Bachelor Thesis Towards a New False Friends Dictionary

Published on January 2019 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 18 | Comments: 0 | Views: 330
of 59
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

Masaryk University Faculty of Arts

Department of English and American Studies English Language and Literature

Lenka Tycová

Towards a New False Friends Dictionary Bachelor’s Diploma Thesis

Supervisor: Ing. gr. !i"# $am%ousek  $a m%ousek 

!"

 I declare that I have have worked on this thesis independently, independently,  using only the primary and secondary sources sources listed in the bibliography.

……………………………………………

&uthor’s signature

 I declare that I have have worked on this thesis independently, independently,  using only the primary and secondary sources sources listed in the bibliography.

……………………………………………

&uthor’s signature

&ckno'ledgement: I 'ould like to thank my supervisor Ing. gr. !i"# $am%ousek (or his patience) support) valua%le advice and kind guidance.

Ta#le of $ontents "%! &ntroduction%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% &ntroduction%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%' %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%' 1.1 Motivation.... Motivation............... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ........................................ .............................. 5 1.2 Objective .......................................................................................................................6

%! Defining the $oncept of (False Friends)%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Friends)%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%* %%%%%%* 2.1 Putting it Right: “False Friend” or “False ognate”!......................................................."

+%! $lassification of False Friends, $ategori-ing the Uncategori-a#le. %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%" /%! Approaches to the Treatment of False Friends%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Friends%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%  '%! Towards a New $-ech0English0English0$-ech $-ech0English0English0$-ech False Friends Dictionary%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Dictionary%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%* * 5.1 #co$e........... #co$e...................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................................... ........................... 2% 5.1.1 &he riterion o' For(al #i(ilarit)..........................................................................2* 5.1.2 &he riterion o' “Falsit)”........................................................................................+2 5.1.+ &he riterion o' Fre,uenc)....................................................................................+5.1.- &he riterion o' Fre,uenc) o' rror.......................................................................+6 5.2 For(: Printed and o($uteri/ed False Friends 0ictionaries.......................................+* 5.+ a)out............ a)out...................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... .......................... ................ - 5.- ntr): &heoretical 3uidelines 'or False Friends 0ictionar) ntr) o($ilation.............-5 5.-.1 Model False Friends 0ictionar) ntr) ............................ .............. ............................ ............................ .................... .......... .... -*

1%! $onclusion%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% $onclusion%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%'! %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%'! 2orks $ited%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% $ited%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%' %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%' 34sum4 5English6%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 5English6%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%'* %%%%%%%%%%'* 3esum4 5$-ech6%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 5$-ech6%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%'7 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%'7

8ist of A##reviations ** *alse *riends L+ *irst Language L, Second Language SL Source Language TL Target Language

"%! &ntroduction "%" Motivation The phenomenon o( -(alse (riends is more or less vaguely kno'n to most language learners at all levels o( pro(iciency. These tricky 'ords seem to (orm an insepara%le part o( second language ac/uisition0 they are a pit(all 'hich occasionally traps even those highly  pro(icient in their second language) including translators0 hence (alse (riends need to %e dealt 'ith 'ithin %oth the (ields o( language teaching and translation studies. 1et it is too o(ten the case that little attention is dra'n to them) particularly i( the meaning divergences are relatively su%tle. I( the learner does receive some 'arning instruction) it 'ould most likely %e  %ased on) or %y means o( re(erence to) a (alse (riends dictionary) 'hich is e2pected to (urnish the learner 'ith all the necessary in(ormation.  3ative 45ech learners o( the English language have no' (or more than t'o decades turned (or advice regarding (alse (riends to a dictionary authored %y !ose( 6ladk7 and entitled  Zrádná slova v angličtině  8+99;. The slight %ook 'as pu%lished in +99) %e(ore the age o(

rapid development in the computer science and corpus linguistics) and thus o'es its virtues to nothing more than the single<handed scholarly e((ort o( its author. &s such) it remains a remarka%le collection o( (alse (riends pairs0 ho'ever) ne' developments in the a%ove areas 8among others; have %rought a%out the perception o( its shortcomings. 1et other un(avoura%le  points may %e raised %y a learner) such as mysel() 'hen they chance upon some -(alse (riend) either in 45ech or English) su%se/uently (ailing to (ind it in 6ladk7’s %ook. y motivation (or 'riting this 'ork 'as a com%ination o( the a%ove points0 indeed all o( them) (or it 'ould have %een a pity (or this e2tensive collection o( (alse (riends 'hich has apparently served its purpose (or a num%er o( years to occupy a place on the shel( unopened) o'ing largely to the -all<computeri5ed mood o( recent years. In addition) it 'as the marginal attention that the phenomenon o( (alse (riends sometimes receives) and the results thereo() that

=

 prompted me to 'rite this thesis. &s a learner o( English) no' a student o( the English language and literature) I have o(ten 'itnessed the 'rong use) on account o( (ormal similarity) o( a 'ord %y my (ello' students 8and I am not so sel(<con(ident as to consider mysel( an e2ception in this respect;. Thus) I argue that more attention should %e paid %y language teachers to (ormally similar 'ord<pairs) and that an up<dated and user<(riendly (alse (riends dictionary 'ould aid this aim.

"% 9#:ective The primary o%>ective o( this thesis is to provide comprehensive theoretical guidelines concerning (alse (riends dictionary content and compilation) (or this thesis is chie(ly designed as a preparatory study (or the compilation o( a revised and computeri5ed version o( 6ladk7’s 'ork 8+99;. The revision and computeri5ation o(  Zrádná slova v angličtině  is a task that the Department o( English and &merican Studies o( asaryk ?niversity in Brno has set itsel(. The task o( a dictionary compilation is rarely undertaken or success(ully accomplished  %y a single person0 thus) it 'as o(ten thought use(ul) or even necessary) to present several  possi%le 'ays 8or vie's; o( approaching a particular aspect o( a (alse (riends dictionary compilation) rather than advocating merely one. Indeed) in (ul(illing the a%ove stated o%>ective there 'as an incessant need to account (or and %alance di((ering opinions) 'hether these concerned the very term -(alse (riends) categori5ation o( (alse (riends or the content o( the -ideal (alse (riend dictionary) 'hich diversity is partially caused %y the (act that -(alse (riendship is a language<speci(ic phenomenon) al'ays peculiar to the t'o languages involved.

@

%! Defining the $oncept of (False Friends) The topic o( (alse (riends is as old as languages themselves. 1et it 'as not until +9,A that the term -(au2 amis 8du traducteur;) 'hich is generally understood + to %e the *rench e/uivalent o( the no' commonly used -(alse (riends) 'as coined %y a2ime oessler and !ules Deroc/uigny in their 'ork entitled -Les *au2 &mis , 84hami5o<Dom#ngue5) ,A)  p. +;. The concept arose (rom the idea that a particular le2ical item in the learnerCtranslator’s L, 8or a given TL; appears to %e in a -(riendly relation to 8i.e. a correct translation e/uivalent o(; a particular item in the learnerCtranslator’s L+) helping them to communicate in the (oreign language. In actuality) ho'ever) the L, item proves to have a di((erent meaning8s; (rom those  predicted on the %asis o( (ormal similarity to the L+ item) thus revealing to %e only deceptively -(riendly. ost language learners 'ill have heard at some point or another) /uite in accordance 'ith the a%ove) that (alse (riends are those pairs o( 'ords in t'o di((erent languages 'hich look similar %ut their respective meanings di((er. The purpose o( this thesis) ho'ever) re/uires a more ela%orate de(inition. The term (alse (riends ... re(ers to the speci(ic phenomenon o( linguistic inter(erence consisting o( t'o given 'ords in t'o or more given natural languages that are graphically andCor phonetically the same or very alike0 yet) their meanings may %e totally or partially di((erent. 84hami5o<Dom#ngue5) ,A) p. +; 4hami5o<Dom#ngue5 provides a reasona%ly accurate de(inition 'hich manages to em%race all the essential aspects o( -(alse (riends. Even though in a %road sense) the concept may %e used to descri%e multi<'ord units and even 'hole grammatical constructions) as suggested %y &l<Fahy 8as cited %y 3ihal 1etkin) ,++) ,9;) this is not very common. ore importantly) the de(inition includes partial di((erence in meaning 'hich tends to %e) (or the  4hami5o<Dom#ngue5 8,A; e2plains that it is actually not a very good translation.

1

2

Les (au2 amis) ou) Les trahisons du voca%ulaire anglais 8conseils au2 traducteurs;

G

sake o( %revity) neglected %y some more concise de(initions. 6olmes H uerra $amos) to name one e2ample) are contented 'ith stating that (alse (riends are -'ords in t'o di((erent languages that are orthographically recogni5a%le) %ut totally di((erent in meaning 8+99J) p. AA;. It is) naturally) the degree o( di((erence in meaning) or the degree o( mutual sense overlap) %et'een look<alike 'ords in di((erent languages that governs the su%tlety o( this linguistic phenomenon. The a%ove mentioned -overlap is in turn dependent on ho' the concept o( e/uivalence o( meaning is perceived. In the (ield o( translation studies the notion o( -e/uivalence has %een (re/uently scrutini5ed and assigned varying importance. Kpinions di((er as to 'hat it consists o(0 nevertheless) it can %e sa(ely concluded that) as artington notes) -some sort o( e/uivalence is desira%le. &t the same time) ho'ever) it is generally accepted that -complete e/uivalence o( message) (unction and (orm ... is rare) to say the least 8artington) +99A) p. M9;. artington amply e2empli(ies this statement 'ith revealing that even those (ormally similar cross<linguistic 'ord pairs 'hich have %een %elieved to %e -true (riends) meaning correct translation e/uivalents o( each other) may in (act %e used in slightly di((erent 'ays and in di((erent conte2ts. &mong the 'ords he e2amined using corpora 'as the English 'ord -correct and its Italian look<alike -corretto) the (ormer %eing (ound to %e o(ten  %est rendered %y -giusto or -esatto) 'hile the meaning o( the latter is (re/uently %est e2pressed using -right) -proper or -(air 8artington) +99A) p. =@;. The (act that a%solute e/uivalents are rare to (ind has led some to o%serve that) %roadly speaking) almost any L+ literal e/uivalent o( an L, 'ord is a (alse (riend. Despite all the e2aggeration) the statement must %e granted its due -grain o( truth0 at the very least) the  %oundaries o( the phenomenon o( (alse (riends are very (u55y indeed. *alse (riendship is  perhaps %est imagined in terms o( semantic continuum 8de Schryver) ou's H rinsloo)

A

,M;) 'here the -strongest versions o( (alse (riends occupy one end o( the spectrum and -true (riends the other) the t'o phenomena gradually shading into each other.

%" ;utting it 3ight, (False Friend) or (False $ognate). The term -(alse (riends) though 'idely spread) is %y no means the only one used in literature on the su%>ect. &ccording to Buncic) as /uoted %y 4hami5o<Dom#ngue5 8,A)  p. ,;) -up to +@ more terms re(erring to the same or analogous phenomena e2ist. K( these at least (ive are misleading since they re(er to a di((erent concept. The most nota%le as 'ell as (re/uent e2ample o( a simpli(ication o( this sort is the use o( -(alseCdeceptive cognates interchangea%ly 'ith or instead o( -(alse (riends. $ing%om 8,G;) (or instance) provides the term -(alse (riends in inverted commas) as another 'ay o( re(erring to -deceptive cognates 8p. G=;) and 4asanovas 4atalá H K’3eill 8+99G; o%serve that -'hen 'e speak a%out (alse (riends) 'e are normally re(erring to interlingual deceptive or (alse cognates 8p. +J;. The inconsistency in terminology springs (rom the (act that the concept o( -cognate is vie'ed di((erently in di((erent lines o( research. In 'orks concerned 'ith %ilingual 'ord  processing the term -cognate has %een used to denote -L+<L, translation pairs that share  %oth (orm and meaning 8de root) ,++) p. +,+;0 (or 'ords sharing (orm %ut not meaning the term -(alse (riends has %een used. 6o'ever) the term -cognate traditionally denotes those 'ords 'hich are etymologically related) that is) those 'hich share a common origin) regardless o( their meanings. The original sources o( cognate voca%ulary in European languages are mainly Latin) reek) and to a lesser e2tent) 6e%re' and &ra%ic 84hami5o< Dom#ngue5) ,A) p. @;. De root 8,++; lists several -cognate terms assigned) according to the traditional -etymological approach) to several related phenomena di((ering in the degree o( meaning

9

overlap %et'een the t'o 'ords involved: -true cognates) -deceptive cognates 8share some meanings;) -(alse cognates 8share no meanings; and the rather o2ymoronic -accidental cognates 'hich are no -cognates in the (irst place) (or they -are not etymologically related  %ut >ust happen to share (orm 8de root) ,++) pp. +,+<+,,;. The latter group) the only one o( the -etymologically unrelated type) comprises -(alse (riends as vie'ed %y the -processing approach) along 'ith a hypothetical group o( non<e2istent L,<like 'ords devised  %y the learner) 'hich de root 8,++; terms -pseudocognates 8p. +,;. It has to %e stressed) though) that not all authors 'ho consider the concept o( -(alse (riends (rom a diachronic vie'point are o( the opinion that (alse cognates are etymologically related. 4hami5o<Dom#ngue5 8,A;) (or instance) understands them to %e those cross< linguistic 'ord pairs that are (ormally similar %ut -'ithout any semantic or etymological reason 'hich may account (or this similarity 8p. J;0 he seems to have in(erred that inso(ar as -(alse (riends only -appear to %e (riendly) then the su%stance o( -(alse cognates must %e -8only; appearing to %e cognate) that is) -8only; appearing to %e etymologically related. 6is vie' is (airly rare) despite the commonsensical logic %ehind it. It is also 'orth noting at this point that) strictly speaking) many o( the cross<linguistic 'ord pairs that are commonly held to %e 8(alseCdeceptive; cognates 8in the sense advocated %y de root) ,++; are loan'ords) that is) 'ords that have %een imported into a given language (rom another one0 and as such should %e distinguished (rom -proper cognates) 'hich have independently developed (rom a common ancestor) 'hether these are -true or -(alse meaning<'ise. Fhile 8(alseCdeceptive; cognates a%ound among languages that are historically related) loan'ords are o(ten the cause o( (alse (riendship among those languages that are 'holly unrelated) such as English and !apanese) (or -once a 'ord ... is %orro'ed into a language) 'e cannot predict ... its development 8Baker) as /uoted %y artington) +99A) p. =,;.

