Пример готовой дипломной работы по предмету: Языки (переводы)
Содержание
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 4
CHAPTER 1. THE PROBLEM OF DIFFERENTIATION OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS AND FIXED PHRASES 8
1.1 Conceptual Picture of the World: Denotation and Connotation of Various Word Combinations 8
1.2 Distinctive Features and Types of Fixed Phrases 14
1.3 Distinctive Features and Types of Phraseological Units 28
1.4 Summary of Results 38
CHAPTER 2. ANALYSIS OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS AND FIXED PHRASES 40
2.1 Nominal Phraseological Units and Fixed Phrases Having the Same Word Components 40
2.2 Verbal Phraseological Units and Fixed Phrases Having the Same Word Components 46
2.3 Adjectival Phraseological Units and Fixed Phrases Having the Same Word Components 49
2.4 Adverbial Phraseological Units and Fixed Phrases Having the Same Word Components 52
2.5Results and Discussion 57
CONCLUSION 58
REFERENCES 61
Выдержка из текста
Introduction
Communication of people is carried out, not only by words they link to one another due to their own choice but by means of a wide range of phraseological units and fixed phrases they remember and quite often use without thinking of the collocation structure and composition. In case of the intercultural dialogue which is at a loss use of different languages as a communication medium, it is very difficult to find an equivalent to this or that phraseological unit and this or that fixed phrase \ collocation, because every language has its own cultural traditions making people use a wide range of phraseological units and fixed phrases, which already exist.
The same slice of a reality, the same concept has different forms of language phraseological units and fixed phrases in various languages, which are more or less full, to some extent specific.
The language consciousness in whole of each nation or ethnic group is important, as their self-identification is realised in it the consciousness by means of creating specific phraseological units and fixed phrases.
The practice of language communication shows that each language is not a mechanical appendage of concrete culture as in this condition it could not be used in numerous situations of intercultural dialogue resulting in exchange of a number of phraseological units and fixed phrases. The linguistic relativity would limit potential features of each language to the frameworks of one culture. Actually one of the major properties of the language is its universality allowing a native speaker to use his or her mother tongue as a means of dialogue in all potentially possible situations of communications, including communication with representatives of other cultures.
According to T.G. Grushevitskaya, relations between language and culture can be considered as those of a part and a whole entity. «Language can be apprehended as a component of culture and as a culture tool. However each language at the same time is independent in relation to the culture in whole, and it can be considered as an independent semiotics system. As each native speaker simultaneously is also a culture carrier of his or her own phrases, which get an ability to carry out the function of signs of one culture and serve as a means of representation of basic installations of culture. For this reason each language is able to display cultural and national mentality of its carriers» [38, p. 248].
«A culture component – it is not simple cultural information informed by a certain language, and an integral property of language inherent in all its levels and all branches» [44, p. 15].
The problem of mutual relation of language and culture traditionally have been in sphere of interests of linguists. However in the recent decades the concept «culture» gets an increasingly wider interpretation due to the growing interest to phraseological units and fixed phrases [47, p. 23].
The opinion on national character according to which it is «not a set of specific, original lines inherent only in the given people, but the original set of universal features is widespread enough» [44, p. 136].
The process of phraseological unit and fixed phrase formation in each particular language highly depends on the national character of mass consciousness resulting in producing these or those implicit motivation of any type of word formation process involved.
The object of the research is English phraseological units and fixed phrases.
The urgency of the present research is determined by the general orientation of the modern paradigms of English phraseological units and fixed phrases, which make intercultural communication tremendously difficult and lead from time to time to communication failure.
So as to provide the theoretical basis required concerning discourse theories, functional style distinctive features, stylistic and semantic categories of expressivity, evaluation and emotionality, use of various tropes we refer to the latest linguistic theories developed by a number of researchers, whose investigations are referred to in the bibliography further on.
The objective of our research is analysis of English phraseological units and fixed phrases concerning their difference in structure as well as implicit motivation. Therefore we intend to take into consideration the following tasks:
describing language picture of the world in general,
characterizing conceptual picture of the world: denotation and connotation of various word combinations,
outlining some distinctive features and types of fixed phrases and phraseological units,
analyzing specificity of English fixed phrase and phraseological unit structure as well as semantics.
The topicality is explained by the profound interest to the peculiarities of fixed phrases and phraseological units in the English language.
The scientific novelty of the research is defined by the concrete result of investigation that can be useful for future studies.
The methods of investigations used in this research are:
• descriptive method;
• the method of classification;
• comparative and translation methods;
• the method of semantic analysis.
