Issues of Rendering Military Terminology Within the Framework of Military Discourse

IRSTI 14.35.07 https://doi.org/10.26577/CAJSH.2020.v6.i1.03 A.С. Seidikenova,1 Abdeljalil Akkari,2 A. Bakitov,3 Yelena Morugova4 1 al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Kazakhstan, Almaty 2 University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland 3 al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Kazakhstan, Almaty e-mail: seydikenova781022@yandex.kz ISSUES OF RENDERING MILITARY TERMINOLOGY WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF MILITARY DISCOURSE Abstract. This article takes an attempt to review the complexity of rendering military terminology in two languages and its subsequent identification of structure-forming features. The processes of globalization are incredibly intense, the military services of the world powers have to communicate with each other using military terminology in the course of hostilities and in the framework of military cooperation (competitions of military personnel, all kinds of military forums). The armed forces and the army are one of the most important social institutions and apparatuses in many countries. In the zones of local military conflicts, with the assistance of the armed forces, missions and humanitarian convoys are carried out aimed at establishing and maintaining a ceasefire and normal life. That is why, this research focuses on the study of military discourse and its functional components taking into account the increasing demand for developing multilingual vocabulary and speech strategies owing to current international conflicts. Key words: military discourse, military terminology, military vocabulary, transformations. Introduction. Recently, the problem of the use of military terminology in military discourse has received considerable attention. This is due to the current extralinguistic situation, which is characterized by political and military conflicts. According To J. Michaels, “in conflicts, discourse plays an essential role, both direct and indirect, and the principles of warfare are inseparable from the war language” (J.Michaels, 2013, p.1).Military discourse is a special kind of speech organization of the worldview of military personnel, which has such properties as correlation with the speech military situation, the surrounding situation of the military sphere, specific military chronotopy, intentionality, integrity of the speech elements used, coherence, military factual information, procedural intertextuality, authority of military-theoretical and military-historical sources, anthropocentricity of the military worldview, ability to interact with other institutional-type discourses (Ulanov A.V., 2014, p.32). Military discourse contains the types of communication that have developed in society and reflect the relevant social institution, namely, the need for security and order. Military discourse changes historically: from time to time integral parts of the structure of the army are being reorganized – some may disappear or appear in certain military units, ranks, and insignia. Despite its historical impermanence, it has a number of advantages that characterize arguments within the army hierarchy. In the army, the concept of subordination regulates the status and service relationships between the participants (members) of discussion. Subordination is a fundamental element of military discourse. It is due to the clarity of structure, manifested in the daily routine, the formulation of orders and relations between soldiers. It can be seen not only in the process of informal communication, but also in the texts of military documentation and militarydiplomatic documents. Thus, in a broad sense, military materials are considered to be military journalistic, military scientific, military technical materials and acts of military administration. 19 Moreover, military materials include all scientific and technical materials and management acts containing information about the life of the troops and military institutions of the armed forces. This forms a formal part of military discourse. Literature Review. For a long time, translation has been inextricably linked with the performance of the important social function that ensured inter-language communication between people. The implementation of the translation was closely intertwined with the problems of stylistics, linguistics and sociological adaptation of the text. While translating, one cares not only about the logical essence of the text in a foreign language, but also he is interested in the way of conceptual expression of information, of one or another character in the native language. Translation always attracted the attention of scientists and researchers, causing a lot of opinions and unique points of view. In the last century, there was a conscious neсessity for translation activities to bring into the system and scientifically substantiate the results of the vast experience