+

To sum up the a%ove) there e2ist at least three di((erent notions o( the status o( -(alse cognates. ost o(ten) they are presented as identical to -(alse (riends) 'ith no signi(icant di((erence o%served or ackno'ledged. In addition to this) de root 8,++; presents the terms -(alse cognates and -(alse (riends as technically re(erring to dissimilar phenomena) 'hile 4hami5o<Dom#ngue5 8,A; considers -(alse cognates a hyponym o( -(alse (riends) the (ormer concept constituting a part o( the latter.  3evertheless) 'hether considered to %e historically related or not) -(alse cognates are indeed hyponymous to -(alse (riends) precisely due to the (act that the /uestion o( etymology is irrelevant to the concept o( -(alse (riends0 (alse (riends may trace their origins %ack to a common ancestor or they may not. *rom the vie'point o( the (oreign language learner the aspect o( historical 8un;relatedness is certainly not relevant 8though it 'ould dou%tless %e interesting to e2plore;) (or -'ords do not 'ear their historical origin on their sleeves 84aroll) as cited %y de root 8,++) p. +,J;;. Etymology aside) the term -(alse (riends seems  pre(era%le 8to (alseCdeceptiveCaccidental cognate; since (ormal similarity accompanied %y semantic dissimilarity should most appropriately %e considered as a single phenomenon rather than a set o( distinct phenomena 8several types o( -cognates;) given that its su%tlety is governed %y the intricate concept o( e/uivalence) 'hich causes it to vary in degrees rather than in categories.

++

+%! $lassification of False Friends, $ategori-ing the Uncategori-a#le. Divergences in meaning %et'een t'o (ormally similar 'ords (rom t'o di((erent languages may %e o%served (rom di((erent vie'points and at various levels0 this is re(lected  %y the (act that many diverse classi(ications o( (alse (riends have %een put (or'ard. & ma>ority o( 'orks concerned 'ith the topic that are availa%le discuss (alse (riends under the 8imaginary; heading -cognates) taking in their organi5ation into account the etymological criterion. Scott !arvis) (or instance) (irst distinguishes %et'een -true historical cognates and non<cognates) su%se/uently classi(ying cross<linguistic 'ord pairs (rom each group -according to 'hether they are the same) similar or dissimilar in terms o( %oth (orm and meaning 8!arvis) ,@) p. +@;. iven that (alse (riends can %e (ormally either same 8identical; or similar and either similar or dissimilar meaning<'ise) %oth groups put together yield eight types o( (alse (riends. This classi(ication some'hat resem%les the one proposed %y Beltrán 8,@;) 'ho (urther distinguishes %et'een phonetic and graphic (alse (riends. This is done %ased on 'hether it is in pronunciation or in 'ritten (orm that the t'o 'ords o( a cross<linguistic 'ord  pair seem alike. &s (ar as semantics is concerned) he divides (alse (riends merely into the t'o  %roadest categories e2isting: total and partial (alse (riends. Due to disregarding the -degree o( (ormal similarity) his typology comprises (our types o( (alse (riends: total (alse (riends %oth  phonetic and graphic) and the same done 'ith partial (alse (riends. This typology) 'hich strives to -(ind connections %et'een semantic) morpho<syntactic and phonological levels o( analysis 8p. JJ;) then seems to %e adopting a linguistic perspective rather than a pedagogic one) despite his claiming other'ise. The etymological criterion is taken as the point o( departure also %y 4hami5o< Dom#ngue5 8,A;. In his vie') (alse (riends (all into either o( the t'o %asic categories he terms chance (alse (riends and semantic (alse (riends) the (ormer %eing those 'ords in given

+,

t'o languages that are similar %ut neither etymologically nor semantically related. Fhen there is a semantic or etymological reason 'hich accounts (or the similarity o( a particular (alse (riends pair) he speaks o( semantic (alse (riends. This group includes not only the -traditional (alseCdeceptive cognates 8'hich he himsel() as has already %een e2plained) considers a non< cognate group; %ut also loan'ords. 6e o%serves that semantic (alse (riends tend to %e more (re/uent than those 'hich sho' a purely accidental resem%lance. In addition) they are) (or o%vious reasons) likely to retain the same meaning divergence8s; (or more than a given pair o( languages. The Spanish 'ord -preservativo has the same connotative meaning 8connotation; as does its 45ech look<alike -pre5ervativ and the olish -pre5er'aty'a) all three %eing (alse (riends o( -preservative in English) al%eit only in the last (e' centuries0 in the +A th century) -preservative 'as indeed used in English to re(er to condom. 4hami5o< Dom#ngue5’s 8,A; a%undant e2amples some'hat >usti(y) though %y no means validate) the  presence o( the etymological criterion in 'orks on (alse (riends0 it seems that -(alse (riendship %et'een a pair o( semantic (alse (riends is much more comple2 and there(ore  pro%lematic than that %et'een chance (alse (riends. 4hami5o<Dom#ngue5’s 8,A; treatment o( (alse (riends is almost entirely theoretical) 'ith (e' pedagogical or le2icographical implications) and so it 'as intended to %e. Kther scholars aim to present a more practically oriented classi(ication o( (alse (riends. In his paper entitled -*alse *riends Dictionaries: & Tool (or Translators or Learners or Both) &ndre>s Neis%ergs 8+99@; distinguishes -(alse (riends proper) occasional 8accidental; (alse (riends and pseudo (alse (riends 8p. @,A;. E2cept (or the last group his division roughly corresponds to that %y 4hami5o<Dom#ngue5 8,A;. 3either o( the scholars (urther classi(ies occasional 8chance; (alse (riends) (or) though they may account (or a considera%le percentage o( (ormally similar voca%ulary %et'een certain languages) they -normally %elong to a di((erent logico<su%>ect group 8Neis%ergs) +99@) p. @,9;0 thus) their meanings are typically

+J

totally di((erent. &mong the 'ords that share the same or similar (orm %y pure coincidence are (or instance the 45ech -m#sa and the English -missa. The e2istence o( pseudo (alse (riends is rarely ackno'ledged %y (alse (riends classi(ications) although 'orks on %ilingual 'ord processing do discuss the -creative coinage o( -ne' 'ords %y language learners. Fhile technically non<e2istent) these coinages 'ill at some point %e a part o( the le2icon o( most learners) even those nearing pro(iciency. They may result (rom the trans(er o( a (oreign<sounding L+ 'ord into the learner’s L,) o(ten 'ith some alterations that the learner deems necessary0 thus) the 45ech -narkoman is translated into English as -narcoman) -kompromitovat as -compromite 8discussed in detail in =.+.+;) and -nadace as -nadation. &lternatively) a 'rong pre(i2 or ending may %e added to the right stem as a result o( the learner’s attempt to reconstruct the L, e/uivalent o( an L+ 'ord)  providing these are (ormally similar. &s (ar as -(alse (riends proper are concerned) Neis%ergs 8+99@) pp. @,A<@,9; divides them into -complete 8a%solute;) -partial and -nuance di((erentiated) de(ining -complete (alse (riends as those cross<linguistic 'ord pairs 'hich are -monosemantic in %oth or one language and this meaning di((ers (rom that o( its counterpart 8p. @,A;. This type may %e e2empli(ied %y the 45ech<English 'ord pair -pastaCpasta0 the t'o can in no circumstances %e considered translation e/uivalents. 6o'ever) Neis%ergs’s de(inition needs alteration. 3amely) it is certainly possi%le (or -completely (alse cross<linguistic pairs o( look<alikes to e2hi%it t'o cases o( polysemy 'ithin one pair. Both the 45ech -resortCre5ort and the English -resort are polysemous) and their meanings have thus (ar %een regarded as completely divergent) despite the English -resort in the sense o( -an area 'here many people go (or recreation 'hich has recently %egun to penetrate the 45ech language in the (orm o( -re5ort) sometimes assuming the place o( the more conventional -rekreaOn#Cturistická o%last and -prá5dninovP letovisko. 1et) though understanda%le) it 'ill %e vie'ed as anglicism %y many.

+M

Fhile %oth pseudo and complete (alse (riends are (airly straight(or'ard) other types may entail considera%le intricacy. This applies namely to 'hat Neis%ergs 8+99@) pp. @,A<@,9; terms -nuance di((erentiated 'ord pairs) and also to partial (alse (riends. 6e de(ines the latter as -pairs o( 'ords in the respective languages (or 'hich it is true that in one or several meanings they are identical %ut in some meaning di((erent 8p. @,A;. & case in point is the 45echCEnglish 'ord pair -orgánCorgan 8see E2ample +;. E2ample +J K$Q3CK$&3 Fhen re(erring to %odily parts such as lungs or kidney) the t'o can sa(ely %e considered e/uivalents0 less so in the sense o( -an administrative unit o( government) in 'hich the 45ech -orgán is (re/uently used) and usually %est rendered %y the English -authorityCauthorities or -%ody. 1et) occasionally) 'hen used to mean -a government agency or instrument devoted to the per(ormance o( some speci(ic (unction) the 45ech -orgán can indeed %e translated using its English look<alike. The num%er o( hits retrieved (rom the British 3ational 4orpus that contain the lemma -organ in the a%ove mentioned sense is minor %ut not negligi%le) 'hich may mislead or at %est pu55le learners as 'ell as translators. The English 'ord -organ is also an e/uivalent o( the 45ech -varhany. ?sed in this sense) either o( the pair has little propensity to cause con(usion and %e translated incorrectly as a result thereo() e2cept perhaps (or the plural ending 'hich some learners may %e tempted to add to -organ due to its 45ech counterpart %eing technically in the plural 8plurale tantum;.

The a%ove descri%ed type o( partial (alse (riends) it needs to %e emphasi5ed) only covers a part o( the phenomenon o( partial (riendship0 that o( -intersection. In addition to this) 4asanovas 4atalá H K’3eill 8+99G; speak o( -inclusion) 'hich according to them -occurs 'hen the meanings o( one 'ord a%sor% those o( the other 8p.++;. *or a given cross< linguistic 'ord pair there are) naturally) t'o 'ays o( this happening: either the meaning8s; o( the L+ 'ord constitute a su%set o( the meanings o( the L, 'ord) or vice versa. K(ten) %ut not al'ays) the -su%set 'ord %elongs to a rather specialised voca%ulary) as does) (or instance) the 45ech 'ord -divi5e 8see E2ample ,;.  De(initions in these e2amples are taken (rom Lingea Le2ion =.

+

+=

E2ample , DINIRECDINISIK3 &ll o( the meanings o( the 45ech -divi5e) that is) -an army unit) -a league ranked %y /uality and -an administrative unit) are 'ell rendered %y -division) o( 'hich) ho'ever) none o( these is a primary meaning. ore (re/uently) the English -division is used to re(er to -the act or process o( dividing) -one o( the portions into 'hich something is regarded as divided and -an arithmetic operation) to name %ut a (e' o( its meanings. 6ere again) some other 45ech e2pressions are necessary.

&n inverse phenomenon seems) >udging %y 6ladk7’s %ook 8+99;) some'hat less common (or the 45echCEnglish language pair. It may %e e2empli(ied %y the 45ech -provi5orn# and its English look<alike -provisional 8see E2ample J;. E2ample J $KNIRK$3C$KNISIK3&L Fhen used to mean -under terms not (inal or (ully 'orked out or agreed upon) the 45ech -provi5orn# may under certain circumstances %e translated using -provisional0 -provi5orn# "een#) (or instance) is /uite nicely rendered %y -a provisional solution. 1et) this -(riendship is rather -(u55y since the 45ech -provi5orn# is perceived as too in(ormal (or some conte2ts) and there(ore o(ten replaced 'ith other e2pressions such as -pro5at#mn#) as in -pro5at#mn# hranice 8provisional %orders;. -rovisional) on the other hand) is not uncommonly a%andoned in (avour o( -tentative) -interim and -temporary. 3evertheless) in its primary sense -provi5orn# re(ers to something that has %een hastily contrived to meet an urgent need) using 'hatever 'as availa%le. &dmittedly) the product o( such activity is typically meant to serve a temporary purpose) and is thus) in a 'ay) -provisional) too0 ho'ever) the essence o( -provi5orn# used in this sense is the implied lack o( /uality resulting (rom the (act that some alternative means 'ere used. There(ore) a tree stump 'ould %e descri%ed as -a makeshi(t ta%le rather than a -provisional one.

