The translator's false friends and their types

Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)

14

history of Central Asia (prepared for publication by Yu.E. Bregel). –M .:
Nauka. 1964.-S.472-473.

10.

Abdusamatova N.S. Academician VV Bartold is a scholar who has

made significant contributions to Russian oriental studies and the history of
Central Asia. // Bulletin of Khorezm Mamun Academy. 2019, №2-issue.-
P.72.

11.

Khudoykulov T. On the topography of Bukhara in the research of

academician VV Bartold. // Bulletin of Khorezm Mamun Academy. 2019,
№2-issue.-P.70.

12.

Romitan village is located 18 versts north of Bukhara.

13.

KHamroev A.H. Academician V.V. Bartold Bukhoroda. // Bukhora

State University Ilmiy Ahboroti. 2012 y. N. 1/45. –P.44.

14.

Bartold V.V. Compositions. T.II. part 1. –M. Publisher: Oriental

Literature. 1963. –P.148.

THE TRANSLATOR'S FALSE FRIENDS AND THEIR TYPES

A. Kaljanov

Abstract: A great number of terms proposed by researchers in order to

name interlingual correspondences having homonymic characters confirm
the complexity of the given phenomenon and the necessity to use such
linguistic methods that will help to avoid ambiguity in the interpretation of
interlingual homonymy category. There are words in the source and target
languages that are more or less similar in form. Such words are of great
interest to the translator since he is naturally inclined to take this formal
similarity for the semantic proximity and to regard the words that look alike
as permanent equivalents.

Keywords: Interlingual homonyms, false friends, translation,

classification.

Nowadays, the problem of international lexicon translation is one of the

most actual problems and, unfortunately, it isn't studied very well. The
translator should be afraid of numerous pseudo-internationalism that can
confuse even skillful specialists and completely distort the sense of the
statement; he also is faced with some difficulties connected with the choice
between preservation of the international form and selection of some
equivalent of a native or foreign language. In this work we tried to touch
upon some widespread mistakes trapping the translator in the process of

Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)

15

his work with such kind of lexicon; we also tried to explain some reasons for
their occurrence and the way to avoid these mistakes.

The linguistic term false friends or false cognates describes confusing

word pairs occurring in two or more different languages, which have the
same or very similar form but different meaning. These words developed
mostly from classical languages that mean that all of them have the same
origin but their semantic meaning rapidly changed over the years, so they
are no longer considered to be polysemous. The difference between these
word pairs can be observed not only in the semantic meaning but also in
spelling, pronunciation, or grammatical category [1].

False friends can cause many difficulties to a language used when

learning a foreign language, they can provide linguistic traps in which a non-
native speaker can unknowingly fall. Wrong use of a false friend can result
in mistakes in translations, misunderstandings, confusion, or even
embarrassment and hilarious situations. It is undeniable that these words
can be erroneously expressed by non-native speakers, as well native
speakers because of the fact that they can occur in various dialects of the
same language [2].

This phenomenon of false friends existing in one language is called

intralingual false friends. On the other hand, false friends are not always
considered to be linguistic obstacles which can cause non-native speakers
unpleasant issues. For some authors, false friends represent original
opportunities, they use them in order to make their texts more interesting,
they allow them to make for example puns, as well as homophones [3].
These are just common false friends regardless of their shared scope of
meaning, etymology, graphic or phonetic features.

Rather systematic and wide studying of similar interlingual

correspondence has begun in 1928 with the works of M. Kessler and Z.
Derkony based on the materials of French-English and the English-French
parallels. They also introduced the term "faux amis du traducteur"
("translator's false friends"). Nowadays this term is standard and is in
common use. Two types of "translator's false friends" are defined:

1) "completely false" with similar spelling and different semantics;
2) "partially false" with similar spelling and with general semantics.
The compound term "Translator's false friends" is used in the works

that mainly connected with problems of translation. Some differential
dictionaries that after M. Kessler and Z. Derkony began to be named as
dictionaries of "translator's false friends" were published in Russia some
years ago" [4].

Emphasizing distinctions between the concepts of "translator's false

friends" and "interlingual homonymy", V.V. Akulenko marks that "a

Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)

16

significant place among "translator's false friends" is occupied by some
cases of interlingual homonymy and paronymy".

