HObIM 2009 gI\

ng/ .
( n OgHUM ngn )
JbCT

:
N 4(20)/2008
...............3
4 ..

: . 1 ..
000 . I
. .

.................5
:
..

: .. . 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

..

.. . 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .
.. .. . , ........25
.. .. .
..
36
I .. l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.. .. . ,
.. - 38 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.. .. , .. . ,
.. ? .................40
.. Lidia Razran Stone (USA) Itts and Translators:
.. Two Species? . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. :
..
:
.. .. . ...........................50
.. ... " in the Car";I! . . . . . . . 56

..

.. . ,
.. ......................60
: .. . .....62
105062, ,
., . 23, . 5 UI grano salis

./: +7(495) 916-67-0 .. . ?

.: +7(495) 979-63-91
e-iL: rvaLent@onLine.ru . . ........................70
rvaLent@yandex.ru
www.rvaLent.ru n " .

158 978-5-93439-267-4 .. .
29.12.08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

800 .
N! 1774
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

000 N!! 1
- " 2008 ................... 77
.

000 ., 2008
 I(0

(1930-2008 . )

, 5 .. 79
- -,

, , , "".
, ,
.

, . ...
 0 ')
.. - , ,
19- ,
, . , ,
, ,
...
:: , (
z:: , , , ..). ,
- , , , .
1980 ., - ,
(<
- (The Transactions of the American Society of Mechanica! Engineers).
( ) .. , - -
: (. ?
. , .
...
,
. ,
, , (. .
,
, . , ,
. -
, ,
(..
, !
. ,
( ): (. , -
: (. ?...
:
( !) , ,
, ,
, . ,
, -
. , , .

(.. , , ...
,
.

, ! .
2002 .
. ,
, , ,
. rv1 ,
, compound '.
(. (.. .
(, , ) (., ,
.
, , , , ...
. . ,
.
, , , .
. (., - (., , ,
, .
, .
, , .
, - .

..
 " !i( ,

- :::
, , -
, -
. , - :

(<
-, , - ..,..
.
- ,
,
=
- . , 00
, ,
, , - -

-
.
, , , ,
,
,
- .

: ! .
, 2 1 2008 .
: , , ...
, : ,
bl , . ,
bl "" bl.

..


.. u

..

,
.
, ,
,
.
- ,
,
-
,
. . .

5
 0 '. ' ...

,
, "': , :
"<; (< n ,
::ti .
, -

=
. ,
('.J
, ,
5'
. ,
::::!,
:: , -,
z:
,
. , , ,
, , Deja- u ,

,
. .
( ). .. ,
.. : , Deja-u ,
,
- ?


n. .. (,
NQ 1(13)/2007).
n , -
ux n . ..

, ,
,
:

,
-
. n
n.
,
nn

n
,
' .
. .
. <<, .. u , ...
XIX ( ,
-

)
, .

. . . .
.
.. . . ,
,
-

 -
,-, - 0

m . . . . . - ::
. :
....,
-;
, . . , , n
'\' ,
, . n . -
N
, -9
? , - =
r-...;

(. ) , , =
00
n n .
. 58
::r:
,


-, -

.

.
, ,
. . : "arn to see things ,
as they reaUy are, not as imagine they are." 1

: , , ,

. n

. ,
n.
. ,

- ,
.
,
..
.

:
, - -
-? ,
(
.
, )
- . :


,
.
, ,
,


. .
.
,
,


-

,
TRADOSOM.
-
.
1 . Howard: rn to see things as they ll ,
not as we imagine they . (<< ,
,
.)

7
 ',"

.\:'
."
'..

i;!e'

..

,
, - . ,
(1813-1855),
. , . , . , . . -
, , -
.
..
, . ,
. 1919 .,
,
: , . ,
3000 900 .
1936 ,
, :
. ,
, :
, , .
, . ,
, , . -
. ,
, . , , , .
,
, . , - ,
, . , . ,
, ,
, . ,
, ? < . . . > ,
, . , , ,
, , ,
, ,
I1 , I1, . l1,
11 -l1 . , I1 . , I1I1
. - I1 AI1KKeHca.

, , ,
, ,
: .
,
. , -

8
 .. XIX , - ::
, 1985 5300 .
- ::::::
: , , , , !2:
, .. , -
, ; , - ,:::
, .
. ,
, - , - :3
00
:
1853- - , .
-
. , - , -
i1i1 , - . -
, , i1 .

(\)

: - ::t:

. ..
( .: : - 1:::,
. ., 1982).
,
.
, . - ,
.
. ,
, , .
, .
.
, , -
. , ,
, , , . (
"Currer BeLL" - -).
, , , .
, .
. . 1850 . -
- . ''Vity Fair".
, ,
, .
- ,
(
).
, .. ,
, , -
ro .
.
,
, .
. ,
, : , .
- - - .
,
(.: 1960).