I( the pro%a%ility o( a student or translator dra'ing mistaken analogies is already considera%le in the case o( partial (alse (riends) it is even greater in the case o( 'hat Neis%ergs terms -nuance di((erentiated 'ord pairs 8p. @,A;. These -%asically have the same denotative meaning 8Neis%ergs) +99@) p. @,A;0 yet) they may har%our an array o( slight semantic di((erences. Some authors regard these di((erences as -a series o( (actors 'hich (urther +@

compound the pro%lem 86ay'ard H oulin) +9AJ) p. +9J;0 ranger H S'allo') on the other hand) have adopted a (airly novel approach o( classi(ying (alse (riends %ased on eo((rey Leech’s 8+9A+; -seven types o( meaning) allotting many o( these di((erences their o'n -groups. Either 'ay) it is agreed that the -nuances are related) among others) to stylistic (eatures) 'hich are comprised mainly o( the degree o( (ormality) the (ield o( discourse and -the temporal and geographical setting o( the language event 8ranger H S'allo') +9AA) p. ++=;. &n incongruity in the level o( (ormality is the primary reason o( (alse (riendship %et'een many *renchCEnglish look<alikes0 in English) many -/uasi<synonymous dou%lets 8ranger H S'allo') +9AA) p. ++=; e2ist) such as -descendCgo do'n) 'hich consist o( one 'ord o( *rench 8or Latin; and the other o( ermanic origin. The (ormer e2pression) 'hich is usually (ormal or do'nright literary in English) is o(ten (ormally similar to a 'ord commonly used in *rench 8descendre;. *alse (riendship %ased solely on stylistic di((erences in general is (airly rare among 45echCEnglish look<alikes. & (ine e2ample is provided %y the -thPCtea 'ord pair) 'here the 45ech e2pression is almost over'helmingly archaic. Kther cases) such as the 45echCEnglish 'ord<pair -drogaCdrug) may %e less clear<cut as to 'hether the di((erences involved are  purely stylistic 8see E2ample M;. E2ample M D$K&CD$? The English 'ord -drug is e/uivalent to the 45ech -droga 'hen the (ormer is used to re(er to a narcotic) its primary meaning %eing -a su%stance that is used as a medicine. Fhen -droga) on the other hand) is used in this latter sense) typically as a medical term) it (eels (ormal0 outside medical conte2t) it (eels literary and even archaic. Some might rightly argue that) unlike -drug) -droga in this sense denotes a natural su%stance) such as her%al e2tract) rather than a synthetic one) and the di((erence is there(ore not limited to the stylistic level. Uuite interestingly) this di((erence appears to %e inherent in the archaic nature o( the 'ord and the concept it 8in that particular sense; re(ers to0 (or in the past) synthetic medical su%stances had yet to come into e2istence.

+G

&nother source o( (alse (riendship is connected 'ith connotative meaning) 'hich is de(ined %y eo((rey Leech as -the communicative value an e2pression has %y virtue o( 'hat it re(ers to) over and a%ove its purely conceptual or denotative content 8Leech) +9A+) p. +,;. Disentangling this -communicative value (rom the -denotative content may re/uire considera%le e((ort on the part o( the student or translator) particularly in the case o( a%stract concepts) such as naivety0 here) the divergences %et'een the 45ech -naivn# and the English -naive are not o( purely connotative character either 8see E2ample =;. E2ample =  3&IN3C3&INE Fhile -naive can %e used to descri%e something -lacking sophistication) it is only in esta%lished  phrases such as -naivn# umVn# that its 45ech -counterpart has this meaning. It seems) there(ore) that this sense is not inherent in the 45ech e2pression per se) %ut rather constitutes a separate -unit 'hich has %een esta%lished as a result o( literal translation (rom a (oreign language. In its pro%a%ly most common sense) -naivn# re(ers to something -marked %y or sho'ing una((ected simplicity and lack o( guile or 'orldly e2perience) as in -naivn#  p"edstava and -naivn# OlovVk. In denoting this) or) lack o( e2perience in general) it agrees 'ith the English -naive0 ho'ever) di((erences e2ist %et'een the t'o in the degree o( negative connotations that each e2pression entails. ?sually it is the 45ech e2pression that is marked %y a higher degree o( these connotations0 'hile -a naive child seems to com%ine ine2perience 'ith a certain degree o( innocence) -naivn# d#tV com%ines ine2perience 'ith a certain degree o( reprimand (or this lack o( e2perience. Thus) although it is possi%le to translate) say) -naivn# p"edstava as -a naive idea) sometimes a synonymous e2pression instead o( either -naivn# and -naive 'ould %e more appropriate0 all the more so %ecause -naive is) according to the British and the 45ech 3ational corpora) decisively less (re/uent than its 45ech look<alike is0 it appears in the B34 roughly seven hundred and (i(ty times) 'hich renders it more than t'o times less (re/uent than -naivn# 'ith its appro2imate num%er o( occurrences in the W3 8syn,; o( one thousand si2 hundred. In English) it appears) a range o( synonymous or related e2pressions is used instead o( -naive: gulli%le) callo') credulous) green) simple) innocent) childlike) ingenuous) unin(ormed and ine2perienced) to name %ut a hand(ul o( them. -3aivn# "een# might there(ore %etter  %e translated as -a simple solution and -naivn# mlad#k as -a callo' youth. Though the English -naive is o(ten not devoid o( pe>orative connotations) it is occasionally) much to the pu55lement o( the 45ech learner)  purely neutral) as in: -& di((erentiation is %eing made %et'een naive and e2perienced users o( online

+A

catalogues. 8B34; 6ardly a sentence more illustrating o( the use o( -naive in a neutral sense could %e devised0 here) the 45ech -naivn# 'ould %e clearly unsuita%le as a translational e/uivalent.

& yet another area o( (alse (riendship arises (rom the e2istence o( collocational restrictions. &ccording to orosado'ic5<Stu5ynska 8as /uoted %y ranger H S'allo') +9AA)  p. ++,;) -the notion o( collocation is connected 'ith 'ord distri%ution and its pro%a%ility o( occurrence in certain conte2ts. The collocational spectrum ranges (rom 'ord com%inations -the elements o( 'hich can commute (reely 'ith other le2ical items 8ranger H S'allo') +9AA) p. ++,; to idioms) 'hich are -se/uences o( 'ords 'hose meaning cannot %e predicted (rom the meanings o( the 'ords themselves 8almer) +9A+) p. J@;. The middle part o( the spectrum consists o( restricted collocations) o( 'hich al'ays one element is not used in its original) literal sense 8*ischer) +99A) p. MM;. &isenstadt 8as /uoted %y ranger H S'allo') +9AA; (urther e2plains the notion o( restricted collocations %y stating that these are -used in one o( their regular) non<idiomatic meanings...and restricted in their commuta%ility ... %y usage 8p. ++,;. ranger H S'allo' 8+9AA; assert that t'o distinct -(alse (riendship situations may arise as a result o( collocational restrictions0 either there is e/uivalence  %et'een the t'o look<alikes in a particular sense) 'ith the e2ception o( certain restricted collocations 'here some other e2pression is used in either or %oth languages) or the e/uivalence o( the t'o look<alikes is limited to a certain num%er o( restricted collocations. & some'hat loose e2ample o( the (ormer situation is provided %y the cross<linguistic pair o( the 45ech -a%solutn# and the English -a%solute. 6ere) using a 'ord (ormally similar to the 45ech e2pression 'ill not impede understanding) %ut may render the te2t less natural 8see E2ample @;.

E2ample @ &BSKL?T3C&BSKL?TE

+9

In a vast num%er o( occurrences they %oth collocate 'ith the same e2pressions in their respective languages0 thus) -a%solutn# vVtina is 'ell<rendered %y -an a%solute ma>ority and -a%solutn# hodnota %y -a%solute value. K(ten another alternative instead o( -a%solutn#Ca%solute is availa%le in either or %oth languages0 in 45ech) (or instance) ad>ectives such as -naprost7 are used) as in -naprost7 nesmysl or -naprostP ticho) 'hich in certain circumstances seem to more descriptively evoke the concept they modi(y and may (eel less in(ormal. In English) too) a range o( colour(ul ad>ectives may %e used instead o( -a%solute0 among others these are -sheer and -pure in connection 'ith -nonsense) and -dead and -utter in connection 'ith -silence. &s regards the -a%solutn#Ca%solute pair) collocational restrictions may /uite markedly result in the e2istence o( a certain degree o( (alse (riendship %et'een the t'o look<alikes in those cases 'here a di((erent English e2pression 8instead o( -a%solute; is a (ar %etter collocate0 -a%solutn# priorita) (or instance) translates as -top priority rather than -a%solute priority.

&n inverse situation) 'here e/uivalence %et'een t'o look<alikes is limited to a num%er o( restricted collocations) is 'ell illustrated %y a cross<linguistic 'ord pair consisting o( the 45ech -kontrolovat and the English -control 8see E2ample G;. E2ample G K3T$KLKN&TC4K3T$KL &dmittedly) certain English phrases containing the 'ord -control may %e translated using the 45ech -kontrola0 -lose control 8o( something;) (or instance) is 'ell<rendered %y -5tratit 8nad nVO#m; kontrolu. It is) ho'ever) merely in these phrases that the 45ech e2pression coincides in meaning 'ith the English -control 'hen the latter is used to denote -the activity o( managing or e2erting control over something. Typically) the 45ech -kontrola in the sense o( -check8ing; or -inspection) 'hich is its decidedly most common meaning) di((ers completely in meaning (rom the English -control. 6o'ever) a (e' nota%le e2ceptions e2ist) such as -pasová kontrola) 'hich translates as -passport control.

To round up the concept o( (alse (riendship) yet another mani(estation o( nuance di((erentiation %et'een cross<linguistic 'ord pairs must %e taken into consideration: divergences in (re/uency. &s can %e in(erred (rom the a%ove) these usually 8and /uite naturally; accompany other di((erences) such as those in the connotational sphere. 3uance di((erences in general should %e regarded as an accompanying phenomenon rather than a

,

distinct group o( (alse (riends) although they alone may) on occasion) result in the e2istence o( (alse (riendship %et'een cross<linguistic look<alikes. The a%ove presented categori5ation o( (alse (riends into pseudo (alse (riends) total (alse (riends and three su%sets o( partial (alse (riends) along 'ith a set o( nuance di((erences 8see 4hart +;) aspires to provide a simple) yet all<em%racing system o( organi5ation o( this multi<(aceted phenomenon. Such a system 'ill ena%le the learner or translator to gain a %etter insight into (alse L+CL, analogy. &n a'areness o( all the categories that comprise the concept o( (alse (riendship is no less important (or le2icographers aiming to compile a (alse (riends dictionary. seudo (alse (riends

4 4  c Chart  cc 'c '' '  4 4 4 

Total (alse (riends

artial (alse (riends Intersection Inclusion Inclusion

 3uance di((erentiation

,+

 3uance True di((erentiated (riends 'ord pairs

/%! Approaches to the Treatment of False Friends In reminiscence o( the (alse (riends’ semantic continuum 'ith its t'o contrasting ends) there e2ist t'o opposing vie's on the signi(icance o( cross<linguistic look<alikes. Some scholars vie' it as a matter o( vital necessity (or learners and trainee translators to %e su((iciently alerted to the e2istence o( (alse (riends. Kn the other hand) not only the scope and the comple2ity o( the phenomenon o( -(au2 amis are o(ten simpli(ied) as 'as indicated in the  previous chapter) %ut its signi(icance has %een some'hat do'nplayed as 'ell) in (avour o( -true (riends. The e2istence o( the t'o contrasting vie's on (ormally similar items in t'o di((erent languages accentuates the need (or (alse (riends dictionaries to %e compiled0 they may %e vie'ed as help(ul tools in striking a %alance %et'een the t'o approaches. &mong the opponents o( the signi(icance o( (alse (riends is $ing%om 8,G;) 'ho voices his opinion that -(alse (riends easily assume an importance in learners’ and teachers’ minds that is out o( proportion to their signi(icance) and that -the dangers o( (alse (riends ... should not %e e2aggerated 8p. G=;. 6e concurs 'ith 3e'mark 8+99A; in that -true (riends are more numerous than (alse (riends 8p. +,=;. &lso) in the (ield o( language teaching it has %een  pointed out that -cognates as vie'ed %y the traditional approach) also the -not<true ones) may (acilitate voca%ulary learning 8de root) ,++) p. +,,; and the learning o( a (oreign language in general) since they -help (luency and sel(<con(idence 'ith speakers o( poorer English) giving them a sense o( a%ility to communicate 8Ioana) ,G) p. 9G=;. The a%ove attitude has) to an e2tent) replaced the one characteri5ed %y -stressing the  potentially detrimental e((ect o( cognates 8de root) ,++) p. +,,;. &dvocates o( this latter approach maintain that -it is pre(era%le to mistrust all (riends as one cannot hope to kno' all (alse (riends 8Dodds) +999) p. @+) /uoting 3e'mark /uoting Seleskovitch H Lederer;. Fhen used e2clusively) each approach has its dra'%acks. Fhile the (ormer approach may) as 6olmes H uerra $amos 8+99J; have (ound) result in over<reliance on (ormal

