Student: Sarbassova Marzhan, Alkenova Aray
Group: IR-13
Supervisor: Zhanuzakov Nurbol Bolatovich.

 
 Proper Name

Annotation
The theme of the research article is: “Proper Name”
The topicality of this research article – names and titles are a big part of the vocabulary of any language. They are in their own way reflect the history, religious beliefs and culture of the country to which they belong. Therefore, the problem of adequate transfer of proper names when translating from one language to another has been and remains an urgent task of translators.
General notion of the article: When we use proper names we utilize words for the denotation of specific objects. Proper nouns are basically names, by which we understand the designation of specific people, places and institutions. Moreover, the concept of name extends to some markers of time and to seasons that are also festivals (Monday, March, Easter, Passover, Ramadan). Proper nouns usually refer to a particular, named person or thing. Later on they give the following types of proper names: personal names, animal names, geographical names, names of institutions and organizations, titles of pieces of art, periodicals and newspapers, and brand names.

The aim of the research article - in the theoretical part study of proper names, to identify the species and find solutions to problems in translation.
 Keywords: proper nouns, linguistic, identifying descriptions, pronouns, translation.

Before we turn to the question of meaning, we will have to clarify first what a proper name is. So far we have been content with an implicit understanding of the concept but a detailed characterization of the problem as a whole requires that the definition is made more or less explicit.
Let us begin our search for a suitable elucidation of the term by quoting some definitions from various English sources.
[Proper names] name one from among many of a similar kind and distinguish this from all the other similar ones). This list is probably not meant to be exhaustive – it is still interesting to note that while in the English-speaking tradition the concept is generally supposed to include the names of days, months, and seasons, it is not so in the linguistics tradition.
There seem to be some inconsistencies in these definitions. First, they do not make clear the difference between a proper noun and a proper name. Proper nouns like ‘Michael’ or ‘Exeter’ form a subclass of the grammatical class of nouns, whereas proper names are simple or composite expressions formed with words from any of the common word classes. In Huddleston’s terms, a proper name is “the institutionalized name of some specific person, place, organization, etc. – institutionalized by some formal act of naming and/or registration”. A proper name may of course be constituted of a single proper noun, but it can also be formed with the help of words from any other word class. For instance, an adjective like ‘Fluffy’ would make a good name for a dog, or a noun phrase like ‘The Green Dragon’ might well be used for a pub name.
Then, it is also somewhat unclear what these definitions mean by saying that proper names denote, designate, name, are used for, refer to, or identify particular entities. It appears that these sources base their definitions on the typical function of these linguistic expressions, which is to refer to, or single out, a unique object or class of objects in the act of communication.
As we read in Strawson, The language contains expressions of several celebrated kinds which are peculiarly well adapted, in different ways, for use with this [identifying] purpose. These include proper names, definite and possessive and demonstrative descriptions, demonstrative and personal pronouns.
As a first step to answer this question we must introduce the principle of identification, which may be formulated as follows: A necessary condition for the successful performance of a definite reference in the utterance of a description is that the description must be an identifying description or the speaker must be able to produce an identifying description on demand.
In accordance with this principle, Searle argues, when somebody uses a proper name, he must be able to substitute an identifying description of the referent of the proper name, otherwise he would violate the principle of identification and, consequently, would fail to perform a definite reference.
These considerations lead Searle to say that “a proper name must have a sense, and that the identifying description constitutes that sense”. This is very much like what Frege proposed when he identified the meaning (sense) of a proper name with a description of what it designates (its denominatum).
This point is also made by Balazs, stating that, of necessity, every proper name may be associated with a definition-like synonym. Moreover, a name can also have a particular stylistic value.
CONCLUSION
The problem of the transmission of proper names in cross-language and cross-cultural communication is as old as communication itself among peoples. Various the associated challenges and mistakes and, most likely, will arise in power both subjective and objective reasons. The main objective contradiction, which is associated with difficulties in the transmission of proper names, an intrinsic property of proper names as verbal signs.
Subjective reasons for the transfer of proper names sometimes problems arise, mostly related to language mediators first of all as interpreters, teachers of foreign languages and journalists who do not always see the depth of the problem and not always armed with a conscious strategy of solving practical problems of language mediation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Alexander, L. G. Longman English Grammar. London: Longman, 1988

2. Brislin, Ricard. W. 1976. Translation: Application and Research. New York: Gardner Press Inc.

3. Carter, Ronald & McCarthy, Michael 2006, Cambridge Grammar of English. A comprehensive guide. Spoken and written English grammar and usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

4. Catford, John C. (1965) A Linguistic Theory of Translation: an Essay on Applied Linguistics, London: Oxford University Press.