9
 ' '''!
"

.
, , ,
:,
, , -
, , ,

. , - . , -
, < ,
studio et ira, l ) ,
00
8
C'J
, - , ,
,
; ,
q-
, . ,
z:
:2s , -
t; , ,
, :

, , -
, - , (
, , !) - ,


,
, .
, , ,
. , -
,

.
.
, (!) , (?) ,
. ,
( ?)
, ,
-
, ,

, (NB.
1847 1848 .
, ,
) . -


, , 1848 (?) (
, !) ,
. , , ,
(nil novi sub luna2 ) ,
(, ,
1849 , ,
,
< > . ,.
( ?)
. -

1 2 (.) .
(.) .

10
 i'" .

; , 2 ) - :3
, , ,
( , .
), - . n- !2:
. - ( ; - ::z
); - - :..
, : , ,
, (, , . " " -
); , "Vanity Fain"
(!! , , 6
!) ,>. ,

( 3 ) -
! ) . - .
( ,
.
,
-
): ,
. , , -
, , (
,
:::
, Lick) . . . ,
0:::,
, ,
(, , ,
, , m ,
) , , . ?
, ,
,
(

, , : did-dle - diddle - :
darling) . , .
. <
,>, . XXI, . 93
,>. ) ,
, , ?
n ,
,
. , ? - , !
,
, ? ,
3 ,
, ,
nlU,
, ,
, , ,
. , n - ,
, ! -
, !
:
,
1) -
, , ,
, , . ,
,> ,> , :
.. ( -
. )
; -

11
 .
:;,.
.

, lady, -
,

, , , -,
- ,
, , ,

"""'1 . .
, sp eaker ;
- ,
, , , ,
8 , , ( ) . ,
r--.J . ?
6' , ,

"""""" ! , .
z= , ! - . ,
:25 ,
1-
, . ; ,

, ,
L:
, ,
, . -
, .

, . , ,
, . ,
,
,
.
-, -, -
- - ,
- . ,
, oe H
. ,
, .
. ,
,
, , ,
.
, .
, -
, ,
. v,> , ,
dominus, , -

sir. 3 'Y1JV , .
mulier moglie,
, ,
Weib wife. 4 dEmrO ,
Lva, matrona, madame, Frau, signora, mistress , ;

3 .

4 .
,

12
 ,'" .

, ( , :
) , , , - )
'"""'
, , -1

. , :
:::z
, :.
, ? - N
. , - 3
"-'

8
. De tous les livres faire , ' plus
. 00
,

difficile, avis, c'est u traduction . 5
Voyage
.
Orient , 6
,
.

, ,
. ? , ,
, , , - ,
, ,
, , ,
- , - -
;
, .
, -
, .
. , , :,
, ,
, , , ; ,

. , ,
, .
; , - , -
, , .
, , , , .
, ? ,
, ,
. , ,
, ,
.
. ,
, . -
.
.
, , -
, , , .
,
5 , ,

, , (.) .
. 6 (.).

13
':=:::
, , ,
:=::: :


? -

-
,
. ,
, .


. - -. ?

00
8
'"'1
:
: u
::, ,
..q- --
, ,
..Q - ,
f , , -
.
......

, iproviso, 1 , , abrupto, 8
, -, -
, ?
,
(
)
, : .
, , . , ? , .
, ,
Dives,
, agnijicentissia
spirituu, ingenioruque societate? 9 <.
,
, . LXXII, . 328.) , , ,
- .


, ,
- .
; ,
Dives

,
- .
,

, . ,
,
,
, .

,
.
,

, .
10 .
. I

. 111

.
V anity F air


,
,
:
.
7 (.) . , ,
8 (.).
9 ,
10 Hammer - (.) .
? (.)

14
, ,
:
, :
.-"'")
. , , billet-douxll -
. , . =
- "

, , , , / de chambre, MademOise"e':::
Anastasie. 12
m ,9
- ! !

-
. , .
, , - ? -
, ,
-
, m ,
.
- - , Monseigneur! - -
,
, ,
.
- Vous avez alors n -
1t

, , - ;::
. ;::,
- -
, -
, - .
. - Trente tonnerres! 14 -
, , agonie
du moment.15
-
- , , Monseigneur! ill pardons! 16
,
- , cher?
-

: , . -
? , cher: 17
, ?
- pardons!
, .
.
.
- Und das ist nicht (! 18 -
, , - . . <., . XXI, .
, 193 .)

,

,
, ,
,
.
;
.
, ,
,
<<Vanity Fair? .
, ,
? ,

. , ? .
, , - ,
-

11
( .) .

12 , (.)
, .
13 , (.)
14 ! (.: !)
: , 1 5 ( .) .

! ! 16 ! ! (.).

