Discourse markers and peculiarities of their translation

Գին՝ 7500դրամ
Էջերի քանակ՝ 25էջ
English
Աշխատանքի տեսակ՝ Կուրսային
Աշխատանքի ID` 2828

Բովանդակություն

Introduction
Chapter 1. Discourse and Discourse Markers
1.1. Discourse Analysis
1.2. Discourse Markers and their Classifications
Chapter 2. Peculiarities of Translation of Discourse Markers
Conclusion
Bibliography

Հատված

Discourse analysis is a general term for a number of approaches to analyze written, vocal, or sign language use or any significant semiotic event. The objects of discourse analysis—discourse, writing, conversation, communicative event—are variously defined in terms of coherent sequences of sentences, propositions, speech acts, or turns-at-talk. Contrary to much of traditional linguistics, discourse analysts not only study language use ‘beyond the sentence boundary’, but also prefer to analyze ‘naturally occurring’ language use, and not invented examples. Text linguistics is related. The essential difference between discourse analysis and text linguistics is that it aims at revealing socio-psychological characteristics of a person/persons rather than text structure. Discourse analysis emerged as a new trans-disciplinary field of study between the mid-1960s and mid-1970s in such disciplines as anthropology, ethnography, microsociology, cognitive and social psychology, poetics, rhetoric, stylistics, linguistics, semiotics, and other disciplines in the humanities and social sciences interested in the systematic study of the structures, functions, and processing of text and talk. Over the past few decades research on discourse markers (DMs) has been rapidly expanding and the theoretical appeal is amply demonstrated by the number of frameworks that have been applied to the study of Relevance Theory, Rhetorical Structure Theory, Construction Grammar, coherence-based studies, Interactional Sociolinguistics, Conversation Analysis. Since DMs do not change the basic meaning of utterances, a straightforward translation strategy is to omit them in the target text (TT). The resulting translation, in certain contexts, might not lose any of the propositional content of the source text (ST), but will definitely lose a variety of communicative effects, such as the very naturalness of ordinary, everyday conversation, or the speaker’s attitude to the words being uttered.

Գրականության ցանկ

1. Aijmer, Karin & Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen. 2003. The discourse particle well and its equivalents in Swedish and Dutch. Linguistics. 41(6): 1123–1161.
2. Allen Bell. The Language of News Media[M]. Cambridge: Blackwell, 1991.
3. Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London and New York: Longman. Reah,D. (1998).
4. Chovanec, J., Interpersonal Aspects of Printed News Discourse (unpublishedPhD dissertation). Brno: Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts. 2000
5. Crystal, D., Davy, D. Investigating English Style. Longman Group Ltd, 1997.
6. “English-Armenian Dictionary” by H.Asmangulyan & M.Hovhannisyan, Publishing House “HAYASTAN”, Yerevan
7. English-Armenian Armenian-English Modern Dictionary (English and Armenian Edition), 1990 by Mardiros Koushakdjian, Rev. Dicran Khantrouni
8. English Armenian; Armenian English Dictionary: A Dictionary of The Armenian Language , 2007 by Grigo Chyukyurian
9. Armenian-English Dictionary, 2011 by N. Baratyan

Պատվիրել/