in this field. Many researchers have observed the concept of translation and given different definitions to it. Thus, according to the Russian professor of linguistics L. Barkhudarov, translation can be described as “interlanguage converting or transforming text from one language into another language” (L.Barkhudarov, 1975, p.5). Another Russian translator I. Alexeyeva gives the following interpretation of the process of translation: “Translation is an activity that consists of invariable reexpression, transcoding of the text from one language into another language provided by the translator” (I. Alexeyeva, 2004, p.3). Translation requires understanding of the term “discourse” since it is “a continuous stretch of especially spoken language larger than a sentence, often constituting a coherent unit, such as a sermon, argument, joke or narrative (D. Crystal, 1992, p.25). What is more, G. Cook defines discourse as “stretches of language perceived to be meaningful, unified, and purposive” (G. Cook, 1989, p.106). This research is going to focus on military discourse – a special type of discourse that arise in the military sphere and everything interacts with it. Military discourse has its own criteria and components of formation. The first component of military discourse is its participants – employees of military and power departments of all posts and ranks. The chronotope of military discourse includes closed and open meetings of military departments, military units, military bases, army collectives, etc. Military discourse is aimed at accomplishment of assigned tasks, including military actions and victory over the adversary. While discussing the peculiarities, it is necessary to point out that one of the most significant features of military discourse is pursuing the values of appealing to the qualities necessary for warfare: discipline, foresight, respect for people senior in rank (subordination), compliance with military traditions, honor, bravery and courage. The subject of military discourse is military conflict, principles and tactics of warfare, subordination (relationship “boss – subordinate”). The strategy of presentation is used in its genres and types: orders, decrees, instructions, directives, recommendations. The characteristics of the armed forces as a separate social institution are subordination of all bodies of the military departments and personnel, as well as authoritarianism, actions under strict regulations, centralization of leadership and responsibility of officials. It follows that for the military discourse as a tool for bringing large amounts of information, and also setting clear goals and objectives in conditions of a constantly changing environment are characterized by such features as imperativeness, clarity and consistency of the stated thoughts, standardized prototypical text-building models and communicative tension. Significance of the study. This paper addresses to the questions of the adequate usage of the corresponding vocabulary in the military discourse. Military documents that comprise formal military discourse have a number of common distinctive lexical features. First, it is the frequent use of military terminology, which is constantly changing due to the exit from the circulation of some words and the addition of new ones. Secondly, this is due to the reorganization of the armed forces, the emergence of new weapons, military equipment and new methods of warfare. Thirdly, it is the presence of abbreviated and index symbols and symbols for the received weapons and military 20 equipment. Basing on the reasons mentioned above, we consider that the study of the peculiarities of the use of military terminology in military discourse is important. Research Objectives - To identify peculiarities of the military terminology in military discourse. - To set the boundaries of the military vocabulary. - To analyze the characteristics of the military discourse and distinguish its main features. - Research Hypothesis The hypothesis of this research is based on the fact that military discourse requires accurate understanding of special military terms while translating military vocabulary from the source language to the target one with the aim to avoid misinterpretations that may lead to negative consequences. Methodology. A mixture of methods and approaches is employed in this descriptive research. In the article, a complex research technique is used to address the set objectives: contextual, component analyses, method of definitional analysis, which has observed the definitions of the studied concepts, statistical method, allowing to visualize the prevalence of different types of military terms and acronyms. Data Analysis. The syntactic feature of military materials is the wide use in them of constructions in the passive voice, gerundial, infinitive, participial constructions, as well as cliché sentences (for combat documents). In the statutory documents regulating the passage