! 17 (.) .

18 ! (.) .

15
 . ': .
"!b

. ; .
' ::::1
::::1 ,
t3 . ,
,

.
,
. , ,
Mi l \e p ardon s , potzt ausend! 1 9

?
,
.
,
00
, .
:
("'-J
.
, ,
6'
,
S;- -

i!. ? ,
, ,
,
::25 -
1-
L-'
?
?

, - ,
. ,
-

(<Yanity Fair!!!

,
. -
,
- ,

.

. >
- . . . , , ,
:
- ,
. ( . . . :
, , .
)
- , . . .

; . ,
, > , - ?
. -, .
, , ,
. , . , ,
-,
. ;
. , 1 d are
? s ay, 20 ,
,
, ,
. , .
, ,
. ,

( XXI ,
3 1 ,
) , , ,

, : 19 (.), , !
(. ) .
20 ( .).

16
 ;':
"',,;

. , ? . . :3
, , , , :>
,..-"")
, - --i
!2:
. , , - =
, , , , - :.
, , , N
, , , 3 '..J

. , - 8
, , 00

, . ? -
,
, , -
,
( . . . ,
, ,
, !
, ,

t
) , , , , ;:: ;:: ,
, .
,
. . . ,
- ,
ry? . - ,
, , ,
.
, ,
: n.
, ?
, , ,
, - , ! -
. , . . ,
, , , -

.
, ffi1L"
,
. , . . -
, , , ,
, -
, , . ,
,
, ,
? , .
- ,
? -
- <. , 1850 . , N2 8. )
, , .
, -

17
 ,
, ,-": <:'
. ,
' ::::!
. : ,
'-' ,
::t: . .

c:u
, !
( XXI l . , . 180.) .
, ? ? ?
- ,
, .
. ( . )
?
- , n! - , -
00 - .. , -

; ,
'-.J
spooney2 1 scoundre!? 22
. , cynic a! ch apter, 23
-<:
) ,

;
?
,

-
,
, ,
,
Haa' , ,
?
? , ,
.
,
,
,
,
,
. , ,
, ...
? ,
,
1851. Vanity
,
Fair n

. -
, -
,
- ,
Ng 9, . VIIl, . 61, 65- 78.
.
Vanity Fair ( Wanity, ,
, ), :

! )
m
m.
2)
,

.

3)

.

4)
, 21 ( .)
22 ( .)
23 << ,> ( .)

18
 " ;,, :
':."';
. : 1

. .

www. pavelpal . ru ) .
, ,
. ,
,
1 2 2008 , .
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
, ,
. ,
. .
.
lI . - :
, ccbUIKa . ,
-
- 1 2 , :
, .
, -,
n
: .

- ,
, . ,
,
.

.
-


:

2 1 -23 Ouverture de discussions internationales sur
( les modalites de securite ! de stabilite n
, , Abkhazie et n Ossetie du sud.
:

19
 -'''';
: ,

> Opening 01 intemational talks the security )

and stabllity arrangements in Abkhazia and South .
;: Ossetia. -

.
:
,
CI...; .
t:: .
- ( ) , -
00 ,

(<<
.
) .

.
-
"'< .
i!:.

::2i ? ,
.
t::: , , ,
.

- : -
- , ,
. , , ,
-, -
, .
. ,
.
, - ,
.
, , , ( ,
,
, ) ,
. ( - , .
, - :
, , . ,
, ,
(equaUy authentic),
. .
- legally binding - .
, , .
- . -
, ,
. - .
.
) .
, ,
, H ,
. ,
, , . .
,
( .

20
 .. ; ' ,
tWi"."i! ."

- - ::
12 . - . -
r")
, --i
!2:
ro : , , - ::z
-

, - '-J
,
? - 3
. '-J
- 8
v

18 , , - 00

- , .
, ,
, : , :10-
. . . , - ,
. . .
,
, en -
( , ) . ,
. - .
?:
, - <:::>
. , -
19
< ,
22 . ! ) . ,
,
Jamestown Foundation : he Russians :
a/so mis/ed SarkozY linguistically. Medvedev used m ,
the Russian word "otvod, " meaning pull-back, -
rather than "vyvod" lor "pullout. " he French , .
should have n alert ( this deception. . . . This , .
means that Russian troops would pulled back !
within Georgia, rather than ! olGeorgia. ,
. ,
- .
1987 :
withdrawal,
- .
:
? ,
, , ,
. , 1972 , n
,
, ,
, , - , ,
, .
-
Taking into n! the preparation 01 the
(. . ) ,
- . Treaty Strategic Offensive Ans, the leaders 01
the countries also instructed their delegations
25
. in Geneva ( work ! n agreement that would
commit the sides ( observe the Treaty, as

21
 " ' .

