Authors

The article discusses the terms sociolinguistics — contact linguistics — World Englishes paradigm. The structure of Contact Linguistics, whose central part is made by the World Englishes paradigm, is dwelt upon. Major problems of language contacts are overviewed, including differentiation of the global language, its localization and development of varieties. Varieties of a pluricentric language are defined as typified speech that is specific of a certain linguacultural social community, that reflects the mentality, cultural features and to a certain degree transfer of the native language. The author emphasizes that each variety is underpinned by a linguacultural identity of its users. Attention is focused on the legitimacy of the Expanding Circle varieties (according to B. Kachru) such as Russian and Chinese Englishes, need in their studying in theory and applied aspects.

The article determines the new term intervarietal, or intermediary translation and explains why the need for integrating this type of translation into curricula has been enhanced today. The challenges of intervarietal translation are viewed in the framework of L. Smith’s theory of intelligibility in intercultural communication — in the aspect of form, semantics, and pragmatics. These problems are directly related to studying varieties of the pluricentric English language, though they are also significant for studying other pluricentric European languages. The most urgent need for today’s translation practice is in study East Asian Englishes, translation of which results in a number of mistakes, since translators from European languages do not know the specifics of Asian Romanizations, transfer features typical of Asian English users, or Asian cultures. Based on syllabi of the LMSU Faculty of Foreign Languages and Area Studies, we have shown the possibility of integrating studying these problems in translation curricula.

The paper analyzes the use and translation of zoometaphor in political media and Internet discourse. Translation of zoometaphors is discussed based on an English fable about the Donkey, Tiger and Lion. The research has revealed that in British English the word donkey metaphorically objectivizes the semes of ‘pomposity’ and ‘stubbornness’; in American English, like in Russian, the semes of ‘stupidity’ and ‘stubbornness’. However, the Chinese English discourse reveals a new meaning — ‘humbly doing hard work’, which is similar to the Russian derived verb ishachit ‘to drudge’. Meanwhile, a Chinese English context can be either negative and positive when the semes ‘without tiredness’ and ‘perseverance’ are activated. The word lion creates a metaphoric image due to the semes ‘power’ and ‘majesty’. British and Indian Englishes, as well as Chinese English reveal one more meaning — ‘power guard’. The word tiger as a metaphor has traditionally activated the semes of ‘danger’, ‘aggressiveness’, and ‘force’, but nowadays in the Asian context it has the positive seme ‘rapid development’ and the negative ‘high-ranking corruption’. The article compares the participation of these words in making phraseological units used in the political discourse and points to the challenges they present in translating to Russian. The paper concludes that it is a cultural underpinning that causes most problems in translating pluricentric English.

The article discusses the necessity to refocus teaching pluricentric foreign languages from linguistic and cultural features in the traditional countries onto the specifics of varieties considered to be non-native for their users participating in a wide international / intercultural communication. East Asian varieties are a good example of such a phenomenon. For an unprepared communicator it is quite challenging to perceive and comprehend varieties of this type — challenges occur at all levels of language structure: phonographic, grammatical, lexico-semantic, and discourse-pragmatic. The ways to solve these problems include raising students’ awareness of the existence of the varieties of a pluricentric language, i.e., the World Englishes paradigm; receptive training of Asian English speech comprehension; awareness of challenges in understanding students’ own (Russian) variety of English (or another pluricentric language) for communicators using other varieties; studying translingual literature written by authors of Chinese (or other Asian) origin; listening and reading mass media in the variety; training intermediary translation from the variety into Russian, and acquiring the basis of intercultural literacy. All these ways are relevant not only for teaching Russian students; they will also help in teaching Chinese students whose number has been increasing at our universities