of military service, “dry official language” is commonly used, which is dominated by clichés, statutory wording and absence of any literary techniques. Incomplete sentences omit those components that, with proper knowledge of combat documents, can be easily recovered from the text and do not impede the correct understanding of the transmitted information. In a clichéd sentence there are only those elements that are necessary for the transmission of information and without knowledge of the full decoding of each element, it is not possible to understand a sentence of this type: Let us consider the original statement taken from the US Army Manual called “Ranger Handbook SH 2176 (United States Army Infantry School, 2006, p.5-1): Table 1: Сonsider the original statement taken from the US Army Manual Original “The headquarters consist of the platoon leader (PL), RTO, platoon sergeant (PSG), FO, RTO, and medic. It may include any attachments that the PL decides that he or the PSG must control directly.” (United States Army Infantry School, 2006, p.5-1) Translation «Подгруппа управления включает в себя командира взвода (PL), радиотелефониста (RATELO), взводного сержанта (PSG), передового наблюдателя (FO) и его радиотелефониста. Она же может включать в себя любые дополнительные подразделения, которыми командир взвода или взводный сержант решил управлять непосредственно.» (United States Army Infantry School, Translation made by Wanderer S., 2007, p.5-1). The commonly found and widely used translation of the word “headquarter” refers to the Russian «штаб-квартира», «центр», «главное управление», however, in the translation made by Sergey Wanderer this word is translated as «подгруппа управления». In this occasion, the translator employs the transformational method of concretization, thus, explaining the recipient the corresponding contextual meaning. Having analyzed the proposed translation of the given statement, it is possible to admit that without knowing military terminology of radio communication one cannot accomplish appropriate rendering of the meaning. 21 Military terms include lexemes, which mean combat units that are presented in the armed forces of countries, tactics, unrest issues and methods of warfare: Table 2: Military terms include lexemes, which mean combat units that are presented Original Translation «Что касается “With regard to countering terrorism, the противодействия терроризму, то в Constitution has introduced a novelty on the Конституцию внесена новелла о deprivation of citizenship of Kazakhstan for лишение гражданства Казахстана за participating in terrorist activities”. участие в террористической деятельности». [Tokayev K.K. , Speech of the Chairman of the Senate of the Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan K.K. Tokayev at the Parliamentary Conference on the Fight against International Terrorism, Retrieved November 8, 2019, https://www.zakon.kz/4850752vystuplenie-predsedatelja-senata.html] The widespread term “terrorism” that was originated during the French revolution in the late 18th century and began to be used since 1970s still has its “popularity” in the current affairs [Europol, 2010, Retrieved November 8, 2019, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism]. This term means “the use of intentional violence, generally against civilians, for political purposes” and occurs with a periodic frequency in mass media and has become common owing to the military coups and unrest in the 21st century. Considering this, it can be said that the term “terrorism” has survived and retained its semantic meaning without any changes grammatical and lexical forms of the word. Moreover, the terms “terrorist”, “suicide bomber”, “shahid”, “terrorist organization” are widely known and used today, as they indicate a real military threat. Military discourse has a narrow focus and covers exclusively the issues of warfare. Table 3: Military discourse has a narrow focus and covers exclusively the issues of warfare. Original from “Rangers Handbook SH 21-76”: “If prisoners are captured during a patrolling operation, they should be treated IAW the Geneva Convention and handled by the 5-S rule: (1) Search (2) Silence (3) Segregate (4) Safeguard (5) Speed to rear [United States Army Infantry School, 2006, p.9-2] Translation: «Если во время патрулирования захвачены пленные, к ним должны быть применены положения Женевской конвенции и правило «5-S»: (1) Наблюдение; (2) Тишина; (3) Разделение; (4) Охрана; (5) Быстрый отход. [United States Army Infantry School, Translation made by Wanderer S., 2007, p.9-2] 22 Here, the translator has used the transformational method of calque while rendering the meaning of the phrase “the Geneva Convention” – «Женевская конвенция», as well as grammatical transformation and substitution. The translation had an intention to preserve the original meaning of the source, for this reason he hasn’t retained the S-structure in the Russian language. Military discourse