<;:) signed in 1972, while conducting their research,
development, and testing as required, which are . 2002
pennitted the Treaty, and n! ( withdraw , :
from the TreatyJor a specijied period oftime. ,

..; , , .
-
. , , ( ,
t::: ,
00 , .. ) -
242,
"'-J
6' - -
:::, . 1967

z::
required , .
:J5
, , - , 1 (i)
. , ,

: as required :
,
Withdrawal ! Israeli armed forces from

territories occupied in the recent conjlict.
: required
permitted . : :
Retrait des forces annees israeliennes des
- territories occupees lors du recent conjlit.
, 1972 ,
,


,
territories,
:
(des -
Each Party undertakes n! { develop, test, or de les) .
deploy systems or components which , ,
sea-based, air-based, space-based, or mobile , ,
land-based. .
,
. ,


. , ,
, , (
1987 . )
, ,
. - , , ..
,
(
) , .
, , ,
,
, , .

22
 ,t
"
,
-, there/ore, the English language text was :
. authoritative and would prevail in n dispute
,..,
, . over interpretation . -1
!2:
, , B ritish resolution ::z

,
(Committee [ ur .
in Middle East Reporting in Arnerica) , -
=
f'..J
, , , , =
-
: .
-
h e practice in the UN is that the blnding
version 0/ n resolution is the n voted n,
wh ich is always in the language 0/ the introducing
party. [n the case 0/ 242 that party was Great
, (<
,

>:)
115
..s:
Britain, thus the blnding version 0/ 242 is in
English . The French translation is irrelevant. ,
;>:
-
, > . -
, binding version . .
,
,
.
(binding) ,
, - version. ,
,
, .
: , , ,
242
, [ occupied territories.
. :
, , , ,
. - [ some occupied
242. territories. -
- .
, , ,
.
, , Dogs ust kept the
lead n ponds in the park
- , .
. 242 2 () ,
, /reedo 0/ navigation through
intemational waterways in the -
ro ,
(Georgetown University's Institute [ the ,
Study of Diplomacy) , .

: Both the British and the Aericans .
pointed ! that 242 was British resolution; ? , -

23
 .. ''

'",< '

, agreemenl with lhe Palestinians, the meaning 01

: . , , which is that in practice we will withdraw /rom
, , , almost " the te"itories, if not the temtories.
. We w leave percentage / these temtories in
hands, but will have ( give the Palestinians
t::::: , similar percentage, because without that there will '.
, .
, , , i
,

- i
00 ,
8 , - ,
'" , , - ,

::;- . ,
. .
i!:. -
zi , -
1- ,
\....'

(, - -
.
) . , , ,

- I-! .
( - ) :
decision has ( made. his decision is .
difficult, l, decision that contradicts .
natural instincts, innermost desires, - .
colleclive memories, the prayers / the Jewish
people / 2, 000 years. < . . . > We / the need 10 ,
decide l n! wing ( t ourselves, yes, this .
is whal we have 10 do. We have ( reach n

C3MI0311 . 3 IIJI CI!oBaplO

II 3
. !
,

,
,
,
.

, I

.
. ,
( ,
,
, ,
, ,
), ,

,
.
, ,
.
,
, , Hec , ,
,
.

24
 ,\:
. -'

,

. .

.
,
, : ,
. , .
, ,
,
, - .
- . - .
sale, ,
- . - - ,
trade-in , , - .
uty-
make-up. , -
. .
worksh op -
, .
,
. .
- . , , ,
. , ,
... . , ,
- ,
nail studio, .
nil-, - sale ty-
( ) . ? .
, - ,
- -
. , .
, studio,
. trade-in?
. ,
, , ,
, -
. ,
, ,

25
 ':: '
L1io

. ,
:::
, ,

concept-store - ,
jshin -uuu .
.
t:::: 70 ! , , ,
f.,.; , , -
- .

. ,
, debt { l
:::;:- equity ratio - .
.z:. .
::: - vnt- .
1-
'-" . :
_
L joreign { native ratio -
-
. (payroll outsourcing) , -
, , , (HR
, , administration outsourcing) .
, , .
. , (
!)
. ,

-,
, - .
, , ,
,
, , .
. Sale Event
? - autsourcing.
. ? . -,
? - , ,
unreal jashion!
- , ,
, , .
, .
- . :

,
. -
? ,
, ( .
) , , ,
(< :
1 ,

. - , ,
.