,,

similarity and lead to learners -recklessly guessing the meanings o( 'ords in a (oreign language) the -conse/uences o( the latter could ... %e particularly dire in L+ to L, translation) as little time and e((ort 'ould %e spent on other error sources 8Dodds) +999)  p. @+;0 in other 'ords) i( too much attention is paid to avoiding literal 8(ormally similar; items) mistakes not involving le2is 'ill likely elude the translator) 'ho may thus produce a translation much 'orse than they 'ould i( (ormally similar items 'ere employed. 1et) on the other hand) the %oundary %et'een 3e'mark’s -true (riends and -(alse (riends is precisely as (u55y as are those o( the phenomenon o( (alse (riends itsel() given that) in his vie') -the degree o( di((erence %et'een (alse (riends may vary (rom complete to slight and that -true (riends ... have precisely or appro2imately the same meanings 83e'mark) +99A) p. +,=;. These de(initions clearly sho' ho' the t'o phenomena o( the semantic continuum shade into each other0 -slight di((erence may) in actuality) involve the same degree o( di((erence as does -appro2imately the same. There(ore) 'hile 3e'mark maintains that -true (riends outnum%er -(alse (riends) it may) at least in certain cases) %e disputa%le 'hether a particular cross<linguistic 'ord pair counts to true or (alse (riends) 'hich is not even to mention the important 8and decidedly large; category o( partial (alse (riends) that is) pairs that are -true (riends in certain conte2ts and -(alse in others.  3or is (alse (riendship) it might %e added) an unchanging phenomenon0 as a semantic relation) it is su%>ect to the in(luence o( language dynamics 8de Schryver) ou's H rinsloo) ,M;. There%y (ormally similar cross<linguistic 'ord pairs e2perience various shi(ts 'ithin the semantic continuum. *alse (riendship may thus gradually 'eaken or even vanish) or it may arise %et'een t'o (ormerly e/uivalent items. &lthough diachrony may other'ise %e o( no interest to either learners or translators) the a%ove (act needs to %e taken into consideration  particularly 'hen consulting (alse (riends dictionaries that are not o( recent compilation.

,J

The -(u55iness and multi<(acetedness o( the phenomenon 8as illustrated in this and the previous chapter; seem to make it sa(est to mistrust all (ormal similarity %et'een t'o languages) especially i( the languages in /uestion are 'holly unrelated) as are 45ech and English. This -mistrust) ho'ever) must not %e understood as -avoiding at all costs) (or it is) a(ter all) possi%le under certain circumstances to translate) say) -provi5orn# as -provisional. $ather) it should take on the (orm o( initial mistrust that induces learners and translators to veri(y the e2istence o( e/uivalence %et'een the given items in the given conte2t. This veri(ication is important in %oth production and receptionCcomprehension (or %oth learners and translators) although (or lo'<level learners even certain (alse (riends may serve as communicative aids0 at higher levels) o%viously) communicative skills cannot %e developed at the e2pense o( accuracy. &s (ar as receptionM is concerned) it is) as 4hacXn Beltrán points out in his paper entitled -The E((ects o( *ocus on *orm in the Teaching o( Spanish<English *alse *riends 8,=;) vital (or learners to %e a'are o( the possi%le e2istence o( (alse (riendship %et'een (ormally similar 'ord pairs) (or -'hen a learner is say reading and interprets a  !alse !riend  as a true  !riend ) it is almost impossi%le (or himCher to come up 'ith the mistake on hisCher o'n i( negative evidence is not provided 8p. @G;. Translators are not e2empt (rom the -seductive in(luence o( (ormal similarity) either. &s regards reception) erroneous assumptions in comprehension o( an L, source te2t occur -especially 8%ut not e2clusively; among novice translators 8SchY((ner H &da%) ,) p. ,=;. The a%ove in(luence) as SchY((ner H &da% e2plain) 'hen it occurs in production) is t'o<directional0 it occurs in %oth L+<to<L, and L,<to<L+ direction. They particularly highlight -

*or reasons o( convenience) the terms -reception and -production are used (or %oth the (ields o( language

teaching and translation) -reception meaning -comprehension o( a te2t) -production meaning -production o( a te2tCtranslation.

,M

-the hypnotic po'er 'hich the L, source te2t seems to e2ert on the translator) even 'hen he or she is highly pro(icient and is translating (rom L, into L+ 8p. ,@;. Kn the level o( le2is) the conse/uence o( this -hypnotic po'er may) in the case o( the 45ech<English language pair) %e the use in 45ech either o( a -(alse (riend or o( 'hat tends to %e regarded as anglicisms and (ro'n upon 8e.g. -prá5dninov7 re5ort instead o( -prá5dninovP letovisko or -rekreaOn# o%last;. &s (ar as the other 8L+<to<L,; direction is concerned) it is pro%a%ly stating the o%vious  %oth in the (ield o( language teaching and translation that L+ inter(eres in the production o( the te2t in L, 8SchY((ner H &da%) ,;0 especially in the case o( 'ords such as -(rakce 8'hen used to denote -a dissenting cli/ue;) the translator may %e tempted to preserve the (ormal similarity) presuming 8or hoping; that the (ormally similar 'ord pair concur in a  particular acceptation) too. Such misunderstandings) in addition to resulting in errors not involving le2is) may) too) lead to the 'rong employment o( a (ormally similar 'ord. & case in  point is the English -e((ectively. ?nlike its partial (alse (riend) -e(ektivnV) it is (re/uently used to mean -in actuality or reality or (act) 'hich meaning may tend to slip the translator’s mind) especially 'hen the 45ech look<alike -o((ers itsel() as in -any people are e((ectively 'orking 'ithout any special tools. Sometimes) translation errors made under the -spell o( (ormal similarity may %e solely due to the translator’s overcon(idence and la5iness to merely open their 8computer; dictionary0 at other times) time<saving reasons come into play. These do not e2cuse a poor translation0 at the same time) though) it has to %e admitted that the a%ove emphasi5ed veri(ication 8in a conventional dictionary; may turn out to %e a (airly time<consuming process)  particularly i( the 'ord has a multitude o( meanings. &lso) in addition to consulting monolingual and %ilingual dictionaries) the 8trainee; translator may need to use language corpora and other sources. Simultaneously) they are running the risks o( either %ecoming

,=

unnecessarily preoccupied 'ith le2is to the point o( making mistakes in other areas) or 'rongly employing a (ormally similar item 'here another one 'ould (it %etter. K( course) the search (or the most suita%le) or the most -appro2imate) translation e/uivalent is among the essential /uests o( the translator) >ust like (inding a reasona%le e/uivalent is among the  primary concerns o( a language learner) and none o( these is limited to (ormally similar items. 6o'ever) (alse (riends occupy a some'hat -special status due to their comple2ity and -treacherousness. In addition to providing in one place all the relevant in(ormation) a /uality (alse (riend dictionary is a relia%le re(erence 'ork0 one that 'ill (urnish learners 8and trainee translators; 'ith (acts instead o( over<generali5ed tendencies.

,@

'%! Towards a New $-ech0English0English0$-ech False Friends Dictionary The most (re/uently occurring  !au" amis should %e listed) categori5ed and e2plained  %y means o( contrastive comparisons. It is only %y this sort o( analysis that advanced learners can %e sensiti5ed to the di((iculty o( translating such innocuous<looking pairs o( similar 'ords. 8erkins) as /uoted %y ranger H S'allo') +9AA) p. ++9; Despite occasional claims to the contrary 8as mentioned in M.;) the importance o( learners’ and translators’ a'areness o( (alse (riends and the need (or (alse (riends dictionaries to %e compiled is usually generally ackno'ledged. It is perhaps rather surprising) then) that not much has %een 'ritten on 'hat such a dictionary should actually look like. & compiler o( a (alse (riends dictionary 8or o( a revision o( it; is thus le(t to use largely their o'n discretion) e2perience and) importantly) the 'orks o( their predecessors. The pillar o( the 'hole o( this chapter is Zrádná slova v angličtině %y !ose( 6ladk7 8+99;. This 'ork is gradually analysed and evaluated throughout the (our (ollo'ing su%chapters.

'%" Scope &ccording to van $oey) a co<author 8together 'ith ranger and S'allo'; o( a *rench< English (alse (riends dictionary) the e2pectations o( learners and trainee translators regarding a (alse (riends dictionary coverage are that it should -represent a scienti(ically and  pedagogically >usti(ied selection o( the most (re/uent and most misleading (alse (riends 8van $oey) +9AA) p. +@,;. 4ertainly) the /uestion o( the scope o( a (alse (riends dictionary can  %e seen as several(old. ?nless there are some (urther speci(ications) it appears to %e linked to  %asically (our concepts0 these are that o( (ormal similarity) -(alsity) (re/uency and 'hat can  %e termed as -pro%lematicity. In other 'ords) it depends upon 'hich cross<linguistic 'ord  pairs are perceived as (ormally similar0 o( these) 'hich are regarded as -(alse (riends0 'hich le2ical items participating in a (alse (riends pair are reasona%ly (re/uent 8in either or %oth

,G

languages;0 and 'hich tend to %e misused most o(ten. It must %e emphasi5ed that the (our  %elo' discussed aspects 8or criteria; linked to the /uestion o( the scope o( a (alse (riends dictionary should never %e considered separately) %ut as parts contri%uting to the 'hole.

'%"%" The $riterion of Formal Similarity &s regards the (irst o( the a%ove listed aspects) (ormal similarity) no universal criteria are availa%le0 at least) none that 'ould %e applica%le (or the purpose o( a dictionary compilation. Nan $oey mentions a suggestion in this respect that has %een put (or'ard %y 6ammer and onod) 'ho reserve the term  !au" amis (or -pairs sho'ing a di((erence in spelling (orm o( one letter at most 8disregarding recurrent a((i2es; 8van $oey) +9AA) p. +@J;) 6o'ever) he o%serves that -e2perience 'ith *rench learners o( English does not indicate that the di((erence o() say) three letters 8in e.g. avisCadvice; makes (alse (riends less deceptive than the di((erence o( one single letter 8in e.g. dPlaiCdelay; 8van $oey) +9AA)  p. +@J;. Thus) the selection (or le2icographic purposes o( -(ormally similar 'ords  participating in (alse (riends 'ord pairs is usually impressionistic and empirical) %ased on the compiler’s su%>ective >udgement and e2perience. Though van $oey uses the 'ord -selection) it 'ould perhaps have %een more appropriate to speak o( -identi(ication0 (or identi(ying (ormally similar items in %oth 8or all; languages is the (irst step that needs to %e taken in compiling a (alse (riends dictionary. The manner in 'hich this step 'as e2ecuted in the case o(  Zrádná slova v angličtině is not disclosed to the user0 yet) in his pre(ace to the %ook) 6ladk7 8+99; states that the selection o( head'ords roughly corresponds to #lovn$k spisovn% če&tiny pro &kolu a ve'e(nost  8Dictionary o( Standard 45ech (or Schools and u%lic; (rom the year o( +9GA and the  )ongman  *ictionary o! Contemporary +nglish 8rocter; (rom the same year. Since  Zrádná slova v angličtině  appears to %e designed primarily as a 45ech<to<English dictionary) it seems

,A

 >usti(ied to presume that the entries contained in the mentioned #lovn$k spisovn% če&tiny  'ere manually e2amined) and -(oreign<sounding) loan'ord items 'ere collected (or the inclusion in the dictionary. This procedure yielded a considera%le num%er o( 'ords that are likely to  participate in (alse (riends 'ord pairs0 indeed) a pair o( 45ech<English 8non<pseudo; (alse (riends that is not -in 6ladk7 is a rather uncommon sight. 1et) a comparison o( the 3 section o( Zrádná slova v angličtině 8+99;) 'hich is among the shortest) and the corresponding section o( #lovn$k spisovn% če&tiny pro &kolu a ve'e(nost  (rom +9GA revealed that inclusion o( some more 'ords in  Zrádná slova might %e considered) especially that o( -na(tal#n) -nátura and -naturel) and perhaps also o( -naordinovat) as -ordinovat is not contained in 6ladk7’s dictionary. & shining e2ample o( the su%>ective nature o( (ormal similarity is provided %y the a%sence (rom the dictionary o( the 'ord -kompromitovat. resuma%ly) its usual translation e/uivalent) -compromise) appeared to %ear enough resem%lance to its 45ech e/uivalent (or it to %e e2cluded (rom the group o( (alse (riends. 1et) it may %e sa(ely predicted that -compromise 'ill not %e the (irst 'ord to -pop up in the mind o( a learner not kno'ledgea%le o( the correct 8usual; English e/uivalent o( -kompromitovat. &nd even i( the learner does possess this a'areness) they may still make a mistake in the opposite direction o( translation) (or the meaning o( the English -compromise e2tends %eyond that o( its 45ech -counterpart to mean -e2pose or make lia%le to danger) suspicion or disrepute. It seems (rom the a%ove that mere comparison o( the e2isting -(orms in the t'o languages is not su((icient0 even during this initial stage the le2icographer needs to pay sensitive attention to the direction o( translation) or) rather) to the speci(ic -position o( the target user) 'ho in the case o( Zrádná slova v angličtině  is) as 6ladk7 8+99; states in his pre(ace) a person 'ho has mastered the %asics o( the English language and can regard themselves as an at least moderately advanced learner.