The theoretical significance of the research is motivated by the necessity to distinguish fixed phrases and phraseological units as well as paying attention to the problem of their adequate translation.
The practical significance of the research is defined by the results of the study, which can help to understand the distinctive features of fixed phrases and phraseological units.
The present research consists of Introduction, Chapter 1 “The problem of differentiation of phraseological units and fixed phrases”, Chapter 2 “Analysis of phraseological units and fixed phrases, Conclusion and Bibliography. In the first part of our study we take into account specific features of formation language picture of the world, denotation and connotation of various word combinations, distinctive features and types of fixed phrases and phraseological units.
In the second part of our research we characterize English distinctive features and types of fixed phrase and phraseological unit structure as well as their implicit distinctive features.
The bibliography contains 64 items.
Список использованной литературы
References
1. Акуленко В.В. Вопросы интернационализации словарного состава языка. — Харьков: Изд-во Харьк. Ун-та, 1972. – 215 с.
2. Алексеева Л.М. Проблемы термина и терминообразования. – Пермь: ПГУ, 1998. – 120с.
3. Алефиренко Н.Ф. Лингвокультурология: ценностно-смысловое пространство языка. – М.: Флинта, 2012. – 282c.
4. Алефиренко Н.Ф. Фразеология и когнитивистика в аспекте лингвистического постмодернизма. — Белгород: БелГУ, 2008. — 150 с.
5. Антрушина Г.Б. Лексикология английского языка. – М.: Юрайт, 2013. – 286с.
6. Арутюнова Н.Д. Типы языковых значений. Оценка. Событие. Факт. – М.: Наука, 1988. – 339 с.
7. Арутюнова Н.Д. Язык и мир человека. М.: Языки русской культуры 1999. -896с.
8. Аскольдов С.А. Концепт и слово// Русская словесность. От теории словесности к структуре текста. Антология. — М., 1997. – С. 45-58.
9. Аюпова Р.А. Фразеология и фразеография английского и русского языков. — Казань: КГУ, 2013. — 269 с.
10. Бабич Г.Н. Лексикология английского языка. – М.: Флинта Наука, 2012. – 195с.
11. Белых И.Н. Введение в языкознание: курс лекций для студентов специальности 031202.65 "Перевод и переводоведение" очной формы обучения. — Красноярск: СибГТУ, 2013. — 70с.
12. Буянова Л.Ю. Русский фразеологизм как ментально-когнитивное средство языковой концептуализации сферы моральных качеств личности. — М.: Флинта Наука, 2013. – 179c.
13. Вежбицкая А. Сопоставление культур через посредство лексики и прагматики. – M.: Языки славянской культуры, 2001. — 272 с.
14. Виноградов В.А. Словосложение// Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь. – М., 1990. – С.468.
15. Гаврилов В.В. Русская фразеология в культурологическом аспекте. — Сургут: РИО СурГПУ, 2013. – 160с.
16. Грушевицкая Т.Г., Попков В.Д., Садохин А.П. Основы межкультурной коммуникации. – М.: Наука, 2002. – 342c.
17. Гумбольдт В. фон, Избранные труды по языкознанию. – М.: Прогресс, 1984. – 398с.
18. Дубенец Э.М. Лингвистические изменения в современном английском языке. – М., 2003. – 356с.
19. Дубровская О.Т. Русские и английские пословицы как лингвокульторологические единицы. — Тюмень, 2002. – 164с.
20. Зыкова И.В. Концептосфера культуры и фразеология: теория и методы лингвокультурного изучения. — М.: URSS ЛЕНАНД, 2015. — 376с.
21. Иванова Е.В. Пословичная концептуализация мира (на материале английских и русских пословиц).
Автореф. на с. зв. докт. фил. н. СПб., 2003. – 38с.
22. Карасик В.И. Языковой круг: личность, концепты, дискурс. — Волгоград, Перемена, 2002. -477с.
23. Ковшова М.Л. Лингвокультурологический метод во фразеологии: коды культуры. – М.: URSS ЛИБРОКОМ, 2013. — 453с.
24. Комиссаров В.Н. Лингвистика перевода. — М.: URSS ЛИБРОКОМ, 2013. – 165с.
25. Комиссаров В.Н. Современное переводоведение. — М.: Р.Валент, 2014. — 407с.
26. Копылов А.В. Межъязыковой перевод: лингвофилософские аспекты. — Мурманск: МГГУ, 2013. — 216с.
27. Коряжкина О.В. Лексикология английского языка. – Петропавловск-Камчатский: КамГУ, 2013. – 294с.
28. Кубрякова Е.С. Словообразование// Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь. – М., 1990. – С. 467-468.
