Non-equivalent vocabulary in social-political texts of the XVIII century

Abstract

The article deals with the non-equivalent vocabulary in socio-political texts of the 18th century. The interest to this type of vocabulary is growing (especially in translation and linguoculturology): every year there are more and more works studying non-equivalent vocabulary with national-cultural specificity of meaning in various resources: fiction, textbooks, press, dictionaries. However, these studies are carried out on the texts of the 19th-21st centuries. In this article, we for the first time analyze this vocabulary in the artistic texts of the 18th century. The authors of the texts (the research materials) are well-known historical figures of the period: Catherine II, M.V. Lomonosov, V.N. Tatishchev, V.K. Trediakovsky, A. Matseevich, P.A. Plavilshikov. The main criterion for text selection was the level of knowledge of non-equivalent vocabulary in them. It is for the first time when identification and description of non-equivalent vocabulary was held in socio-political texts. The purpose of this research is to identify, describe and analyze non-equivalent words in the texts. The practical significance of the research is in the fact that its results can be used in classes of Russian as a foreign language, when compiling dictionaries of non-equivalent vocabulary or linguistic and regional dictionaries, when translating the source texts into foreign languages and making comments. The theoretical significance of the research is in the fact that its results became the basis for further research of non-equivalent vocabulary with national-cultural specificity of meaning. As a result of the research, there were identified the quantity and quality of non-equivalent words. The discovered non-equivalent words were classified into several thematic groups: household items, titles, military vocabulary, social groups, etc., and into types of non-equivalent vocabulary: words-realities, lacunae, exotisms, deviations from the common language norm, etc. In order to have a complete picture of this linguistic phenomenon, it is necessary to make wider the chronological and genre framework of the research material in the future. It is possible to use not only texts of the 18th-21st centuries as a source, but also texts of earlier periods; it is necessary to use not only works of fiction, dictionaries, press, but also to research sociopolitical texts: documents, scientific works, letters.