include technical instructions and scientific and technical manuals, which also have an intellectual and communicative function, as opposed to sections of military literature designed in the official style. We would like to analyze which translation techniques can be applied in the translation of military terms of the Field Manual of the US Army “Ranger Handbook SH 21-76” (United States Army Infantry School, 2006, p.285): Table 4: United States Army Infantry School № 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Term/ terminological unit Frequency-shift keying Translation into Method of translation Russian Частотная Lexical transformation – манипуляция omission, concretization of the concept “keying” Зона посадки Grammatical Landing zone transformation – substitution Точный огонь Grammatical Precise long-range дальнего действия transformation – substitution fire Положение лежа, Explication Prone position упор лежа Боевые патрули Word-for-word translation Combat patrols Снайперские Lexical transformation – Counter-sniper операции omission operations Огневая мощь Grammatical Fire power transformation – substitution Генеральный Concretization General staff штаб Штаб-квартиры и Explication Headquarters and воинские подразделения headquarters company размером с компанию, находящиеся на уровне батальона и выше Штабная Generalization Headquarters battery Центр Transposition, calque, Heavy mortar огнем substitution platoon fire direction управления взвода тяжелых center минометов Ключевые цели Word-for-word translation Key targets Некомбатанты – Explication Non-combatants входящие в состав вооружённых сил лица, функции которых сводятся лишь к обслуживанию и обеспечению боевой деятельности 23 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 вооружённых сил, и которые имеют право применять оружие только в целях самообороны. Затыльник Explication Butt plate приклада Приборы с Concretization Image электронно-оптическим intensification devices преобразователем Ползти на Generalization Hand-and-knees четвереньках crawl Принимать Explication To call the shot решения, командовать Двуглазая Word-for-word, Twin-eyed optical оптическая система substitution system Не шуметь Explication, calque Noise discipline Стрелок Generalization Rifleman Having analyzed some methods of possible translation of military terms and common expressions, it can be said that grammatical (transposition, substitution) and lexical (omission, addition, concretization) transformations are generally used to translate military terminology from English into Russian. It is obligatory for military interpreter to have a good range of knowledge not only in the sphere of translation but also he/she must be a specialist in the warfare business since without fully understanding the concept of one or another term it is impossible to render the accurate meaning to non-English interlocutors. One more notable thing is explicatory method of translation of military terminology, since the Russian language and Russian military reality do not have such objects. That is why, it is important to know the subject of military affairs and be able to choose the right equivalents to convey the meaning and adequate explanation of an object or action within the framework of military terminology and military discourse. Discussion/Results. Given that the problem of the use of military terminology in military discourse does not have a sufficiently complete coverage, we have studied this issue and highlighted its main features. First, when analyzing the structure of military terminology, we have revealed the use of related concepts, in which units of specialized vocabulary are considered as definitions used both in the political sphere and in military affairs. This situation is due to the fact that the confrontation of political forces entails military action. Ye. I. Sheigal supposes that “war, as we know, is the continuation of politics by other means...” (Ye.I. Sheigal, 2000, p.145). Secondly, everything related to military actions is a serious topic. It requires the adoption of responsible decisions, which are discussed by representatives of military departments at the highest level at closed meetings of military departments, military units, military bases, and as a result, secret documents are submitted. Thirdly, it is noteworthy that in military discourse, when constructing a statement, preference is given to military terms that verbalize general concepts rather than individual ones. The formation of military terms occurs in the usual, typical for the English language ways of word formation: morphological and lexical-semantic ways, by borrowing from other areas of science and technology, and from other languages, as well as on the basis of word combinations. The most common methods of translation of simple and complex (multicomponent) terms are lexical-semantic substitutions (modulation, generalization, concretization), calque and descriptive translation. The most common