26
 :""
, :3
- , , -
.......
- --1
!2:
. . -
::z
, , -
. , event vnt- . '-.J

event - 3
'-.J
: , : event-mex- 8
00
, , , event-bJ, vnt- (

. - ) .
vnt- , event , --
, vnt-, event manager, -
- , -- ?;
evenl . , vnt- ,
-

, - ..,
. -
- : . . . ! - -

,
. , ,

, .
. , event-bJ
, , ,
: .
. , ,
, ,
,
, , ,
, , , .
. (
. )
, , ,
. -
. - , ,
, , . ,
.
- . -
, , ,
, ,
, . .
, , , ,
vnt-,
( - ,
) . ,

27
 "
. :"" '

. ,


) ,
<:.J .
\:! , , ,
:, - , ,

...., , (
t::: . ; ) ,
--: , - .
,
. .
=
"-1
,
, , , ,
""<t' ,
i!: : , .
, , ,
v' , :

.. ,

,
,

,
n, :
,
( ) , ,

, . , ,
-
, event ,
,
, .
.
,
,
,
, . ,
, , ,
, , - ,
: .
, , ,
, . , .

. n
? ,
. .
: , (htt p : //socio-researc h . ru/cnt/publicatio n s/
, // f1drThesisjf1drSAV ThesisjcntNewness&forprint)
_

/
,
, (
, Ka (
, -
) .

28
 .'> .

: . :
.
,......,
n, , -
, - "&
,
. n
l n, n
, Sauna-PRO.
, ,
,
. .
!
(http://www.indepsocres.spb.ru/sbomik6/6_kuzm
;.:
in.htm)
- t:)
, , :
8



, . . . -
-
.


, , ,
,
? ,

. , ,

.
. .
: -
. , ,

, .

,

,
.
. - best practice(s) .

, ,
,
.
:
- :
, /
//
. ,
.
(http://saratov.og.ru/articles/2007 /l 1/2 1 /478.shtm1) , .
- Best practices -
, ?
, ,
. ,
, , , . practice(s)
,
. Best practices identify,

29
 deploy, employ, install, implement, cultivate,
promote, share .. ,
8 ,

, ? ,

..... .
/ majeure
t:::
f...,; - (events) ,
.
, - .
=
r-...J ,
. . , , ,
::;- Spa-u ,
- , . ,
... . ,

,
=
. -


RRR ?
,
-

:
. (hedging) -
10 .
/ll -
RRR.
:
.


n RRR FR, Economicus.
.
R_FRl
n - : u ()
. . . n
: -
? n -
.
ff , RA , .
ff/ The , ,
- fl'. . . .
,

? ,
- RS- R , , ,
, - ,
: ? ,
, , .
, ,
, - . , -

30
 -:,,-
, - - :3
. . )

(put option) --i

,-")
:
( option) , - ::z
, ,
. , : N
3
n I'J

=
, - n-
.

,
,
. -
put
, - n-
option [ ] ,
,

- ?:;
- .
n .
8
( , :,
, ,
,
, /9. /2. 2007-3/. /2.2007).

. - ,
- ( ) - .
misdemeanors (offences lower than
je/onies and generally those punishable fine, , pre-schoo/,
pena/ty, /or/eiture or imprisonment otherwise
than in penitentiary) /elonies ( crime / ,
graver and more serious nature than those
designated as misdemeanors) . . ,
lack's Law Dictionary.

,
( .
,
) , , ,
( ,
, cemeH
,
) . u
- (
, ,
, ,
Mo,
. , ) .
, -
- ,
. .
1967 , , , ,

, - , , -

31
 ..
' ;,. >
" ......

, , .
, ,
, ,
- . ,
,
h (estimate) ,
- , ,
: ,
, .. , ,
, -
--- .
,
Z:: , , - :
::ZS , n !
1--
'-" VI ,

VI . - - . -

, , , ,
, (
, - , ,
, .
, provenance) .
, ,
?
, , ,
, , , ,
. !shin -
, .
, , . ,
, ,
: ,
, . . . ,
.
, ,
. , , , ,
, ,
,
, .
. -
, (ready-made) ,
(provenance) , ,
,
,
, , .
. ,
- Wikipedia, :

32
 ,;;;-
Rebranding is the process which product , - :::
service developed with n brand . . . , : -
is marketed distributed with dif/erent identity. () , -
his involves radical changes ( the brand 's logo, , !2:
brand , image, marketing strategy and , ..
advertising themes. It usually results in the , 'N
repositioning / the brandjcompany. It just (, , -9
involve merely superjicial changes. legal due diligence, - 8
- jinancial due diligence, environmental 00

, - due diligence) . - -
( , -
), - , - .
, - ,
, , - ;:::
. , .
.
(personne/
. secondment - the detachment / person /
their regu/ar organization / (
, assignment e/sewhere, WordNet)
.
. ,

(-, - . . ) , personne/ secondment agreement.
, - ,
, m , ,
.
. , ,
. , , ,
, .
-, - , ,
- , - , ,
, ,
. ? - -
, , ,

.
: ,
, / , .
.
,
,
, , (outstaffing) .
, , ,
- ,
. , . Bre
(due dgn) , ,
,
, .

