Ўзбекистон республикаси олий ва ўрта махсус таълим вазирлиги самарқанд давлат чет тиллар институти

 
ADABIYOTLAR 
 
1. 
Виноградов В.С. Введение в переводоведение. М.: 
Издательство института общего среднего образования РАО, 2001. — 
224 с. 
2. Виссон. Л. Синхронный перевод с русского на английский. М.: 
«Р. Валент». 1999. - 275 c. 
3. Гак В.Г., Теория и практика перевода: Французский язык. - 
СПб.: Интердиалект, 2000. - 456 с. 
FEATURES OF INTERNATIONAL MILITARY 
TERMINOLOGY 
Djalilova A. R. 

---

106 
(graduate student of SamSIFL) 
In the modern world, the profession of a military translator, as well as 
the skill and proficiency of military personnel in various foreign languages 
for military operational, as well as peaceful and peacekeeping purposes, is a 
vital art. 
It is possible that at present it would be much easier to defend the 
rights of the Russian-speaking population in the Baltic countries that have 
become EU members to preserve their culture and the Russian language as a 
regional language with the help of the same EU. [3]. 
In an article by one prominent theorist-political scientist on 
strengthening the “spiritual foundations of military integration” with our 
former Soviet republics, various components of our cooperation are very 
thoroughly analyzed – “knowledge, ideas reflecting the need for military 
integration and the possibilities of its implementation”; samples of “military-
international thinking, behavior and activity”, etc. are offered. The author is 
right that “the variety of values of military integration, the mechanism of 
their action presuppose the concentration of efforts of the subjects of military 
integration at least in the following areas: 
- search, formulation, explanation and confirmation in the minds of 
peoples, servicemen of ideas that can become a driving force of military 
integration; 
- finding effective ways to carry out military-integration activities of 
state structures, peoples, armies, military personnel; 
- creation of a system of relations, adequate to the methods of military 
integration adopted by ideas, between the participants of military integration 
processes at all levels ...” [1]. 
At present, it seems extremely important to carry out a deeper, 
fundamental analysis of the problems of translation classification of military 
texts, the foundations of functional typification, methods of modeling, 
extralinguistic and textural content, communicative-active identification and 
methods of their discursive implementation. 
It is known that G.M. Strelkovsky two-component classification of 
military texts, including their “informational” and “regulatory” varieties [4, 
100], covers their most representative types, but does not exhaust the entire 
array of searched texts. 
Addressing this problem, R.K. Minyar-Beloruchev emphasized that 
“military translation as a type of translation is characterized only by its 
inherent texts and some specific types of translator's work. Texts can be 

---

107 
characterized both from the point of view of their information content, and 
from the point of view of the linguistic means dominating in them”. As 
examples, he named the following types of military texts: combat documents, 
manuals and manuals, instructions and technical descriptions, military 
scientific articles and military journalism. The texts differ from each other 
“by belonging to different functional styles” [2, 194]. 
Many military scientific and technical terms arise using international 
sources of terminology (Latin and Greek roots). There is a fairly large group 
of international military terms that are found in English and Russian 
(division, general, lieutenant, major). However, it should be borne in mind 
that such terms in English may have a different or slightly changed meaning 
in comparison with Russian. For example, the term “general staff” should be 
translated as “общий штаб” or “общая часть штаба”, but not as 
“генеральный штаб”, since this concept has no connection with the concept 
of “general staff”. 
The term “military academy” is correctly translated as “военное 
училище”, not “военная академия”, “ammunition” – “боеприпасы”, not 
“амуниция, снаряжение”; “diversion” – “отвлекающий удар”, not 
“диверсия”; “disposition” – “боевой порядок”, not “диспозиция”; 
“barracks” – “казарма”, not “барак”; “monitor” – “наблюдатель”, not 
“монитор”. 
When translating, the translator should also always take into account 
the real meaning of the term in a given setting, in a given context. For 
example, the term “battalion” means “батальон” in infantry, but “дивизион” 
in artillery; the term “section” in the US military means “секция” in heavy 
infantry units, “орудие” in artillery, and in the British Armed Forces 
“отделение” in infantry, “взвод” in artillery. 
By a grammatical mismatch between similar English and Russian 
words can be caused translation errors. So, a number of nouns in English are 
used in the singular and plural, and in Russian - only in the singular. In the 
plural, “industries” can mean “отрасли промышленности” or 
“промышленность” (from a number of countries); “policies” can mean 
“политика”, “политический курс” of a number of countries or in different 
areas, “nuclear weapons” – “ядерное оружие”. 
The influence of foreign languages in the English military vocabulary 
is also manifested in the formation of the so-called “калек”. Recently, for 
example, many cripples from the Russian language have appeared: 

---

108 
“inhabited point” - “населенный пункт”; “rifle division” - “стрелковая 
дивизия”; “front” – “фронт(объединение)”.