PECULIARITIES OF ENGLISH WEAPONSTERMINOLOGY TRANSLATION

Abstract

In recent years, the focus of linguists’ attention has been the translation of professional texts, in particular terminological units, the disclosure and transmission of foreign language realities by means of the Ukrainian language and the features of their reproduction in scientific and technical texts.In the context of the war military terminology is in the focus of attention of researchers, translators, and users. Leading scientists consider problems related to the analysis of the morphological structure of terms, the specifics of the terminological units translation. In the field of military terminology, scientists analyze the specifics of certain lexical-semantic groups of concepts in this field, raise problems of classification of English-language military vocabulary, investigate military neologisms, and study the features of the translation of terms in this field.Purpose of the article is to study the peculiarities of the English weapon terms translation into Ukrainian. The research material is the English weapon terms obtained as a result of sampling from professional dictionary. Like no other, technical translation strives for the most accurate and complete transmission of information contained in the original. Translation difficulties often arise not only because of differences in the grammatical structure of languages, but also because of the cultural and historical specificity of the native speaker’s worldview. The responsibility for the correct transmission of the content lies with the translator. Any mistake made during the translation process can distort the content of the message. Correct translation of terms is the key to effective professional communication. Since the basis of a technical text is terms, it is necessary to exclude their incorrect translation.Thus, as a result of the conducted research, it was pointed out that English terms of weapons are in most cases reproduced in Ukrainian by using tracing (47%), the translation technique of explication is somewhat less represented (19%). The translation transformations compression (11%) and inversion (10%) are used almost equally. Generalization (5%) and concretization (4%) are used less often.