,9

It may) in the case o( the a%ove descri%ed pair o( pseudo (alse (riends) %e dou%ted 'hether learners need to %e alerted to the -e2istence o( non<e2istent 'ords) such as -compromiting. The reason %ehind the very inclusion o( such -%lacklist 'ords is the hope that upon seeing their 45ech counterparts the learner 'ill) at the very least) think t'ice %e(ore recklessly guessing the English e/uivalent.  Zrádná slova v angličtině  8+99; contains a num%er o( pseudo (alse (riends) the non<

e2istent 'ord %eing su%stituted (or a dash. ?n(ortunately) not all pairs presented as such are  pseudo (alse (riends0 (or instance) the 45ech -interrupce o%viously has its (alse (riend counterpart in English) though the %ook does not say so. The a%sence o( -interruption) ho'ever) hardly seems deli%erate) and is all the more disconcerting since there clearly e2ists a semantic link %et'een the meanings o( the t'o (alse (riends. Like'ise) once the author had) a little curiously) decided (or the inclusion in the dictionary o( -klav#r) he should have supplied its English look<alike -clavier) i( only (or the sake o( completeness. The latter 'ord is) admittedly) not listed in the  )ongman *ictionary o! Contemporary +nglish 8rocter) +9GA;) 'hich is most likely the reason (or it %eing a%sent (rom 6ladk7’s %ook 8+99;0 the term -clavichord) on the other hand) 'hich does have an entry in the  )ongman *ictionary)  pro%a%ly appeared too dissimilar (rom -klav#r. In some cases) several (ormally similar -counterparts o( one 'ord e2ist 8or may %e devised %y the learner;. &n e2ceptionally intricate e2ample is provided %y the 45ech -momentálnV and its possi%le look<alikes) 'hich are -momentallyZ and -momentarily. The e2istence o( the latter is) surprisingly enough) not ackno'ledged %y  Zrádná slova v angličtině 8+99;) 'hich is likely to irritate those o( the more advanced learners 'ho do have a'areness o( its e2istence. The English -momentarily = displays a considera%le degree o( -treacherousness %y not meaning -momentálnV and) at the same time) %eing a possi%le  Similarly pro%lematic is the 45ech -momentáln#) 'hich has at least t'o look<alikes in English) -momentary

5

and -momentous) o( 'hich only the (ormer is included in  Zrádná slova v angličtině .

J

translation e/uivalent o( %oth -na moment and -5a moment) depending primarily on the variety o( English0 in British English) -momentarily is traditionally understood to mean -(or  >ust a very short time) 'hile in &merican English) it o(ten denotes -in a moment. Its a%sence (rom Zrádná slova v angličtině  constitutes yet another proo( o( the su%>ective nature o( (ormal similarity. Thus it is clear that the search (or (ormally similar items in the t'o languages given should not %e a one person’s e((ort0 rather) it should %e conducted collectively %y a group o( teachers) linguists or le2icographers0 language teaching e2perience 'ill de(initely aid this 'ork. 6ladk7’s 8+99; process o( identi(ying (alse (riends may) in addition to %eing inevita%ly su%>ective) %e descri%ed as manual identi(ication. Time demanding though the  process may %e) it does not appear to stand much chance o( %eing (ully replaced 'ith an automatic method any time soon) given the comple2 nature o( (alse (riendship. Neis%ergs 8+99@;) (or instance) asserts that -inclusion o( con(usa%les in a **s dictionary should %e ... implemented on individual %asis only 8p. @J,;. 3evertheless) 'ith the development o( computational linguistics and electronic corpora) numerous attempts have %een made at automatic identi(ication o( (alse (riends. E2ploring this topic in depth had %etter %e le(t to computational linguists0 (or the purpose o( this 'ork) a %rie( mention 'ill su((ice. 3akov)  3akov H askaleva 8,9;) (or instance) proposed several algorithms (or ac/uiring (alse (riends pairs (rom parallel %i<te2ts. They also divide previous 'orks on e2tracting (alse (riends (rom te2t into several categories) according to the methods used. In addition to methods (or measuring phonetic and orthographic similarity) 'hich 'ere employed %y the ma>ority o( recent research) there are semantic methods (or distinguishing %et'een -true (riends and -(alse (riends0 little research has %een carried out on e2tracting (alse (riends (rom parallel %i<te2ts 83akov) 3akov H askaleva) ,9;. *run5a H Inkpen 8,@;) to name one more e2ample) present in their paper t'o methods o( partial (alse (riends disam%iguation.

J+

The success rate o( automatic methods o( (alse (riends identi(ication is generally increasing) though it is hardly (ully satis(actory. It seems that care(ul scholarly 'ork 'ill al'ays play a vital part in the identi(ication o( (alse (riends) although automatic processes may (unction as help(ul complements.

'%"% The $riterion of (Falsity) In addition to %eing dependent on ho' the concept o( (ormal similarity is perceived) the scope o( a (alse (riends dictionary depends on 'hich (ormally similar 'ords are considered to %e -(alse (riends. The concept o( -(alsity has already %een discussed throughout the previous chapters) most nota%ly in ,. 8De(ining the 4oncept o( -*alse *riends; and J. 84lassi(ication o( *alse *riends;. &s can %e seen (rom the latter 8J.;) 'hich takes almost all e2amples (rom  Zrádná  slova v angličtině ) the semantic scope o( the phenomenon o( (alse (riends as understood %y

6ladk7 8+99; is remarka%ly 'ide. Nie'ed %ased on the semantic relationships %et'een (alse (riends included in the %ook)  Zrádná slova v angličtině  'ell illustrates the e2istence o( the (alse (riends semantic continuum0 it contains all types o( (alse (riends) ranging (rom pseudo (alse (riends to nuance di((erentiated 'ord pairs. It) in (act) lists even those pairs o( 'ords the (alse (riendship status o( 'hich may %e dou%ted) such as -a%solutn#Ca%solute 8discussed in J.;. &s has already %een implied in the previous chapter 8M.;) there appears to %e) not unreasona%ly) a tendency among those in the (ield o( translation studies to grant the status o( (alse (riendship to a limited num%er o( 'ord pairs rather than ackno'ledge the (ull semantic scope o( the phenomenon 'ith all o( its su%tleties. Stamenov 8,9;) (or instance) states in his chapter entitled -4ognates in language) in the mind and in a prompting dictionary (or translation that di((erences in the polysemous structure and collocational di((erences are

J,

-enough (or the practical purposes o( translation 8p. ,JJ;0 %y this) he e((ectively disregards most o( nuance di((erentiated 'ord pairs) pseudo<(alse (riends %eing hope(ully eradicated among all sel(<respecting translators. It is necessary to point out) ho'ever) that his -prompting dictionary is %uilt on the assumption that -all the in(ormation related to the 'ord in a te2t and its possi%le translation is kno'n to the users and they merely need to %e reminded o( the correct translation match 8Stamenov) ,9) p. ,MA;. The a%ove is o( course unlikely to %e al'ays the case o( novice or trainee translators) let alone learners. These t'o groups) as van $oey suggests) 'ill %ene(it (rom a (alse (riends dictionary that contains more in(ormation than the conventional %ilingual one does 8van $oey) +9AA) p. +@,;) 'hich includes not only the in(ormation provided in each dictionary entry) %ut also the entries as such0 in other 'ords) it also concerns 'hich items are considered -(alse enough to appear in the dictionary. &n important point that needs to %e taken into consideration is the (act that the learning as 'ell as training period are essential in the lives o(  %oth (uture pro(icient %ilinguals and pro(essional translators. During this (ormation process) learners and trainee translators should develop an a'areness o( the su%stantial as 'ell as minor semantic di((erences that may e2ist %et'een look<alikes) so that they could) later on) make an in(ormed choice a%out 'hether) in a particular conte2t) to use a (ormally similar 'ord or not. Fith that end in mind) a (alse (riends dictionary 8(or learners and trainee translators; should %e designed to contain all types o( (alse (riends descri%ed in J.) that is)  pseudo (alse (riends) total (alse (riends) three su%sets o( partial (alse (riends and) last %ut certainly not least) nuance di((erentiated 'ord pairs. The latter group is comprised o( those (ormally similar 'ords 'hich) although they can %e vie'ed as roughly e/uivalent in all o( their acceptations) di((er 8as has already %een ela%orated on; 'ith respect to the degree o( (ormality) the (ield o( discourse) connotative meaning) the collocations they enter into) or 'hich) 'hen used) may impair the naturalness o( the te2t in some 'ay. & pair o( (ormally

JJ

similar 'ords should %e e2cluded (rom the dictionary i( they may %e regarded as translation e/uivalents o( each other in all o( their acceptations) and no signi(icant nuance di((erences e2ist that 'ould prevent them (rom %eing so. Thus) pairs such as -a%solutn#Ca%solute may %e considered (or e2clusion.

'%"%+ The $riterion of Fre<uency &nother criterion to take into account 'hen considering the scope o( a (alse (riends dictionary is that o( (re/uency. The necessity (or the dictionary to contain only the reasona%ly (re/uently occurring 'ords is o(ten highlighted. Nan $oey 8+9AA;) (or e2ample) claims to have e2cluded (rom the mentioned *rench<English (alse (riends dictionary all -theoretically deceptive pairs) at least one mem%er o( 'hich is e2ceedingly rare 8p. +@J;. or%ahn<Krme H 6ausmann 8+99+;) to name another e2ample) 'ho are authors o( an entry entitled -The dictionary o( (alse (riends in an encyclopaedia o( le2icography) provide a summary o( shortcomings o( dictionaries o( this kind0 among these is that they include -rare) unrealistic and (anci(ul ** pairs 'hich 'ill -mislead the uninitiated user and 'ill irritate the e2perienced one 8or%ahn<Krme H 6ausmann) +99+) p. ,AAM;. The (re/uency o( occurrence is) in the age o( computeri5ed corpora) easily ascertaina%le. 6o'ever) it is up to the le2icographer to decide ho' rare is -rare. ?sing an electronic corpus they may set a (re/uency threshold) 'hich 'ill help them to discard lo'< (re/uency items. Kne possi%le 'ay o( determining this threshold is to look up the num%er o( occurrences in a corpus o( a set o( 'ords participating in (alse (riends 'ord pairs that are  perceived 8%y a group o( individuals) pre(era%ly; as in(re/uent0 conceiva%ly) some o( these 'ords 'ill also %e marked as archaic in dictionaries. The highest num%er o( occurrences among this sample 'ill then %e used as the threshold num%er that other candidate items need to surpass in order to %e included in the dictionary. By 'ay o( e2ample) ten 'ords have %een

JM

chosen (rom the 45ech part o(  Zrádná slova v angličtině 8+99;: dia(ilm) epigon) eskamotá[) konspekt) meliorace) politura) polyhistor) po5Pr) sta(á[ and necesPr. The most (re/uent o( these is -epigon) 'ith its (orty<(ive occurrences in the 45ech 3ational 4orpus 8see Ta%le ,;. Ta%le ,  á-ev tabulky Lemma Kccurrences in the W3  dia(ilm epigon eskamotá[ konspekt meliorace  politura  polyhistor  po5Pr sta(á[ necesPr

8syn,+; , M= ,+ + ,M +J +A +M M +=

It seems convenient) (or the purpose o( this e2periment) to set the threshold at (i(ty occurrences in the corpus. ?sing this limit) other 'ords) such as -skreOovat) 'hich only appears in the W3 t'enty<one times) 'ill %e e2cluded (rom the list o( candidate items. The English -counterparts o( many o( the a%ove 'ords (all into the category o(  pseudo (alse (riends or have lo' (re/uency) too. 6o'ever) it need not al'ays %e so) in 'hich case care must %e taken not to remove (rom either section 'ords 'hich) al%eit rare themselves) have relatively (re/uent or even (airly common look<alikes. Thus) it seems that the English -dPclassP) (or instance) 'hich has 5ero occurrences in the British 3ational 4orpus and no entry in  )ongman *ictionary o! Contemporary +nglish 8+9GA;) right(ully appears in Zrádná slova v angličtině 8+99;) (or its 45ech (ormally similar counterpart) -deklasovat) is comparatively (re/uent) occurring in the W3 a little (e'er than t'o hundred times. The a%ove listed 45ech 'ord -meliorace has t'o (ormally similar counterparts in English: -melioration and -amelioration. The (ormer is rare) %ut the latter appears in the J=

B34 seventy<nine times) 'hich renders the 'hole pair 8or trio; eligi%le) in accordance 'ith the a%ove) (or inclusion in the dictionary0 all the more so as the ver% 8ameliorate; related to -amelioration is) 'ith its hundred and t'enty<three occurrences) even more (re/uent than the noun. 4ontrary to the opinion stated a%ove) it may %e argued that even lo'<(re/uency items should appear in (alse (riends dictionaries) (or it is precisely in the case o( these 'ords that the learner or trainee 8novice; translator) o(ten having pro%lems understanding 'hat these terms  precisely re(er to) 'ill (eel tempted to use their (ormally similar -counterparts. 4learly) in deciding 'hether to include lo'er<(re/uency 'ords the needs o( the target users must %e taken into account0 advanced learners and trainee translators) (or e2ample) are rather likely to encounter and %e re/uired to render into the other language even those 'ords that are in(re/uent) and 'ill e2pect the (alse (riends dictionary to (acilitate this task.