29. Кудимова Е.Н. Британская и американская фразеология: сравнительный анализ. — М.: Триумф, 2013. — 102с.
30. Кунин А.В. Большой англо-русский фразеологический словарь. – М.: Русский язык – Медиа, 2005. — 944с.
31. Кунин А.В. Курс фразеологии современного английского языка. — Дубна: Феникс+, 2005. – 479с.
32. Лотман Ю.М. Семиосфера: культура и взрыв внутри мыслящих миров. – СПб., 2000. – 546c.
33. Морозова Н.Н. Лексикология английского языка. – М.: МГПУ Прометей, 2013. – 101с.
34. Мюллер В.К. Большой англо-русский и русско-английский словарь. — М.: Дом Славянской книги, 2013. – 958с.
35. Никитин М.В. Лексическое значение слова (структура и комбинаторика).
– М., Высшая школа, 1983. – 286c.
36. Орлова О.В. Языковая картина мира и национально-культурная идентичность. – М.: Государственная академия славянской культуры, 2010. — 108 с.
37. Постовалова В.И. Язык как деятельность. Опыт интерпретации концепции В. Гумбольдта. – М.: Высш. Шк., 1982. – 156с.
38. Садохин А.П., Грушевицкая Т.Г. Культурология: теория культуры. – М.: ЮНИТИ, 2004. – 365с.
39. Степанов Е.А. Языковая картина мира военной сферы (лингвокультурологический и терминологический аспекты): автореф. дис. на соиск. уч. ст. к. филол. н.. – М., 2012. — 17с.
40. Телия В.Н. Культурные слои во фразеологизмах и дискурсных практиках. — М.: Яз. слав. культуры, 2004. — 340 с.
41. Телия В.Н. Метафора как модель смыслопроизводства и ее экспрессивно-оценочная функция// Метафора в языке и тексте.— М.: Наука, 1988. – C.26-51c.
42. Телия В.Н. Русская фразеология. Семантический, прагматический и лингвокультурологический аспекты. — М., 1996. – 241с.
43. Телия В.Н. Фразеологизм// Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь. — М., 1990. — С. 559-560.
44. Тер-Минасова С.Г. Язык и межкультурная коммуникация. — М.: Слово/Slovo, 2000. — 624 с.
45. Хайрулина Р.Х. Фразеологическая картина мира: от мировидения к миропониманию. — Уфа: БГПУ, 2008. — 299 с.
46. Хмелева В.Н. Что такое фразеологизм. — Тобольск: ТГСПА, 2013. – 116c.
47. Хухуни Г.Т., Валуйцева И.И. Межкультурная адаптация художественного текста. – М.: Прометей, 2003. – 278c.
48. Черниховская Н.О. Современные английские слова и выражения + сленг. – М.: Эксмо, 2013. – 493с.
49. Швейцер А.Д. Современная социолингвистика: теория, проблемы, методы. – М.: URSS Либроком, 2012. – 174с.
50. Шпильная Н.Н. Языковая картина мира в структуре речемыслительной деятельности языковой личности. – М.: URSS ЛИБРОКОМ, 2014. — 148с.
51. Collins English Dictionary. – HarperCollins Publishers, 2006, — 98 p.
52. Dale H. Moscow's next move // The Washington Times — 12 November 2008.
53. Eckel M. Opposition to Russian military reforms grows// The Washington Times — 19 November 2008.
54. Flanagan S.J. Chavez-Russia gambit signals need for U.S. moves // The Washington Times — 19 November 2008.
55. Harding L. Accused appear in Russian court as Politkovskaya trial begins // The Guardian – 18 November 2008.
56. Kristof N.D. Obama, Misha and the Bear // The New York Times – 19 November 2008.
57. Law and Reality — Human Rights Watch [site].
http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/rwanda 0708webwcover.pdf / (handling date: 11.05.2015).
58. Marson J. Breaking the cold war paradigm // The Guardian – 6 November 2008.
59. Poker with missiles // The Guardian – 7 November 2008.
60. Seidl J. & McMordie W. Oxford Pocket English Idioms. — Oxford United Press, 1992. – 272p.
61. Stack M.K. In Russia's Putin-Medvedev shuffle, Putin is the lead dancer // Los Angeles Times — 14 November 2008.
62. Thousands confess to genocide. [site].
http://www.news 24.com/Africa/News/Thousands-confess-to-genocide-20040219/ (handling date: 11.05.2015).
63. Tisdal S. Obama and Medvedev: a lot to prove // The Guardian – 6 November 2008.
64. Young C. From Russia With Loathing // The New York Times – 21 November 2008.