It is considered to be that the concept of "translator's false friends" is

much wider than the concepts of "interlingual homonyms" and "interlingual
paronyms": it includes in its structure all lexical units which can cause
wrong associations interlingual homonyms, interlingual paronyms,
etymological doublets, etc. That is the opinion of some researchers [5].

However, some linguists use both of the terms, with no differentiating

of their semantics So, R.A. Hudagov, having named his article "Translator's
false friends" according to names of dictionaries which data he analyzes, he
marks: "interlingual homonyms, words that sound similar but have different
meanings are usually called "Translator's false friends" [6. 3-9].

J. Vlchek also thought that the term of "translator's false friends" is not

the term but "the trope for the name of interlingual homonyms" [7]. The
same point of view after R.A.Budagov and J.Vlchck is stated by A. Shidlovsky:
interlingual homonyms (words having identical or close pronunciation but
different meanings) are called "Translator's false friends" in linguistics [8.
3].

However, in our opinion, to call the term interlingual homonyms as

"translator's false friends" consisting of metaphorical periphrasis could be
incorrect: such name does not reflect the fundamental symmetric-
asymmetric side of the phenomenon because the homonymy is the
expression of symmetry of the form at the asymmetry of the contents. The
definition "translator's false friends" is comprehensible in translation
theory but it does not reflect the linguistic aspect of a problem: probably,
exactly because of this reason in monographic researches devoted to a
problem of interlingual homonymy, for similar words in different languages
some other terms are used.

Interlingual homonymy covers all that lies within the limits of one-serial

language levels formally identical but semantically different in contacting
languages. However, as many researchers agreed, the basic part of
interlingual homonymy is marked on the lexical level in the category of
interlingual lexical homonyms [9].

There are two possible ways to explain reasons of the interlingual

homonyms occurrence: casual correspondences of soundings in practically
non-contacting languages; and not casual correspondences, caused by the
subsequent changes in the semantics of genetically related single-root
words [10].

R.A.Budagov marking specificity of interlingual homonyms category in

close kindred languages wrote: "One thing when the talk is about the
discrepancy between non-kindred languages (semantic discrepancies of
formally similar lexicon); and the other thing, is the discrepancy between

Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)

17

kindred languages. In turn, it is a different situation in closely kindred
languages than with more remote relation" [11]. This "absolutely different
situation" is connected with that the major part of interlingual homonyms
and paronyms in such languages result from the disintegration of polysemy
or as a consequence of expansion/narrowing of the word meanings which
are going back to the same etymon.

It is natural that between kindred languages and close kindred

languages the relative density of similar correspondence is much higher
than in non-kindred languages. Moreover, there can be a lot of interlingual
homonyms between words of kindred languages; it can be a consequence of
unequal development of common origin words' meanings.

Later on the term "interlingual homonyms" got wide circulation in

linguistic literature. However, the analysis of available points of view
connected with the phenomenon of homonymy has shown that even now
there is no certain standard definition of the concept of "interlingual
homonymy". Researchers' opinions differ both concerning the expression
and connotation of interlingual correspondences having homonymic
characters.

Having relatively formal identity of interlingual homonyms admitted by

the majority of scientists, the degree of a semantic divergence is not clearly
determined.

We should emphasize that the list of given terms is not complete. Some

linguists offer to qualify interlingual correspondences coinciding in their
expression and various in different degrees of their meaning as "false
equivalents" [12. 194], "translator's false friends" [13], "deceptive language
resemblances" [14. 228-238], "words-analogues" [14. 160], "pseudo-
internationalism"[14.16], "approximates", "false lexical parallels" [15], and
"heteronyms" [16. 84-110].

V.V.Dubichinsky to prevent different interpretations and discrepancies

recommends linguists and translators to unite such well-known terms as
"international lexicon ", "translator's false friends", "interlingual
homonyms", etc. into one terminological system. "The lexemes coinciding in
expression and similar/dissimilar in connotation" are suggested to be given
such a general term like "lexical parallels" [17].

As for the classification of false friends, there is no single division on

which all of the linguists would agree. False friends can be therefore
classified in accordance with various aspects, for example morphological,
graphical, phonetic, etymological, or syntactical. This is where the authors
differ the most. However, the shared meaning and the semantic form
between given two words always have a significant role to play in
distributing false friends.

Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)

18

Chamizo-Domínguez [2] divides false friends from a semantic and

synchronic point of view into two basic groups:

1.

Chance false friends

2.

Semantic false friends

Chance false friends do not share any semantic or etymological aspect,

it means that they do not have the same origin and their mutual relation is
just random. However, they are similar to the graphical and phonetic point
of view. A prototypical example is the Japanese word

atama which means

the head and Karakalpak word

atama which means a title. Hence chance

false friends in two or more languages are equivalent to homonyms in one
language. For example the Karakalpak word

san means either a number or

a part of the div. These two words do not possess any etymological
relation, however, from the graphical and phonetic point of view are exactly
the same, as well as chance false friends. Semantic false friends, on the other
hand, share the common origin, have also similar graphical and phonetic
aspects but the meaning changed over the years. To study semantic false
friends in more detail, Chamizo-Domínguez and Nerlich [3] divide them
further into two subgroups:

1.

Full false friends

2.

Partial false friends

The meaning of full false friends in two different languages changed

rapidly and two given words do not share any semantic relation, whereas
partial false friends are words that can bear more than one meaning and one
of them is common for both of them.

Chacón-Beltrán introduced a classification of false friends also with

connection to cognate words [18]. This classification is called CCVF
(

Clasificación de Cognados Verdaderos y Falsos) and divides cognates into

six groups depending on their phonetic or/and graphic structure and
whether they are true cognates or false cognates:

1.

True Cognates: Phonetic

2.

True Cognates: Graphic

3.

Partial False Friends: Phonetic

4.

Total False Friends: Phonetic

5.

Partial False Friends: Graphic

6.

Total False Friends: Graphic

Another classification was introduced by Veisbergs [19]. He

distinguishes three main groups of false friends:

1. False friends proper
2. Occasional or accidental false friends
3. Pseudo false friends
The first group is further divided into three subgroups:
a) Complete (absolute) false friends

Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)

19

b) Partial false friends
c) Nuance differentiated word pairs
Complete and partial false friends share the same features as total and

partial false friends in Chacón-Beltrán’s classification. The difference
connected to connotative meaning occurs with nuance differentiated word
pairs, a slight distinction between two given word can be caused by the
frequency of use, semantic features, stylistic differences, diachronic
diversion, and colloquialism. Occasional or accidental false friends share, on
the contrary, the same properties as chance false friends from the Chamizo-
Domínguez’s classification. It means that the connection between two given
words is just coincidental as they do not have any etymological coherence.
Pseudo false friends are non-existing expressions built by non-native
speakers who assume that one word in their mother tongue has a
corresponding counterpart in the other language. This situation happens
usually with international words. Although pseudo friends are not
ordinarily mentioned in dictionaries, their usage by learners of a foreign
language is quite frequent. For example the Karakalpak word

narkoman

does not have the English counterpart

narcoman

, the correct translation is

drug addict

.

Stevens also organized confusing word pairs into several groups

according to their shared meaning [20]. However, in his book he mainly
focuses on practical exercises that should improve learners’ knowledge
about German-English confusing word pairs rather than on explaining the
principles. Nevertheless, he divides these words into four categories:

1.

True friends

2.

False friends

3.

Lots of friends

4.

Confusing friends

In this article, we talked about the translator’s false friend and focused

on his

classification. However, so far no such research has been conducted in

Karakalpak linguistics. Therefore, we have used only foreign research in this
article. However, we will definitely explore this problem in our next
research.

References:

1.

Hladký, J. (1990). Zrádná slova v angličtině. Praha: Státní pedagogické

nakladatelství.

2.

Chamizo-Domínguez, Pedro J. (2008), Semantics and Pragmatics of

False Friends, New York/Oxon: Routledge

3.

Chamizo-Domínguez, P. J., & Nerlich, B. (2002). False friends: Their

origin and semantics in some selected langugaes. Journal of Pragmatics, 34,

Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)

20

1833-1849.

4.

Акуленко

B.B.

Вопросы

изучения

лексических

интернационализмов и процессы их образования // Вопросы
социальной лингвистики. - Л., 1999

5.

Акуленко В.В. Лексические интернационализмы и методы их

изучения // Вопросы языкознания, (электронный вариант) – 1996

6.