'%"%/ The $riterion of Fre<uency of Error The last criterion 'hich is linked to the /uestion o( a (alse (riends dictionary scope is that o( (re/uency o( error0 in other 'ords) the degree to 'hich a (alse (riends pair is -error< conducive 8van $oey) +9AA) p. +@J;. or%ahn<Krme H 6ausmann 8+99+; list this criterion as the only one regarding a (alse (riends dictionary scope) stressing the importance o( e2perience as opposed to -(anci(ul con>ecture 8p. ,AAJ;. resuma%ly) this -e2perience is e2pected to %e accompanied %y manually keeping record o( the 'ords that have %een misused %y learners on the %asis o( (ormal similarity. It 'as %y 'ay o( this method) supported %y the use o( standard %ilingual dictionaries) that $o%ert !. 6ill compiled his 'ell<kno'n  *ictionary o! /alse /riends 8+9A,;@. This 6

The dictionary reveals a curious piece o( in(ormation) one that has already %een indicated in the chapter on

(alse (riends classi(ication: an English 'ord (re/uently has a meaning that di((ers (rom that o( most 8i( not all; o( its 8cognate; look<alikes in other languages. &lthough the 45ech language is not included in the dictionary) it is)

J@

dictionary is almost invaria%ly cited %y ma>or 'orks on the topic o( (alse (riends 'ritten a(ter +9A,. Fhat makes it uni/ue is its impressive scope: it lists (alse (riends %et'een English and more than ten other languages) including ortuguese) Dutch) Danish and Turkish. In the introduction to his dictionary 6ill 'rites that -many items (irst %ecame evident as (alse (riends in the classroom) indicating 8%y this and else'here; that his students 'ere most help(ul suppliers o( (alse (riends. 6ill’s attitude to'ards compiling a (alse (riends dictionary 'as primarily that o( a language teacher rather than language scientist) the motley assortment o( languages not'ithstanding.  Zrádná slova v angličtině 8+99;) on the other hand) does seem to %e compiled 'ithout

much regard to 'hether the 'ord pairs included are actually likely to lead to misuse. The 45ech -klav#r) (or instance) 'hich entry o( the dictionary has already %een discussed) does not appear to %e a likely source o( pro%lems since -piáno is o(ten used instead) 'hich is (ormally similar to its usual English e/uivalent) -piano. &lso) the a%sence o( -compromise (rom the dictionary 8discussed in =.+.+; seems to indicate that the 45ech<to<English direction o( translation may have %een (avoured over the other direction) (or it is precisely this other direction that may cause pro%lems) the meaning scope o( -compromise %eing 'ider than that o( -kompromitovat. 6o'ever) the a%ove statements 8or those parts o( them concerning -pro%lematicity) to  %e more precise; might %e regarded as an un(ounded con>ecture. *or the argument to %e grounded in (act) it is necessary to either dra' on one’s teaching e2perience orCand check 'ith materials 8%oth oral and 'ritten) ideally) and in su((icient amount; produced %y 45ech learners o( English. Kn an international scale) a nota%le corpus o( learner English has %een compiled apparently) no e2ception. The 45ech 'ord -smoking re(ers to a dinner >acket0 a meaning 'hich) according to the dictionary) is shared %y at least t'elve other languages0 among these are odern reek) Turkish) &ra%ic and  3or'egian.

JG

and pu%lished %y The 4atholic ?niversity o( Louvain) Belgium) under the name o(  International corpus o! learner +nglish. It contains 'ritings %y E*L learners (rom si2teen

di((erent mother tongue %ackgrounds) including 45ech. Such a corpus may %e a valua%le source o( in(ormation) though a corpus containing solely 'ritings %y 45ech 8Slovak; learners o( English 'ould %e pre(era%le. ?nless such a corpus is availa%le) it is possi%le to either manually or electronically compare learners’ 'ritings 'ith the collection o( 45ech<English (alse (riends compiled %y 6ladk70 (or Zrádná slova v angličtině  8+99;) though not (la'less) remains a remarka%le collection o( 45ech<English (alse (riends) unparalleled to this date.

'% Form, ;rinted and $omputeri-ed False Friends Dictionaries *alse (riends dictionaries are most o(ten availa%le in paper (orm) as are all o( those 8e2isting; mentioned so (ar) including  Zrádná slova v angličtině 8+99;. Their primary dra'%ack) in addition to the inconvenience o( use in comparison 'ith those in electronic (orm) is the (act that they are less easily updated and possi%le mistakes in them recti(ied. Indeed) a kno'ledgea%le compiler o( a ** dictionary should presuppose their dictionary to %e imper(ect and incomplete) (or it appears highly likely that some corrections and additions 'ill need to %e made. This is all the more true (or single<authored dictionaries) as are) (or instance)  Zrádná slova v angličtině  and 6ill’s dictionary o( (alse (riends 8+9A,;. 6ill readily admits in

the introduction to his dictionary that -in its very compilation) there has %een a great risk o( errors in this dictionary. K( course) occasional misprints) such as the -moderni5ace instead o( -moderni5e appearing in  Zrádná slova v angličtině  on p. +,) 'ill al'ays (ind their 'ay into all 'ritten material. ore serious in the case o( 6ladk7’s 'ork 8+99; are the rather numerous omissions o( 8e2isting; English look<alikes o( 45ech 'ords) including

JA

-momentarily 8discussed in =.+.+; and -inventory 8p. @@) entry -inventura;) and also o( 'hole (alse (riends pairs) such as -e(ektivnVCe((ectively. The need (or ** dictionaries to %e regularly updated is most stressed %y Neis%ergs 8+99@; and de Schryver) ou's H rinsloo 8,M;. 6aving indicated in =.+.J that even less (re/uent or archaic 'ords may have its place in a (alse (riends dictionary) the mentioned updating is o( prime importance particularly in the case o( those 8t'o; languages the semantic relations o( 'hich are especially lia%le to constant changes %ecause the speakers o( these languages (re/uently come into close contact 8de Schryver) ou's H rinsloo) ,M;. or%ahn<Krme H 6ausmann 8+99+;) too) note that -e2amples provided in the dictionary should not re(lect outdated usage 8p. ,AAM;0 that is) i( a 'ord’s meaning has took on some nuance di((erences in the course o( time) or it ceased to %e used in a particular conte2t) this should %e re(lected in the dictionary. Languages %eing living organisms) none o( them is e2empt (rom the in(luence o( language dynamics) and hard (orm dictionaries are usually slo' to react to changes resulting (rom this in(luence. In addition to paper dictionaries) there e2ist various electronic sources o( (alse (riends. ost advantages linked to (alse (riends dictionaries in computeri5ed (orm spring (rom the convenience o( compilation) use and even (rom their e((iciency. erhaps most importantly) they are more apt to react to the users’ needs0 (or even 'ith a 'hole team o( compilers’ e((ort  put into the dictionary compilation) it is almost impossi%le to avoid the need (or any (uture additions or alterations. In order to create a truly use(ul ** dictionary) some sort o( (eed%ack (rom the target users 'ill %e necessary. In addition) in electronic dictionaries several 'ays o( sorting (alse (riends pairs may %e availa%le at the click o( a mouse) and one pair may thus  %elong to several di((erent groups at one time0 it may %e a partial (alse (riends pair as 'ell as a nuance di((erentiated one. The user may choose to select all mem%ers o( one o( the three  partial (alse (riends groups 'hich di((er 'ith respect to the level o( (ormality0 or they may

J9

'ant to %e sho'n total (alse (riends pairs only. & nota%le positive o( computeri5ed (alse (riends dictionaries is the possi%ility o( lending the user control over the amount o( in(ormation that is presented to them. This possi%ility is made use o( %y Stamenov 8,9; in his outline o( a prompting dictionary (or translators 8discussed in =.+.+ and =.J.;. &lso) computeri5ed 8(alse (riends; dictionaries allo' (or each entry to appear to the user individually) and this prominence o( an entry on the computer screen may aid in(ormation retention 8Lau(er) ,) p. A=,;. &mong the more e2tensive online (alse (riends dictionaries is the English<$ussian dictionary o( (alse (riends %y .N. rasnov 8,M;) 'hich has originally %een pu%lished in hard (orm and 'hich may %e accessed at http:CC(alse(riends.ru. 4ontaining more than a thousand 'ord<pairs) many o( 'hich are simply hard<to<render or culture<speci(ic terms such as -%aked &laska) the 'ork e2ceeds in scope usual (alse (riends dictionaries and cannot %e vie'ed as a (alse (riends dictionary in the true sense o( the 'ord. &n impressively e2tensive collection o( (alse (riends 'hich is to %e (ound online is entitled  /alse /riends o! the #lavist . It has originally started as a personal pro>ect %y Daniel BunOi\) later on %eing trans(ormed into a -'iki%ook) to 'hich many other people have contri%uted) and 'hich contains lists o( (alse (riends %et'een virtually all o( Slavic languages.

'%+ 8ayout The per(ect dictionary is one in 'hich you can (ind the thing you are looking (or  pre(era%ly in the very (irst place you look. 86aas) as /uoted %y Stamenov) ,9)  p. ,M; eneral layout o( a (alse (riends dictionary concerns the 'ay in 'hich the in(ormation is presented to the user) starting (rom the 'ay in 'hich entries as units are ordered) to the

M

order 'ithin individual entries. The layout may either %e (i2ed) not allo'ing (or any changes to %e made) or) in computeri5ed dictionaries) it may %e (le2i%le 8as discussed in =.,;. &s (ar as the entry layout is concerned) it needs to %e %orne in mind that) as 6ay'ard H oulin 8+9AJ; point out) in every (alse (riends pair 8e2cluding pseudo (alse (riends;) an a%solute minimum o( (our di((erent terms are involved. &ll participants in this 8at least; (our(old relationship should %e presented in a 'ell<arranged) user<(riendly 'ay) i.e. spaced< out 8or%ahn<Krme H 6ausmann) +99+) p. ,AAJ;. ?sually) there are t'o -halves) or parts) o( the entry) depending on the direction o( translation 8as) (or instance) 45ech<to<English and English<to<45ech;. In Zrádná slova v angličtině 8+99;) these t'o parts are placed hori5ontally 8side %y side;) 'hile in  /alse /riends o! the #lavist  they are placed vertically 8see *igure +;. It is vertical spacing that is more o(ten opted (or) %oth in the case o( online dictionaries 8see a%ove; and printed ones) such as the *rench<English (alse (riends dictionary co<authored %y van $oey and mentioned in the previous su%chapter. Because o( the vertical spacing used 8see *igure ,;) van $oey 8+9AA; uses (or the dictionary the term -paralle2icon 8van $oey) p. +@J;. a; 6ori5ontally spaced (our<(old entry in  Zrádná slova v angličtině

 %; Nertically spaced (our<(old entry in /alse /riends o! the #lavist 

 /igure 

M+

 /igure 0

&ccording to or%ahn<Krme H 6ausmann 8+99+;) an e2emplary entry layout may %e (ound in this *rench and English paralle2icon. The entry is divided into three parts) the (irst o( 'hich deals 'ith all the senses 'hich the particular t'o look<alikes have in common. It is necessary to note at this point that this -true (riendship includes also nuance di((erentiated senses) in 'hich case the user needs to %e someho' in(ormed a%out the divergences. I( these are o( a su%tle nature) a note %elo' the entry 8as in the paralle2icon; or) say) a hyperlinked e2clamation mark 'ill do0 i( they are more pronounced) they must %e made visi%ly clear0 all the more so since the user 'ill naturally presuppose the e2istence o( e/uivalence in the case M,

o( all senses in section one. The second and third parts o( the entry deal 'ith those senses in 'hich the t'o look<alikes do not concur0 all additional senses o( each mem%er o( the (alse (riends pair are discussed in one o( the sections and provided 'ith correct 8usual; e/uivalents. &ny o( the three sections may remain %lank) sho'ing that no instances under the category in /uestion e2ist. This appears to %e a (airly clear and help(ul arrangement) (or it immediately in(orms the user o( the areas o( meaning overlap and divergence. The user may choose to %e sho'n the (irst section only) and a /uick glance may %e su((icient to (ind out 'hether a term may %e used as an e/uivalent o( its look<alike. Kccasionally) i( there are several (ormally similar -counterparts o( one 'ord) another separate entry 'ill need to %e created0 in any case)  priority should %e given to those items that actually do e2ist. &s regards the entry layout)  Zrádná slova v angličtině  8+99; e2empli(ies a rather con(using 'ay o( structuring entries) one 'hich has apparently %een taken directly (rom a standard %ilingual dictionary) 'ith little regard (or discriminating %et'een total) partial and nuance di((erentiated (alse (riends. The user is thus o(ten compelled to scrutini5e all o( the acceptations o( %oth mem%ers o( the (alse (riends pair to (ind out 8and sometimes le(t to mostly guess; 'hether the t'o look<alikes may under some circumstances %e e/uivalent or not 8see *igure J;. This is an unnecessary 'aste o( the user’s time. &'are o( this (act) Edvard Lotko) the author o( Zrádná slova v pol&tině a če&tině  8+9AG;) attempts to eliminate the a%ove  procedure %y visi%ly marking the e/uivalent senses 'ith a %lack dot) the second pair o( concurring acceptations %eing allotted a %lack s/uare 8rectangle;.