 " c/,
.. , '

,
, , , private
8
(outplacement) . equity ,
- helping people ( :
find new jobs after they have n made ,
t::i unemployed ( Oxford dvd Learner's ,
h Dictionary) . , ,
.
Wikipedia: - .
=

The process / /acilitating terminated
employee s search / new job provision / private equity. ,
pro/essional services, such as counseling, paid/or , , ,
'

Z: the/ employer. Wikipedia http ://en.wikipedia.org/wikij

:: Private equity:
_

t::: Job placement assistance and programs

/n finance, private equity is n asset class
administered organizations implementing
consisting / equity securities in operating
downsizing other sta.tJ reductions. . . Some
organizations sponsorjob /airs and advertise their companies that n! public/y traded stock
avai/able employees. he purpose % utplacement exchange.
activities is to assist separated employees in coping
with the pressures / termination while helping :
them ( seek new employers. Private equity is broad ( which
- commonly re/ers ( n ( / non -public
Ownership Equity securities that n! listed
, exchange.
, , Investment Dictionary
, www.answers.com:
,
, . Equity l that is made available to
- . companies investors, ! n! quoted stock
, KaK private equity, market. he /unds raised through private equity
, . , private used ( develop new products and
equity technologies, ( expand working capital, ( make
- private acquisitions, to strengthen company's balance
equity investments. , , sheet.
, ,
, private equity -
private equity investments,
investments . private equity /und, private ,
equity vehicle, private equity industry, private .
equity projects.
Economicus
, , private equity private stock,
(, 06-
,
, ..
Tx . , - (

34
 -
, private equity market :
)) . -
"

private
/ - --1
equity business: , private equity industry - - !2: ::z
/
Private equity business - - , private equity 'N
i ( projects - - .9
, n ( , 8
,

00
ux ).

, ,
, -
, ) , n t q tyfin d - -
/
;>::
, . ,
private equity. - , - 8
. private equity business private equity,
investments , .
. . ,
.
, ,
private equity projects. ,
eIcr '
/ . -
()
. Private equityfirs//unds/vehicles - , ,
,
. ( ,
) , .
,
( , ,
, .
) , , - ,
) . -
( , , ,
) .
private equity, ,
Investopedia http://www. investopedia.com/ .
tenns/p/ privateequity.asp: ,
, ,
Equity l that is not quoted public
,
exchange. Private equity consists / investors and
.
funds that make investments directly into private

copanies . . . . Capital /or private equity is raised
/ashion
fro retail and institutional investors, and
used ( /und new technologies, expand working
beauty-m.

capital within n owned , make
,
acquisitions, to strengthen balance sheet.
. -

35
 . _
.

aggressive governments and n competitors creative
, environmental projects.
i5 , :
(
Webster's Concise College Dictionary
,
vigorously energetic, boldly
h
,
assertive) , -


n

,
=
n.
'"'J ,
6' , . .
'"'J
:;;;:- - , , -
::. ,
:25 ,
t::; ,
. ,
, ,
...
,
:
.
We are aggressively looking for opportunities
( cooperate with suppliers, customers,

1
. .
Corporation - m ()
corporation - -
m; corporate law - m law; , ,
incorporation - registration.
, body corporate,
,
, Companies Acts (
, ) .
. , ..
, , .
, . . ,
. (corporatios sole) (.,
I http://www. l1Issian
) -
translatoS.11I

36
 ,{,<:'<
(ns aggregate) . - :
,
(registered companies) , , corporation ( -
(chartered companies) ) - 5z:
(statute companies) . , .
, - Corporate Law - an Law
,
( (corporate
) . law, law 0/ ns, corporations law) - 5
,

, ( law). -
(not-/or-projlt companies) . - , -
, 2006 ,

.

, , community interest
copanies ( ) . , -
( ;z:
Corporation - an (CIIIA) ) /

(limited liabllity companies) ,
(.
- , ) .
()
(limited liabllity ) ,
. (limited
, liabllity act) .

, , ,
, (
. , ) ,
( .
)
Incorporation - Registration (Ar)
( ) .
. !ncorporation () -
, . . - , . .

, .

(business corporation) .

: 1 ) -

public (public/y he/d) (grant 0/ Royal

corporation close (closely held) corporation. charter) ; 2)
(passage 0/ n Act Parliament) ;
-
, , 3) ; 4) (

, ) ,

. ,

business corporation (act 0/ person exercising authority

delegated Parliament) ; 5)
, , (incorporation prescription) . ,

(
) .

, , .

37
 _
. _
Incorporation - Registration ()
<:
: -
1) ( , .. ,
::: ); 2) ; 3) -
. .
, , ,
Q ,
(regisfered companies) , - .

00 (chartered companies)

(sfatute companies) .
=

,

frmtin - ,

, . ,
, , .
z::
-
...Q ,
t:::: - (formation).
,
,
, - ,
. -
.
.

