Theme: Analisys of stylistic connotation

3. Features of stylistic connotations.
Indeed, connotations are additional shades of meanings, certain “meanings”. At the same time, stylistic connotations are either a sign of reference to various stylistic varieties of the language, or an expression of attitude to the statement (that is, a type of modality): positive, negative or neutral - therefore, having no connotations.
A textbook example from the Russian language: eyes - neutral style, eyes - sublime and positive, eyeballs, peepers - reduced and negative.
The stylistic connotations are also traps and traps, but also the defensive devices of the language in its war against the "invaders" - foreigners trying to invade its borders.
The problem is that in different languages, words that are equivalent in nominative meaning, that is, correlated with the same object or phenomenon (piece) of reality, can differ both in belonging to different styles, and in positive and negative connotations and, accordingly, use in speech.
Developing a metaphor with a mosaic language picture of the world, we can say that language units, words and their equivalents - pieces of a mosaic - can differ not only in size (volume of semantics), but also in colors, colors, shades: bright, faded, glossy, matte, defiant joy or sadness, etc.
This should also include the use of dialectisms, jargon (slang), that is, all types of territorial, social, professional stratifications of the national language.
The great Ben Jonson had this aspect of the use of speech in mind when he said his famous catchphrase: “Language most shows a man. Speak that I may see you.” (Language best reveals a person. Speak and I will see you).
Much later, Bernard Shaw embodied this idea in the image of Professor Higgins in the immortal Pygmalion.
The issue of stylistic connotations is well known and is represented in a fairly wide scientific literature, so we confine ourselves to a few examples.
The Italian teacher of the Russian language sent a letter in English, in which he asked to confirm the possibility of his settling in a hostel, and attached his own translation into Russian. I would be very pleased if you could confirm theavailability of accommodation… in Russian translation it looked like this: I would ask you to confirm accommodation in a hostel…The words accommodation and lodging belong to different registers of speech usage and have different stylistic connotations.
Chinese colleagues sent an invitation to a conference in Hangzhou, the capital of Zhejiang province, presenting it in English as Hangzhou, Zhejiang Provincial capital. However, the phrase provincial capital has different stylistic connotations than capital of the Province.
The same letter describes the beauty and grandeur of the conference venue: With its picturesque landscape, Hangzhou has ever been praised as “Paradise on the Earth”. In 13th century, Marco Polo, a famous Italian tourist praised Hangzhou as “The most beautiful and magnificent city in the world”.
The nominative meaning of the word tourist, perhaps, corresponds to the fact of Marco Polo's visit to China, however, from the point of view of stylistic connotations, it is not acceptable in this context and causes an unplanned comic effect.
The remarkable translator and lexicographer Robert Daglish, who worked in the Soviet Union, spoke about the stylistic difficulties of translating Soviet clichés, sublime and pretentious, into English, which tends to understatement - understatement, underestimation. Clear point, not too exclusive, not too absolute. And once you get that sentence right, our find that the next sentence flows on almost automatically – “and Georgia has many visitors”, and so on”.
The use of dialectisms, jargonisms, historicisms also causes misunderstandings, often absurd, caused mainly by ignorance or, rather, ignorance of these non-standard units of the language, which go beyond the normative, literary language. These are not mines, not bombs, these are small types of linguistic weapons: bullets, grenades, or maybe just fists. But they also successfully "smash the enemy."
The well-known zoologist and traveler Nikolai Drozdov in his book about Australia[6] cites the materials of the Russian emigrant Igor Ivanovich Mezhakov-Koryakin based on translations by English-language translators of Yevgeny Yevtushenko's poem "Bratskaya HPP".
1. Lexico-phraseological compatibility.
As you know, lexico-phraseological compatibility is understood as the ability of some words to be easily and naturally combined, “to be friends” with some words and “repel” others, “not to be friends” with them. Lexico-phraseological compatibility is national, it is specific for each language, therefore it creates additional and very serious difficulties both for communication in a foreign language, and for its study and teaching. It is possible to learn the meanings of words and thus be able to “know” what is being said in a text created by someone (recognition skill), but in order to create a text yourself - written or spoken - it is not enough to know the meaning of words: you also need to know their compatibility in a given language. You can see the meaning of the English word flat – «ровный», even, and use it to translate the Russian phrase «плоская поверхность» - a flat surface. But this is where the coincidence with the Russian model of compatibility of words flat, even ends. All other variants of the natural compatibility of the word flat are unpredictable, they can only be specially memorized separately: a flat tire - : спущенная шина, flat shoes - туфли без каблука, a flat pan- мелкая кастрюля, расстроенная скрипка - a flat violin, батарейка села - the battery is flat . Both sides of these pairs - both Russian and English - are examples of the compatibility of the respective languages, both require special attention, separate memorization and complicate communication. Lexico-phraseological compatibility is a barbed wire stretched over the language barrier to make it even more impregnable.
A vivid example of the dangers caused by the unawareness of sustainable compatibility in the field of scientific terminology is given by Natalya Shakhova.
“... even if a non-specialist, due to common sense and a good knowledge of grammar, understands a completely new situation for himself, then without knowing the necessary terminology, he will not be able to convey his understanding to a specialist reader. And the consequences of this can be the most deplorable (emphasized by me - S.T.). After all, if “hard disk” is called “твердым диском”, instead of “hard disk” when translating, then this will only cause a smile, but if in an algebraic article we translate “prime ring” with the words “примарное кольцо”, and not “первичное”, then this ( take my word for it!) will invalidate the assertion of the theorem, since there is also a “примарное кольцо”, but it corresponds to the English “primary ring”.[7]
The most common mistakes are in the translation of phrases from the native language into a foreign one. In this case, ordinary dictionaries that give the meaning of the word, but not its compatibility, not only do not help, but also confuse the user who creates translation combinations according to the patterns of his native language. The mistake is that instead of looking for an equivalent phrase in a foreign language, they translate word by word.