methods of translation of abbreviations and acronyms are calquing (translation of the full form) and modulation. The calque is based on the desire for accuracy of information transmission and the “principle of least effort”. Modulation – the need to 24 solve a pragmatic problem when it is impossible to calculate due to the mismatch of lexical and syntactic compatibility of the English and Russian languages. It is worth noting that the achievement of adequacy in the translation of military terms is difficult, so the results of the predeveloped version have made recommendations that help to choose the correct method of translation in the field of military discourse. Fourthly, the peculiarity of the use of military terminology in military discourse is the temporal correlation of concepts, which uses terms limited by chronological frames. Thus, in the military discourse there are military terms and scientific concepts that have not lost their relevance at the present. Fifthly, spatial relatedness limits military terms to chronological frame. This peculiarity of the use of military terms in military discourse assumes their correspondence to a particular situation. Consequently, when commenting the results of the 7th meeting (October 30-31 2017, Astana, Kazakhstan) of Astana process we are talking about progress in the fight against terrorism and the elimination of ISIS/ISIL/DAESH, “Jabhat alNusra” and other terrorist groups in the launch of the zones of de-escalation [Retrieved December 3, 2019, https://www.kazembassy.ru/rus/mnogostoronnee_sotrudnichestvo/astaninskii_process/]. In this example, we are talking about progress in the fight against terrorism and the elimination of terrorist groups, namely, with the use of certain types of weapons, ammunition, military equipment, combat operations and victory over the enemy. Thus, the use of military terms is subject to the conditions of the specific current situation. Sixthly, another distinctive feature of the use of military terms in military discourse is the non-systemic perception of verbalized concepts. For a military specialist, the term is always a part of a coherent system of military affairs and reveals the content of the concept in its relationship with related concepts. Conclusion. It is thought that this study will be able to highlight the importance of the accurate translation of military terms within military discourse. This research contains examples of rendering military terms and analysis of significance of using various translation methods and techniques to overcome mistakes and misunderstanding that may lead to negative consequences. The findings of this research can be used in the creation of the English-Russian vocabulary of military terminology that may help communicate and interact military services of the countries. Looking at the research paper, it can be said that use of military terminology in military discourse is determined by a number of features: 1) use of related concepts of the sphere of military affairs and politics; 2) temporal and spatial correlation, including a limited resource of terms explaining modern weapons and methods of warfare; 3) use of highly specialized terminological units; 4) non-systemic perception of concepts. Relying on the analysis, we can characterize the military discourse as a discourse about war and for war. We believe that military terminology is used to describe events that have occurred or to justify tactical steps taken as part of an ongoing large-scale military strategy or plan. Thus, the article discusses a number of possible translation steps to create an equivalent in translation into the target language. Transformational-substitutive model of translation assumes knowledge and classification of possible models of translator’s actions. The traditional division of translation transformations into lexical and grammatical, as well as the allocation of a group of complex transformations play a significant role. To conclude, this research may assist in the development of the bilingual vocabulary as well as recommendations in the choice of appropriate transformational methods of translating units of military discourse. References: 1. Michaels, J. The discourse trap and the US military / J. Michaels. – New York: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN, 2013. – 267 p. 25 2. Ulanov A.V. Russian military discourse of XIX-XX centuries: structure, specifics, evolution. – Omsk, Dissertation of Doctor of Philological Science. – 494 p. 3. Barkhudarov L.S. Language and translation (issues of general and particular theory of translation). – Moscow: International Relations, 1975. – 240 p. 4. Alexeyeva I.S. Introduction to translation studies: manual for students of philology and linguistics of higher educational settings. — Saint-Petersburg: Philological faculty of St. Petersburg State University: M.: Publishing center “Academy”, 2004. – 352 p. 5. Crystal, D. Introducing linguistics. – Harmondswoth: Penguin, 1992. – 77 p. 6. Cook, G. Discourse in language teaching: A scheme for teacher education. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989. – 165 p. 7. United States Army Infantry School SH 21-76. Ranger Handbook – Georgia: Fort Benning, 2006. – 327 p. 8. Учебная бригада рейнджеров Пехотная школа Армии США SH 21-76. Учебник Рейнджера. – Джорджия, Форт Беннинг, 2007. Translation made by Wanderer S. Odessa, 2007 – 270 p. 9. https://www.zakon.kz/4850752-vystuplenie-predsedatelja-senata.html 10. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism TE-SAT 2010 Terrorism Situation and Trend Report, Europol, 2010. Retrieved November 8, 2019. 11. Sheigal Ye. I. Semiotics of political discourse. – Volgograd: Peremena, 2000. – 440 p. 12. https://www.kazembassy.ru/rus/mnogostoronnee_sotrudnichestvo/astaninskii_process/ 13. Horowitz, Michael C. The diffusion of military power. Causes and consequences for international politics. – New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2010. 14. Dormidontov A.A. Textbook on translation (English language)/ Dormidontov A.A. Nelyubin L.L., Vasilchenco A.A. M.: Voenizdat, 1972. 15. Khomutova T.N., Naumova K.A. Military-Political Discourse as a Distinctive Type of Discourse. – Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser. Linguistics, 2017, vol.14, no.3. – 4953 pp. 16. Webster’s Third New Interational Dictionary – Chicago, Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1983, V-3. 17. https://www.enchantedlearning.com/wordlist/military.shtml 18. Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, 12 April 2001 (as Amended Through 9 June 2004) – Joint Pub 1-02 or JP 1-02. 19. DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. – United States. Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2018. A.С. Cейдекенова,1 Aбдежалли Аккари,2 A. Бакитов,3 Елена Моругова4 1 әл-Фараби Қазақ Ұлтық Университеті, Казахстан, Алматы 2 Университет Женевы, Женева, Швейцария 3 әл-Фараби Қазақ Ұлтық Университеті, Казахстан, Алматы e-mail: seydikenova781022@yandex.kz ӘСКЕРИ ДИСКУРС ШЕҢБЕРІНДЕ ӘСКЕРИ ТЕРМИНОЛОГИЯНЫ АУДАРУ МӘСЕЛЕЛЕРІ Аңдатпа.Бұл мақалада әскери терминологияны екі тілге аударудың күрделілігін және оның құрылым құрушы белгілерін одан әрі анықтауды қарастыруға әрекет жасалды. Әлемдік державалардың әскери қызметтері жаһанданудың керемет қарқынды процестері жағдайында күнделікті әскери іс-қимылдар барысында және әскери ынтымақтастық шеңберінде әскери терминологияны пайдалана отырып (әскери 26 қызметшілердің конкурстары, барлық мүмкін болатын әскери форумдар) бір-бірімен араласуға мәжбүр екендігі талқыланды. Қарулы күштер мен әскер күші көптеген елдердегі маңызды әлеуметтік институттар мен аппараттардың бірі болып табылады. Қазіргі уақытта түрлі саяси режимдердің жақтастары әлемнің көптеген елдерінде бір-бірімен қақтығысып жатыр, күшшілер саяси жағдайды тұрақсыздандыруға және бірқатар мемлекеттердің конституциялық құрылысын бұруға тырысатын террористік топтарды жою жөнінде арнайы операциялар жүргізуде. Жергілікті әскери қақтығыстар аймақтарында қарулы күштердің жәрдемімен азаматтық халықтың да, соғушы тараптардың да атысты тоқтату және қалыпты тіршілік ету режимін белгілеуге және қолдауға бағытталған миссиялар мен гуманитарлық айдауылдар жүзеге асырылады. Сондықтан да осы зерттеуде қазіргі халықаралық қақтығыстардың көптілді лексикасы мен сөйлеу стратегияларын әзірлеуге сұраныстың артуын ескере отырып, әскери дискурс пен оның функционалдық компоненттерін зерттеуге басты назар аударылады. Түйін сөздер: әскери дискурс, әскери терминология, әскери лексика, трансформация. A.С. Cейдекенова,1 Aбдежалли Аккари,2 A. Бакитов,3 Елена Моругова4 1 Казахский Национальный Университ, Алматы, Казахстан 2 Университет Женевы, Женева, Швейцария 3 Казахский Национальный Университ, Алматы, Казахстан e-mail: seydikenova781022@yandex.kz ПРОБЛЕМЫ ПЕРЕДАЧИ ВОЕННОЙ ТЕРМИНОЛОГИИ В РАМКАХ ВОЕННОГО ДИСКУРСА Аннотация. В данной статье предпринята попытка рассмотрения сложности перевода военной терминологии на два языка и последующего выявления ее структурообразующих признаков. Процессы глобализации невероятно интенсивны, военные службы мировых держав вынуждены общаться друг с другом с использованием военной терминологии в ходе военных действий и в рамках военного сотрудничества (соревнования военных кадров, всевозможные военные форумы). Вооруженные силы и армия являются одними из важнейших социальных институтов и аппаратов во многих странах. В зонах локальных военных конфликтов при содействии вооруженных сил осуществляются миссии и гуманитарные конвои, направленные на установление и поддержание режима прекращения огня и нормальной жизнедеятельности. Поэтому в данной работе основное внимание уделяется изучению военного дискурса и его функциональных компонентов с учетом возрастающего спроса на разработку многоязычной лексики и речевых стратегий в условиях современных международных конфликтов. Ключевые слова: военный дискурс, военная терминология, военная лексика, трансформаци 27