 /igure 1

In computeri5ed o((line dictionaries) the in(ormation contained in each entry may %e  presented to the user %y means o( several -%atches o( in(ormation) or -prompts) as in the

MJ

 prompting dictionary (or pro(essional translators proposed %y Stamenov 8,9; 8mentioned in =.+., and =.,;. The idea o( prompting seems highly promising as to the convenience o( use0 instead o( adhering to le2icographic conventions) as does  Zrádná slova v angličtině 8+99;) the prompting dictionary dra's on (indings in psycholinguistics regarding the 'ay in 'hich the %ilingual mental le2icon 'orks. These include (or instance the (acts that (ormal similarity and (re/uency aid 'ord recognition and that 'ords 'ith rich semantic representations 8e.g. highly polysemous 'ords; are recogni5ed (aster than those 'ith poor representations 8Stamenov) ,9) pp. ,JG<,JA;. &ccording to Stamenov 8,9;) these (indings have) surprisingly) not yet %een used (or optimi5ing the structure o( computeri5ed dictionaries. 6e  proposes to do so using a system o( prompts G. The (irst prompt has the (orm o( -the potential target<language e/uivalent 8or at most t'o or three; ... that is most di((icultCpro%lematic A to think o( during translation 8Stamenov) ,9) p. ,M=;0 this prompt 'ould appear a%ove the 'ord as soon as a pro%lem occurs. The second prompt) appearing in a separate 'indo') 'ould consist o( all translation e/uivalents o( the pro%lematic 'ord0 the third) (inal) prompt 'ould then provide the translator 'ith the phraseological component o( a dictionary entry. &l%eit aimed at highly pro(icient %ilinguals 8as mentioned in =.+.,;) the structure o( the  prompting dictionary entry might prove help(ul (or advanced learners) too0 the -easiest senses o( a 'ord participating in a (alse (riends pair could %e le(t out (rom the (irst -prompt) gradually adding more -(amiliar in(ormation.

 Such a system might) o( course) %e made use o( in standard %ilingual dictionaries) too.

%

 Since Stamenov is mainly interested in partial (alse (riends) -most di((icult e/uivalents are) in his vie') -those

*

translation e/uivalents in the target language that deviate most (rom the shared meaning components... 8Stamenov) ,9) p. ,,;.

MM

'%/ Entry, Theoretical =uidelines for False Friends Dictionary Entry $ompilation 6aving decided 'hich 'ord<pairs should appear in the (alse (riends dictionary) it is necessary to determine 'hat in(ormation should %e included in each entry. Fhen compiling a dictionary) it is desira%le) 'ith respect to entries) to take into account %oth the /uestions o( accuracy and convenience o( use on the one hand) and the /uestions o( technical (easi%ility and time) space and e((ort demands on the other. Since this 'ork is primarily concerned 'ith the contents o( a (alse (riends dictionary rather than 'ith the actual process o( its creation) and since this su%chapter is) (or reasons stated in =.,) designed 'ith a computeri5ed dictionary in mind) it 'ill disregard the latter. &s regards the (ormer -group) it appears that creation o( a help(ul entry consists in aiming (or ma2imum accuracy and convenience o( use0 in other 'ords) in providing as much relevant in(ormation as possi%le in as clear and %rie( a 'ay as  possi%le. It must also %e %orne in mind that the essential purpose o( a (alse (riend dictionary consists in preventing the users (rom dra'ing erroneous analogies) 'here these might %e dra'n) and there(ore most attention should %e paid to the -(alse senses o( (alse (riends 'ord  pairs. It should perhaps %e reminded that understanding the scope and comple2ity o( the  phenomenon o( (alse (riends is a necessary prere/uisite (or success(ul completion o( the task dealt 'ith in this chapter. or%ahn<Krme H 6ausmann 8+99+; provide a summary o( demands that a (alse (riends dictionary should meet. Those that concern the content o( a dictionary entry are listed  %elo' 8/uoted or%ahn<Krme H 6ausmann) shortened) order changed) pp. ,AAJ<,AAM;: 8a; Idiomatic and clear e2amples re(lecting present<day usage and their correct translations are essential. 8%; 4ollocations and idiomatic e2pressions in 'hich the head'ords occur typically should  %e included. 8c; E2planations o( di((erences in meaning) i( necessary) should %e %rie( and to the point.

M=

8d; honetic transcriptions should %e added 'here necessary. 8e; rammatical in(ormation in easy<to<understand coding is important. 8(; La%els indicating style level) regional restrictions) speciali5ed usage etc. are essential) especially 'here ta%oo 'ords are concerned. 8g; Terms relating to institutions o( one country that do not have an opposite num%er in the other language should %e e2plained. 8h; The di((iculties that might arise (rom either o( the t'o languages should %e taken into account. The a%ove points may serve as general guidelines) and they may 8or rather) should; %e modi(ied so as to %est meet the needs o( a particular target user group. It must %e emphasi5ed that the content o( an entry need not adhere to the conventional le2icographic conventions0 'hen compiling a (alse (riends dictionary (or highly advanced users) (or instance) it is in (act  pre(era%le 8see also Stamenov in =.J; that it include only those pieces o( in(ormation that are not universally kno'n to highly advanced users. &lternatively) the %asic in(ormation may %e hidden %y de(ault) sho'ing only should the user 'ish (or it. Such a dictionary does not necessarily have to serve as a (ully (ledged %ilingual dictionary. Seemingly contrary to the a%ove statement) Neis%ergs 8+99@; speaks o( -avoiding the necessity o( cross<re(erence in other dictionaries 8p. @J+;0 this point sums up all o( the a%ove  points) although it should primarily re(er to the -(alse aspects o( (alse (riends 'ord pairs. &ccording Neis%ergs) there may %e ** mistakes in the general %ilingual dictionaries0 also) as ranger H S'allo' 8+9AA; point out) many %ilingual dictionaries make the mistake o( listing the (ormally similar counterpart o( a head'ord among its %asic translation e/uivalents) or even as the (irst 8p. ++M;. 3or do %ilingual or even monolingual dictionaries) according to Neis%ergs) al'ays provide enough semantic e2planations (or >udging the meaning details 8'hich are o( particular importance in the case o( nuance di((erentiated 'ord pairs;.

M@

&lternatively) the in(ormation contained in them may %e e2haustive) %ut re/uires considera%le time to e2amine in detail0 Stamenov 8,9;) (or instance) points out that especially in computeri5ed dictionaries) 'here the displayed in(ormation tends to %e dense) the search (or a  particular meaning may %ecome /uite a task. &lso) as may %e the case 'ith monolingual dictionaries) the in(ormation in the dictionary employs voca%ulary so sophisticated as to compel the user to carry out multiple dictionary searches. In computeri5ed online (alse (riends dictionaries) much use(ul in(ormation may %e  provided to the user %y means o( links to other 8e2ternal; sources) such as other dictionaries) corpora and others0 these may provide some additional %its o( kno'ledge) regarding) (or instance) historical development o( the 'ord) and may help the user remem%er the di((erences  %et'een (alse (riends. 6o'ever) e2cessive linking should %e avoided) as it increases time demands placed on the user and thus e((ectively eliminates one o( the primary positives  pertaining to the use o( a (alse (riends dictionary as opposed to the use o( a range o( other sources) as discussed in M.. This) moreover) is not to mention that the user may (or some reason %e unsuccess(ul in accessing the hyperlinked sources. &lso) it is necessary to veri(y 'hether the user) o(ten ignorant o( the (acts kno'n to the compiler) is as likely as the latter to easily (ind or in(er (rom the content o( the e2ternal sources the in(ormation they are supposed to. In addition) care(ul guidelines should al'ays %e provided along 'ith all links0 and it is  pre(era%le that all the essential in(ormation %e included directly in the dictionary. The content o( entries in  Zrádná slova v angličtině  o(ten leaves something to %e desired0 most commonly it is e2amples and e2ample sentences 8or e2planations;) the lack o( 'hich prevents the user (rom >udging the meaning di((erences 8see =.J) *igure J;. In addition to this) occasionally a note e2plaining style level etc. is missing. In the 45ech<to<English part o( pedagogCpedagogue entry 9) (or instance) the English -schoolmasterCschoolmistress should  erhaps the user might also %e in(ormed that native English speakers are on most occasions /uite content 'ith

"

 >ust one 'ord ] teacher ] and do not (eel compelled to su%stitute it (or other e2pressions) (or variety’s sake0

MG

 %e accompanied %y a note in(orming the user o( the archaic nature o( the 'ord0 such a note is  present even in the +9AG )ongman *ictionary o! Contemporary +nglish.

'%/%" Model False Friends Dictionary Entry 6aving thus) in the previous su%chapter) laid some theoretical %asis as to the content o( a (alse (riends dictionary entry) and) e/ually importantly) having discussed selected (alse (riends pairs in depth 8in J.;) it is no' natural to proceed to presenting a model (alse (riends dictionary entry. Belo' 8*igure M; is an outline o( 'hat might %e considered a -standard entry o( an online (alse (riends dictionary (or at least moderately advanced learners. It uses the -section layout advocated in =.J. The de(ault setting o( a (alse (riends dictionary (or advanced learners 8and trainee translators; might %e stripped o( the entirety o( the (irst section) unless there is a possi%ility o( some meanings (rom this section causing pro%lems on account o( their similarity or relatedness to some meanings (rom other sections 8as happens to %e the case o( the orgánCorgan entry;.

native speakers o( 45ech) on the other hand) use 'ords such as -vyuOu>#c# and -pedagog.

MA

93=>N?93=AN @o,gnB section "

$C orgn  EN organ "% st tGla H a part of oneIs #ody

K$&3 or  &?T6K$IT1^ see also s% 

% vJkonn organi-ace H an organi-ation that has a special purpose státn# orgán _ an organ o( government orgány palestinskP samosprávy _ the organs o( the alestinian &uthority show more hide

+% asopis H a periodical 5pu#lished #y a special interest group6 Tyto noviny %yly o(iciáln#m tiskov7m orgánem This paper 'as the o((icial organ komunistickP strany. o( the 4ommunist arty. show more hide section  arlament >e >edin7m a v7luOn7m 5ákonodárn7m orgánem W$.

 police>n# orgán

section +

organ pieceCpiece o( organ music t'o organs The organ resounded.

$C orgn K EN organ /% Lad H authority #ody arliament is the sole legislative %ody o( the 45ech $epu%lic. show more hide '% oso#a 5povGen Om6 H a person 5deputed to do sth 6 la'man) la' o((icer

EN organ K $C orgn 1% an organ H varhany P Notice, The English QorganQ is singular when we speak of 9NE piece of instrument% sklad%a pro varhany dvo>e varhany Narhany se ro5e5vuOely. show more hide *% mouth organ H foukacO harmonika 7% #arrel organ H flaRinet % euph organ H penis

 /igure 2. & model (alse (riends dictionary entry

M9

1%! $onclusion The purpose o( this thesis 'as to provide theoretical %asis (or the compilation o( a (alse (riends dictionary) 'hich can then %e used (or a revision o( the %ook  Zrádná slova v angličtině %y !ose( 6ladk7 8+99;.

