1.Different vision of objects of reality and different usage;

One and the same object of reality can be seen in by different languages in different aspects. This is reflecting in different usage. For ex: school leavers – in the Russian the pupils release; the city is built on terraces rising from the lake – город построен на тeрасах спускающихся к озеру; he crossed his knees- он положил ногу на ногу.

Difficulties arise when such words are used figuratively –instant history like instant coffee be sometimes be remarkable ….at least it is in this memoir by a former White House aid who sees Johnson as an extraordinary gifted president who was the wrong man, from the wrong place, at the wrong time under the wrong circumstance. –Современная история как и такой же современный продукт как растворимый кофе иногда бывает действительно приятным, по крайней мере это так в мемуарах помощника президента, который декларирует что президент….

Sometimes due to a different vision the meaning of a word in a source language is wider and less differentiated and corresponds to two or more correlated words in the tagged language. Example: blue –синий, голубой. Purple –пурпурный, фиолетовый, синий. Убить-kill, murder,slay. Плавать-sail, swim, drift ,float.

2.Different semantic structure of a word in the source language and the tagged language;

Divergence in the semantic structure is one of the primary causes of the lexical transformations. This divergences are connected with peculiar features of a word or a group of words. Even words which seem to have the same meaning in the source and the tagged language are not identical. Most often primary meanings of such words coincide while their derivative meanings do not. Semantic correlation between two languages is not to be interpreted as semantic identity. Due to complexity of semantic structure one to one correspondence between the semantic structure of correlated polysemantic words in the source language and in the tagged language is scarcely possible, N Not infrequently similar meanings of Russian and English words differ in some components. This phenomenon is usually reflected in dictionaries where more than one Russian equivalent is listed under the same meaning of the English word. Example: glooming -1.темный мрачный, 2. Мрачный, унылый. The analysis of the polysemantic word ‘mellow’ shows that it can apply the following meanings – fruit(спелый, мягкий ,сладкий,сочный), wine(выдержанный старый, приятный на вкус), soil(рыхлый, плодородный, жирный), voice(мягкий, сочный) , man( подобревший, смягчившийся с возрастом, веселый - подвыпивший)

3.Different valiancy, or collocability.

The possibility of a word to appear in various combinations is described as its lexical valiancy or collocability. The lexical valiancy of correlated words in different language is not identical. It is natural as every language has its syntagmatic norms and patterns of lexical valiancy. Words habitually collocated tend to constitute a cliché. For ex: bad mistake(грубая ошибка), high hopes (большие надежды), heavy rain( сильный дождь)

The key word in such collocations is usually preserved, but the collocated one is rendered by a word of a somewhat different referential meaning in accordance with the valiancy norms of the tagged language. Example : the trains run –поезда ходят, the worst earthquake –самое сильное землетрясение, . Different collocability often calls for lexical and grammatical transformations in translation, though each component of the collocation may have its equivalent in Russian. For ex: the most controversial prime minister – министр, вызывающий противоречивые мнения. Sweden’s neutral faith ought not to be indult – Швецкая нейтральная вера – верность Швеции нейтралитету не подлежит сомнению.

TRANSLATION OF MONO - SEMANTIC WORDS

This words are comparatively few in number. There are such groups of the as :

1. Antroponyms – names of people.

2. Geographic names;

3. Names of institutions , organizations and periodicals,

4. Scientific and technological terms, besides monosymy is typical of numerals, names of months, of the week and so on.

1.Rendering of antroponyms. The function of An-s is purely nominative. They help to identify a person. There are two ways to render them:

-transcription (universally accepted, however a tradition still place an important role. That is why some names are rendered with the help of transliteration)

-transliteration;

Some telling-names in fiction are translated –тяпкин-ляпкин-clack-dash. Pumty-dumpty- шалтай-балтай.

2. Rendering of geographical names. Tradition is very strong in rendering them. So they are often translated according to the usage of earlier days. For ex: Texas-Техас. Extended names are often translated – the key of good hope –мыс доброй надежды.