,


. . u ( )

GmbH
( 000 ),
- SpA ,
( , , , , LLC - n ,
, 000) . ,
JSC, ,
CJSC, OJSC, LLP, LLC, LLP, Ltd ,
. N. V. . V. ,
. .
:
. 1 , 1 980- 1 990-
,
-
. - , 1 . . . :

- . - . : . r,
: - 2005.

38
 _." '. :
, 0 0 0 , - ::
- , -
,..,
, , - - -1

- , "
::z
. , , . '
..,..
, , N
- 3
( . 8
) - 00

JSC, LLC, , ,
.. -

(
- )
.



;t
? , : -
""
- <;:)

, . ,
: (
-
) -
, ,
m - , .
000 , ,
, ,
Gesellschaft m beschraenkter
Haftung, ,
, , .
,
( )
,

000 . , ( ,
) , .
-Gm -
. ,
, -
, . , . .
Be ,
,

. , .
(
-
)
(withholding tax) ,
, ,
,
. , .

39
 :,;
\... .

,

?
. . , . .

,
, ,
.
,
,
. ,
, ,
.
, .
, ,
, ( )
. .
, ,
.
, ,
? ( , 90%
"Wromthrax" , " Might & Magic 7 ,, 1 )
,
, , ,
.
,
. 1 2- 1 9 , -
, , , -
,
. ,
,
, , . .
,
. - : ,
. . .
I ,
, ,
.
,
, ? :
, . " Strongho1d",
,
-,
: , " Command & Conquer 3
.
", " Empire Earth 1 1 : , -
" , "Z: " .

40
 [!t!' . ,
ru .
. , , ,
, (

"well" ) .
, .

? ,
,
.
, ,

(
, .
.
.
, ,
- ,
,
"bow"
, -
,

.
? , (
-
"Might & Magic 7 " ) ,

( merciless gladiator
,
purnmeler" -
,
?
) . , -
$:::
.

,


"World of Warcraft" "Warharnmer On1ine:
.
g of Reckoning" ,
"felboar" "felbot"

, ,
.
,
mTb ,

.
.
: ,
,
,
.
, " mastercrafted sword of
-
might" , ,
,
,
.

. ,
,

. , , ,
"mastercrafted" , ,
,
. -
.

2-3 ,
" master crafted" " master
crafted" , -

41
 .>
, -
?'!."'"'
'

: ! ,
! !
: ! !
! ,
.
" Need for Speed: Carbon"
:
?
! .
: ,
. .
, " Save gamer ro"
.
c:ci
c:ci , ,
, , -
,

6'
s;- , -
;!!3. :
:25 , ,
t:::; ,
, , -
- .

, "World
of Warcraft" .
, -
(
) , "World of Warcraft"
. : O' Reily -
, "Command YarJey.
& Conquer: Tiberium Wars" , , ,
, -, , .
: " Let's kick some ass!" - " Oh,
really? " "Yeah, really".
- -.
,
- ,
. ,
,
.
, ,
, ,
(
) ,

: ! !

42
 jJ }

-, _

. . . ! :
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! . " Spore "
! , Stomachio ( :2
! , Pinocchio) g:
( ) .
- -
, - 'N
. , .9
"NBA Live 2008" " cyborg" -
, - " Space Siege " . 5

. , ,
-
, -

,
, ,
-

. .
, , -
" Fallout" , - C:;

"ghouls" , . ;:t::
, , -
. ( ) .
, m , - ::;;
, , - -
. , ,
, . -
. , ,
, , - " Buzz"
" Prince of Persia" , "Warri o r (
Within" ) . ,
. , ,
"damsel in distress" , ,
, * .
, m
, .
m -
> . .
:
-
( , , .
"architect" ,
, : : , .
m ) . ,
,
, ? - .
,
. , ,
. ,
" Sam&Max: Season 1 " * - ,
" Bosco's Inconvenience " , ,
. uunu.