Despite the undenia%le /ualities that must %e granted to it 'ith respect to the time and age in 'hich it 'as 'ritten) the 'ork %y 6ladk7 has %een proven in this thesis to %e unsuita%le as a study material. Its dra'%acks concern %oth the in(ormation contained in it as 'ell as the manner in 'hich this in(ormation is presented to the user. any (alse (riends pairs have eluded the compiler’s attention) and there is some evidence to suggest that the 45ech<to< English direction o( translation 'as) 'hether consciously or not) (avoured over the other. In addition) unsatis(actory amount o( in(ormation is o(ten provided in entries) the structure o( 'hich) moreover) inspires (ar (rom thorough understanding o( the meaning di((erences. The latter t'o shortcomings are most likely due to space limitations and also le2icographic conventions o( structuring entries) 'hich 6ladk7 apparently sa' no need in not adhering to. The advancements in various (ields that have taken place over the t'enty odd years (rom the compilation o( its original version) and (indings that have %een %rought to attention) 'ill allo' (or the planned version o(  Zrádná slova v angličtině  to %e more user<(riendly and suita%le as a study material. Knce computeri5ed) the collection 'ill %e allo'ed to take up more space than the original slight pu%lication allo'ed) and) importantly) alterations and additions may %e easily made. & marked improvement 'ill %e achieved %y the section system o( structuring entries and also %y the (le2i%ility o( layout in general. &lso) instead o( simply listing the meanings o( mem%ers o( (alse (riends pairs) particular attention 'ill %e paid to those senses that are most likely to cause pro%lems. The in(ormation provided in each entry 'ill %e accurate and precise enough as to lead to understanding the di((erences) yet not e2ceedingly dense. Kverall) the dictionary 'ill %e more easily ad>usted to learner’s needs0 in

=

(act) although (alse (riends dictionaries are normally designed (or study purposes and targeted at language learners) it is the clear internal structure o( entries and su((iciently detailed in(ormation 'hich may make the dictionary appealing and o( use not only to learners %ut also to translators. 6o'ever) 'hile the use o( the outlined dictionary 'ill clearly %e marked %y more convenience) its compilation retains some o( the pit(alls 'hich (aced 6ladk7 more than t'enty years ago. &n important point made in this thesis is the (act that in compiling a (alse (riends dictionary there is a great risk o( omissions %ecause o( the su%>ectivity contained to some measure in almost all o( the criteria linked to the su%>ect o( a (alse (riends dictionary scope: that o( -(alsity) (ormal similarity) and even ] 'ithout a su((iciently large corpus o( learners’ 'ritings at one’s disposal ] (re/uency o( error. Thus it is necessary (or the compilation o( the dictionary to %e team'ork instead o( a single person’s e((ort. The actual process o( compilation 8revision; 'ill dou%tless %ring a%out some /uestions to %e settled 'hich 'ere not discussed in this thesis. &s regards the planned 45ech<English< English<45ech (alse (riends dictionary) some o( these /uestions may %e linked to the (act that an already e2isting dictionary 'ill %e used. *or instance) it has yet to %e decided in detail in 'hat 'ay the entries (rom  Zrádná slova v angličtině ) once converted into computeri5ed (orm) 'ill %e treated0 the process 'ill clearly %e a ma>or editing task) (or each entry 'ill have to %e manually e2amined. &ns'ering these /uestions 'ill %e le(t to the compilers) (or ans'ering the practical /uestions o( dictionary<making 'ould have (ar e2ceeded the scope o( this thesis. It is the author’s utmost hope that the in(ormation contained in this thesis 'ill prove  %ene(icial 'ith respect to the purpose 'ith 'hich it 'as 'ritten) and that the result o( 'ork that 'ill %e invested in the compilation o( a revised version o(  Zrádná slova v angličtině  'ill  %e help(ul not only to the Department o( English and &merican Studies o( asaryk ?niversity) %ut to all those 'ho may %ene(it (rom it.

=+

2orks $ited &da%) B.) H SchY((ner) 4. 8,;.  *eveloping 3ranslation Competence. &msterdam: !ohn Ben>amins. BunOi\) D. 8n.d.; /alse !riends o! the #lavist . $etrieved (rom http:CCen.'iki%ooks.orgC'ikiC*alse`*riends`o(`the`Slavist  45674C 4ritish ational Corpus. Brigham 1oung ?niversity: rovo. ,= ar ,+,

 http:CCcorpus.%yu.eduC%ncC b. 4asanovas 4atalá) .) H K’3eill) . 8+99G;. *alse (riends: & historical perspective and  present implications (or le2ical ac/uisition.  4arcelona +nglish )anguage and  )iterature #tudies, 8) +J<++=.

4hacXn Beltrán) $. 8,=;. The e((ects o( (ocus on (orm in the teaching o( Spanish<English (alse (riends. 9evista +spa:ola de )ing;$stica plicada) <78) @=<G9. 4hacXn Beltrán) $. 8,@;. To'ards a typological classi(ication o( (alse (riends 8Spanish< English;. 9evista +spa:ola de )ing;$stica plicada, =) ,9<J9. 4hami5o<Dom#ngue5) . !. 8,A;. #emantics and pragmatics o! !alse !riends . 3e' 1ork)  31: $outledge. Werná) N.) Dane) *.) H *ilipec) !. 8+9GA;. #lovn$k spisovn% če&tiny pro &kolu a ve'e(nost . raha: &cademia. >esk? národn$ korpus @ #5 . stav WeskPho národn#ho korpusu ** ?: raha. ,= ar ,+,

 http:CCucnk.((.cuni.c5 b. de root) &. . B. 8,++;.  )anguage and cognition in bilinguals and multilingualsA n introduction. 3e' 1ork: sychology ress.

de Schryver) .) ou's) $. 6.) H rinsloo) D. !. 8,M;. *riends 'ill %e (riends  true or (alse. Le2icographic approaches to the treatment o( (alse (riends. In S. Nessier H .

=,

Filliams 8Eds.; Broceedings o! the +leventh +69)+ International Congress,  +69)+ 0DD2. 8pp. G9G<A@; Lorient: ?niversitP de Bretagne Sud.  *ictionary, +ncyclopedia and 3hesaurus @ 3he /ree *ictionary.  *arle2) Inc. A ar ,+,

http:CC'''.the(reedictionary.comCb. Dodds) !. . 8+999;. *riends) (alse (riends and (oes or %ack to %asics in L+ to L, translation. In . &nderman H . $ogers 8ds.;) Eord, te"t, translationA )iber amicorum !or  Beter ewmark 8pp. =@<@=;. 4levedon: ultilingual atters.

*ischer) $. 8+99A;. )e"ical change in present7day +nglishA  corpus7based study o! the motivation, institutionali-ation, and productivity o! creative neologisms. Tf%ingen:

unter 3arr. *run5a) K.) H Inkpen) D. 8,@;. Semi<supervised learning o( partial cognates using %ilingual  %ootstrapping. In 3. 4al5olari) 4. 4ardie H . Isa%elle 8Eds.; Broceedings o! the 0st  International Con!erence on Computational )inguistics and 22th nnual Feeting o! the ssociation !or Computational )inguistics . 8pp. MM+<MMA; Sydney: The &ssociation

(or 4omputational Linguistics. or%ahn<Krme) &.) H 6ausmann) *. !. 8+99+;. The dictionary o( (alse (riends. In *. !. 6ausmann) K. $eichmann) 6. E. Fiegand H L. Rgusta 8Eds.;)  *ictionariesA n  International +ncyclopedia o! )e"icography. 8,AA,<,AAA;. Berlin: 6. 6eenemann.

ranger) S. 8,J;. The international corpus o( learner English: & ne' resource (or (oreign language learning and teaching and second language ac/uisition research. 3+#G) Huarterly, 18JG;) =JA<=M@.

ranger) S.) H S'allo') 6. 8+9AA;. *alse (riends: & kaleidoscope o( translation di((iculties.  )angage et lJomme, 01, +A<+,.

=J

6ay'ard) T.) H oulin) &. 8+9AJ;. *alse (riends invigorated. In $. $. . 6artmann 8Ed.;  )+eter 81 proceedingsA International Con!erence on )e"icography at +"eter . 8pp.

+9<+9A; Tf%ingen: a2 3iemeyer. 6ill) $. !. 8+9A,;.  dictionary o! !alse !riends. London: acmillan. 6ladk7) !. 8+99;. Zrádná slova v angličtině . raha: Státn# pedagogickP nakladatelstv#. 6olmes) !.) H uerra $amos) $. 8+99J;. *alse (riends and reckless guessers: K%serving cognate recognition strategies. In T. 6uckin) . 6aynes H !. 4oady 8Eds.;) #econd language reading and vocabulary learning  8pp. A@+G;. 3or'ood: &%le2 u%lishing.

Ioana) 6. 8,G;. The threat o( -(alse (riends in learning English. 3he Kournal o! the /aculty o! +conomics @ +conomic #cience #eries, 0,  9G+<9G=.

!arvis) S. 8,9;. Le2ical trans(er. In &. avlenko 8Ed.;) 3he bilingual mental le"iconA  Interdisciplinary approaches 8pp. 99<+,M;. 4levedon: ultilingual atters.

j) . . 8,M;. q<jj jq qwx z{| }||z~. $etrieved (rom http:CC'''.(alse(riends.ruC Lau(er) B. 8,;. Electronic dictionaries and incidental voca%ulary ac/uisition: Does technology make a di((erence^ In S. Evert) ?. 6eid) E. Lehman H 4. $ohrer 8Eds.;  Broceedings o! the inth +69)+ International Congress, +69)+ 0DDD . 8pp.

AM9<A=M;. Stuttgart: Institut (fr achinelle Sprachverar%eitung. Leech) . 8+9A+;. #emanticsA 3he study o! meaning . 6armonds'orth: enguin Books.  )ingea )e"icon L. 8,A; Lingea s.r.o.

Lotko) E. 8+9AG;.  Zrádná slova v pol&tině a če&tině . Klomouc: $ektorát university alackPho v Klomouci.  Facmillan *ictionary. acmillan u%lishers Limited ,9,+,. , ar ,+,

http:CC'''.macmillandictionary.comb.

=M

e>st"#k) N. 8,J;. #lovn$k spisovn% če&tiny pro &kolu a ve'e(nostA s dodatkem Finisterstva  &kolstv$, mládeMe a tělov?chovy >esk% republiky . raha: &cademia.

 3akov) .) 3akov S.) H askaleva) E. 8,9;. ?nsupervised e2traction o( (alse (riends (rom  parallel %i<te2ts using the 'e% as a corpus. In . &ngelova) . Bontcheva) $. itkov)  3. 3icolov H 3. 3icolov 8Eds.; International Con!erence 9ecent dvances in atural  )anguage Brocessing N0DD= proceedings. 8pp. ,9,<,9A; Shoumen: Incoma.

 3e'mark) . 8+99A;. Fore paragraphs on translation. 4levedon: ultilingual atters. almer) *. $. 8+9A+;. #emantics. 4am%ridge: 4am%ridge ?niversity ress. artington) &. 8+99A;. Batterns and meaningsA 6sing corpora !or +nglish language research and teaching . &msterdam: !ohn Ben>amins.

rocter) . 8+9GA;.  )ongman dictionary o! contemporary +nglish. 6arlo': Longman. $ing%om) 6. 8,G;. Cross7linguistic similarity in !oreign language learning . 4levedon: ultilingual atters. Stamenov) . I. 8,9;. 4ognates in language) in the mind and in a prompting dictionary (or translation. In S. •p(erich) &. L. !ako%sen H I. . ees 8Eds.;)  4ehind the mindA  Fethods, models, and results in translation process research . 8pp. ,+9<,=,;.

openhagen: Sam(undslitteratur. van $oey) !. 8+9AA;. Fork in progress: & paralle2icon o( English<*rench N!au" amis. In . Snell<6orn%y 8Ed.; Z;ri)+ 8O proceedingsA Bapers read at the +69)+  International Congress. 8pp. +@+<+@9; Tf%ingen: *rancke.

Neis%ergs) &. 8+99@;. *alse (riends dictionaries: & tool (or translators or learners or %oth. In . ellerstam) !. !Yr%org) S. almgren) ) 3orPn) L. $ogstr•m H 4. $•>der apmehl 8Eds.; +urale" N=O proceedingsA Bapers submitted to the #eventh +69)+  International Congress on )e"icography in PQteborg, #weden.  8pp. @,G<@JM;.

•te%org: 3ovum ra(iska.

==

1etkin) 3. 8,++;. artial (alse (riends in English<Turkish translations: Diplomatic te2ts.  Kournal o! /aculty o! )etters, ) ,G<,,,.

=@

34sum4 5English6 This %achelor thesis deals 'ith a phenomenon 'hich is kno'n as -(alse (riends and 'ith the compilation o( a (alse (riends dictionary. The purpose o( this thesis is to lay the ground'ork (or the compilation o( a revised version o(  Zrádná slova v angličtině  %y !ose( 6ladk7. *irstly) the concept o( (alse (riends is de(ined and the term is compared 'ith other terms re(erring to similar phenomena) primarily that o( (alse cognates. *ollo'ing is the discussion o( categori5ation o( (alse (riends) 'herein the author proposes a division o( (alse (riends into seven groups. The discussion employs e2tensive and detailed e2amples to illustrate the di((erences %et'een these groups. Su%se/uently) t'o opposing approaches to the treatment o( (alse (riends are presented: positive and negative. In this section the need (or (alse (riends to %e dealt 'ith %oth in the (ield o( translation studies and language teaching is accentuated. The (inal chapter o( this thesis is devoted to the creation o( a (alse (riends dictionary. This chapter is divided into (our su%chapters) each o( 'hich em%races 'hat is perceived as a  %asic aspect) or part) o( a (alse (riends dictionary: the scope) (ormat) layout and the dictionary entry. The 'hole o( this chapter %oth (unctions as a detailed revie' o(  Zrádná slova v angličtině  and contains guidelines (or the creation o( a (alse (riends dictionary. In addition)

aspects o( other (alse (riends dictionaries 'hich are considered %y the author as valua%le are also presented. 4oncluding this chapter is a model o( a (alse (riends dictionary entry created on the %asis o( the preceding su%chapters. The thesis’ conclusion summari5es the potential %ene(its o( an updated and more user< (riendly version o( Zrádná slova v angličtině ) 'hich this thesis hopes to incentivise and  provide theoretical %ackground (or. &t the same time) ho'ever) it points to the (act that many  practical aspects o( dictionary making are not discussed in this thesis.

=G

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close