baker М. Translation and Conflict. A Narrative Account / Mona Baker. - London and New York : Routledge, 2006. - xiv + 203p. Banhegyi Matyas. Translation and Political Discourse / Matyas Banhegyi // Acta Universitatiss Apientiae, Philological. -2014. - Vol. 6. - № 2. - Pp.139-158.

7. Bell R. T. Translation and Translating : Theory and Practice / R. T. Bell. - N.Y. : Longman, 1997. - 298 p.

8. Boase-Beier J. Translating the Poetry of the Holocaust : Translation, Style and the Reader / Jean Boase-Beier. - Bloomsbury Publishing, 2015. - 208 p.

9. Borisova E. Opposition Discourse in Russia : Political Pamphlets 1989-91 / Elena Borisova // Paul Anthony Chilton, Mikhail Iyin, Jacob Mey (eds.). Political Discourse in Transition in Europe, 1989-1991. - Amsterdam/Philadelphia : John Benjamins Publishing, 1998. - Pp.111-130.

10. Carbo T. Educar desde la Camara de Diputados / T. Carbo. - Mexico : CIESAS, 1984.

11. Catford J. C. A Theory of Linguistic Translation. An Essay in Applied Linguistics / J. C. Catford. - Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1978. - Рр.уііі + 110 p.

12. Chadwick B. A `hip-hop' Translation of a Poem by the Russian Futurist Poet Velimir Khlebnikov (1885-1922) / Brian Chadwick // Myriam Salama-Carr (ed.). Translating and Interpreting Conflict. - Amsterdam and New York : Rodopi, 2007. - Pp.199-220.

13. Chilton P., Schaffner C. Discourse and Politics / P. Chilton and C. Shaffner // T. A. van Dijk (ed.). Discourse Studies. A Multidisciplinary Introduction. - Vol. 2 : Discourse as Social Interaction. - London : Sage, 1997. - Pp. 206-30.

14. Dillon, G. L., Doyle, A., Eastman, C. M., Kline, S., Silberstein, S., & Toolan, M. (WAUDAG). The Rhetorical Construction of a President / G. L. Dillon // Discourse and Society. - 1990. - Vol. 1. - Issue2. - Pp.189-200.

15. Fawcett P. Translation and Language / Peter Fawcett. - Manchester : St. Jerome Publishing, 1997. - 170 p.

16. Foster I. The Translation of William Le Queux's The Invasion of 1910 : What Germany Made of Scaremongering in The Daily Mail / Ian Foster // Myriam Salama-Carr (ed.). Translating and Interpreting Conflict. - Amsterdam and New York : Rodopi, 2007. - Pp.169-182.

17. Harris S. Evasive action : How politicians respond to questions in political interviews / S. Harris // P. Scannell (ed). Broadcast talk. - London : Sage, 1991. - Pp.76-99.

18. Hatim B., Mason J. Translation : An Advanced Resource Book / Basil Hatim, Jeremy Mason. - London. New York : Routledge, 2004 (1964). - 394 p.

19. Holly W. Politikersprache. Inszenierungen und Rollenkonflikte im informellen Sprachhandeln eines Bundestagsabgeordneten / W. Holly.--Berlin : De Gruyter, 1990. - p.

20. House J. Global English, Discourse and Translation / Juliane House // Target : International Journal on Translation Studies. - 2015. - Vol. 27. - Issue 3. - Pp.370-386.

21. House J. Introduction / Juliane House // Juliane House (ed.).Translation : A Multidisciplinary Approach. - Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. - Pp.1-14.

22. Jakobson R. On Linguistic Aspects of Translation / Roman Jakobson // R. A. Brower (ed.). Harvard Studies in Comparative Literature. - Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press, 1959. - Pp. 232-239.

23. Kong K. Professional Discourse / Kenneth Kong. - Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2014. - 304 p.

24. Linell P. Discourse across Boundaries : On Recontextualizations and the Blending of Voices in Professional Discourse / P. Linell // Text & Talk. An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies. - 2009. - Vol.18. - № 2. - P.143-158. Maynard S. K. Images of Involvement and Integrity : Rhetorical Style of a Japanese Politician / S. K. Maynard // Discourse and Society . - 1994. - Vol. 5. - Issue 2. - Pp. 233-261.

25. Mykhaylenko V. V. Contrastive Semantics of the Lexeme “Town” in English and Ukrainian : Aspects of Translation / V. V. Mykhaylenko // Materials of the XI International Scientific and Practical Conference “Prospects of World Science - 2015”. - Vol. 6. - Sheffield : Science and Education, 2015. - Pp.41-45.

26. Mykhaylenko V. A Glossary of Linguistics and Translation Studies / Valery V. Mykhaylenko. - Ivano-Frankivsk : King Danylo Galytskiy University of Law, 2015. - 528 p.

27. Pshenitsyn S. L. Political Correctness in Translation : Cultural and Linguistic Problems / Sergei L. Pshenitsyn // Thanomnuan O'Charoen and Tongtip Poonlarp (eds.). Translation and Interpretation in a Multilingual Context. - Bangkok : Chulalongkorn University Printing House, 2011. - Pp. 242-255.

28. Richardson K. Translating the Transition / Kay Richardson // Paul Anthony Chilton, Mikhail Iyin, Jacob Mey (eds.). Political Discourse in Transition in Europe, 1989-1991. - Amsredam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing, 1998. - Pp.173-188. Romagnuolo A. Political Discourse in Translation. A Corpus-based Perspective on Presidential Inaugurals / Anna Romagnuolo // Translation and Interpreting Studies. - 2009. - Vol. 4. - No1. - Pp. 1-30.

29. Salama-Carr M. Introduction / Myriam Salama-Carr // Myriam Salama-Carr (ed.). Translating and Interpreting Conflict. - Amsterdam and New York : Rodopi, 2007. - Pp.1-12.

30. Schaffner C. Political Discourse Analysis from the Point of View of Translation Studies / Christina Schaffner // Journal of Language and Politics. - 2004. - Vol. 3. - № 1. - Pp. 117-150.

31. Schjoldager A. G., Gottlieb H., Klitgard I. Understanding Translation / Anne Gram Schjoldager, Henrik Gottlieb, Ida Klitgard. --Arhus : Systime Academic, 2008. - 312 p.

32. Seidel J. Verbal Strategies of the Collaborators : A Discursive Analysis of the July 1986 European Parliamentary Debate on South African Sanctions / Gill Seidel 1988 // Text & Tall. - 1986. - Vol.8. - Issue 1-2. - Pp.111-128.

33. Van Dijk T. A. What is Political Disourse Analysis / Teun A. van Dijk // Political Linguistics [Belgian Journal of Linguistics ]. - 1997. - 11. - Pp.11-52.

34. Van Dijk T. A. Discourse and Power / Teun A. van Dijk. - New York : Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. - 320 p.

Размещено на Allbest.ru