Будагов

Р.А.

Близкородственные

языки

и

некоторые

особенности их изучения // Типология сходств и различий. - Кишинев:
Штиница. 1995

7.

Влчек Й. Чешско-русские омонимы - высшая стадия лексической

интерференции. - Болгарская русистика - София, 1990.

8.

Шидловский А.В. Лингвистические проблемы перевода на

белорусский язык. - Минск, 1999

9.

Супрун А.Е. Сопоставительно-типологический анализ лексики

// Методы изучения лексики. - Минск, 1995.

10.

Новикова JI.H. Выявление стилеобразующих возможностей

творческих элементов научного текста // Теория и практика
английской научной речи. Под ред. М.М. Глушко. - М.: Изд-во Моск. ун-
та, -1990

11.

Будагов Р. Несколько замечаний о «ложных друзьях

переводчика» // Мастерство перевода. Сборник восьмой 1991. - М.,
1971

12.

Федоров А.В. Очерки общей и сопоставительной стилистики. -

М.: Высшая школа, 2002

13.

Гальперин П.Я. Относительно употребления терминов

"значение", "смысл", "содержание" в лингвистических работах //
Филологические науки. – 1994

14.

Гросбарт 3. О русских и польских словах, близких по звучанию

разных по значению ("межъязыковые омонимы") // Материалы
третьего международного методического семинара преподавателей
русского языка стран социализма. - М., 1999

15.

Вилюман

В.Г.

О

сравнении

слов-аналогов.

//

Сопоставительный анализ лингвистических категорий. - М.: Изд-во
МГУ, 1995

16.

Коломиец О.В. Французко-украинские лексические параллели.

Автореф.-.канд.филол. наук. - Киев, 1996

17.

Дубининский В В. Лексические параллели // Харьковское

лексическое общество. - Харьков, 1993

18.

Chacón-Beltrán, R. (2006). Towards a typological classification of

false friends (SpanishEnglish). Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 19,
29-39.

19.

Veisbergs, A. (1996). False friends dictionaries: A tool for

Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)

21

translators or learners or both. Euralex ˈ96 Proceedings: Papers submitted
to the Seventh EURALEX International Congress on Lexicography in
Göteborg, Sweden (pp. 627-634). Göteborg: Novum Grafiska AB.

20.

Stevens, J. (2009). True and False Friends; Stolpersteine im

englischen Wortschatz. Ismaning: Hueber Verlag.

Kudratova Zebo Erkinovna- Assistant of the Department of Clinical and

Laboratory Diagnostics; Kuvandikov Golib Berdirasulovich- Assistant of the

Department of Clinical and Laboratory Diagnostics; Berdiyarova Shohida

Shukrullayevna- Assistant of the Department of Clinical and Laboratory

Diagnostics; Samarkand State Medical Institute ,Samarkand, Uzbekistan

THE ROLE OF SIMULATION TRAINING AT A MEDICAL INSTITUTE

Kudratova Z. E., Kuvandikov G.B., Berdiyarova SH. SH.

Abstract: The use of simulators, mannequins, phantoms allows you to

repeatedly work out certain exercises and actions while providing timely,
detailed professional instructions during work. It is the simulators that can
repeatedly and accurately recreate important clinical scenarios and the
ability to adapt the learning situation for each student.

Keywords: practical skills, simulation training, simulation educational

technologies, mannequin, practical skills, modern medical education,
medical education problems and solution methods.

Simulation training is a fairly new educational technique that is used in

medicine. The use of simulators in healthcare is safe for patients, it allows
you to simulate various critical situations in conditions close to real ones. At
the present stage of development of higher medical education, the use of
modern phantoms and simulators in the educational process is relevant [1].
This is due to the fact that it is not always possible to show certain
pathological conditions at the clinical bases of departments. Simulation
training in medical education is used to create conditions and develop
algorithms for medical manipulations, including in emergency and extreme
situations. This is due to the need for training for the mandatory
simultaneous elimination of problems.

The uniqueness of the simulation training method is manifested in the

possibility of using a repeated repetition in a single-type specified model
conditions on simulators, simulators or with the help of other equipment to
bring skill that requires meticulous accuracy, speed and standardization
(any cognitive or manual actions carried out in the profession automatically,