43

I n te rprete rs a n d Tra n s Lato rs :
Two S p e ci es?
Lydia Rav-an Stone (USA)
This article is based n published in the Summer 2008 issue / SlavFile, the publication / the Slavic
Languages Division o/ the American Translators Association, readers are inviled 10 read un! and back
issues o/ this publication ! the Slavic Languages Division section o/ the
cOnlacted direct/y at lydiastone@verizon. net.
The professional activities of translating
(written) and interpreting (oral) are, i n
different ways, very similar and very different.
80th depend the ability to acquire mastery
over at least two of the most complex systems in
existence (human languages) as well as the skill
of mentalIy manipulating them to produce
equiva!ences. This facility of translating
between !anguage systems, as alI trans!ators
know, is vastly more difficu!t than the naIve
imagine and , at the leve! required of
professiona! , beyond the ability of
accomplished bilingua!s. However, while the
required cognitive competences underlying the
two activities are high!y similar or the
same, not just !anguage modalities used, but,
perhaps more important ,
performance conditions and requirements are
a!most maximally difficult.
Trans!ators work primarily in solitude and
rare!y, or never, interact [ to face
with others in the course of doing their jobs.
Within limits they set their own schedules
and work at their own . At moment,
they are to support decisions based their
own know!edge referring to almost
unlimited number of outside sources. Such
decisions considered and revised at their
discretion. Again within limits, they work
their products satisfied with their quality.
the other hand, interpreters do their job
out in the wor!d, interacting with others ( if only
through the glass of booth ) . work at
. ''I; ""','0
:..:' "
website, www.atanet.org. The author
they must adapt to the hours set their
employers. Their performance is
determined those for whom they interpret.
in the most formal situations, they must
make use of social communicative skills and
sensitivities to complement their pure!y
linguistic competence. Although certainly they
and do prepare for assignments
consulting refe rences, in the course of
performance they are essentially dependent
their own knowledge ; they are not to take
time to consider decisions, or make revisions.
Whe n confronted gap in thei r own
knowledge or the uncertainty attendant
act of communication, they frequently must
simply do the best they without being
to consult sources or revise decisions.
METHOD: It is virtually truism that
those who are primarily translators and those
who vastly prefer interpreting have different
personalities. owever, to this author's
knowledge , this belief has not empirically
tested. This artic!e describes test of this
proposition. The popu!ar Myers- Briggs test was
chosen as the instrument for assessing
personalities. This test is widely used, comes in
various short and painless forms available and
scored the Intemet and, most important,
has strong [ validity, i . e . , the test makes
good deal of sense . ( It is hard
to argue , for i nstance, that someone who
agrees with preponderance of statements
44
 ;;-
4
the of: "1 recharge energy being
with ! , " " 1 have wide circ!e of
friends , " is like!y to an extravert. It was
trivia! to !ocate number of short, [ Myers
Briggs tests the Intemet. ) The one that was
se!ected (http://www. kisa.ca/personality/) was
particu!arly appealing because it allowed
! to choose the answer " I' ll in
between" for each question. Vo!unteer
trans!ators and interpreters willing to take this
test and report its resu!ts and their primary
linguistic activity preference were recruited
f among persona! acquaintances and
through number of websites frequented
!anguage professionals. Vo!unteer participants
were asked to send their results and state if
they were primarily trans!ators interpreters
or, if both, which activity they found
compatible comfortable. Data from those
who did u! not give definitive answer to
the !atter question were discarded . Usable
resu!ts were received from 44 ! classified
as trans!ators and 33 c!assified as interpreters.
This was !arge enough group to produce
statistically re!iable resu!ts. The sample
contained professionals working with variety
of languages . N attempt to balance
demographic other sample characteristics
was .
ABOUT MYERS- BRIGGS TEST
AN D PERSONALIY P ROFILE I
PRO D U C E S : Taking Myers - B riggs test
resu!ts in ro that characterizes person in
terms of four dimensions the basis of answers
to questions pertaining directly to personality
re!ated preferences. These dimensions, defined
their extremes, : introverts (1) vs.
extraverts (); sensors (S) vs. intuitives ( N ) ;
thinkers () vs. fee!ers ( F ) ; and judgers (J) vs.
perceivers (). Few ! extreme f1exibIe , curious, and nonconforming. " (Author's
dimensions, so test ros, including the
one used here , provide percentages after each
!etter to indicate how dominant particu!ar
extreme is for given individua!. Since the
supposed meaning of some of these dimensions
is far from obvious and the words designating
them used in very specific sense, we
provide description of them from the website
www.personalitytype.com:
" Extraverts ' energy is directed primarily :3
outward , towards people and things outside of
themselves. Introverts' energy is pri marily directed
inward, towards their own thoughts, perceptions, SZ::
and reactions. Therefore, Extraverts tend to
naturally active, expressive, social , and interested in +'>
things, whereas Introverts tend to more
reserved, private , cautious, and interested in fewer -;::::;
interactions, but with greater depth and focus . " 8
(Author's note: the Myers - Briggs category of 00
introversion-extraversion more or less conforms to
t--<
the usage of these terms.)
" Sensors notice the facts, details, and realities
of the world around them, whereas intuitives are
interested in connections and relationships
between facts, as welI as the meaning possibilities
of the information . Sensors tend to practical and
literal people who trust past experience and often
have good sense. Intuitives tend to (1:>
creative , theoretical people who trust their hunches
and pride themselves their creativity. " (Author's
note : the terms sensors and intuitives
confusing to some readers who might find the terms
pragmatic and theoretical more satisfying
description of this dimension . )
"Thinkers make decisions based primarily
objective and i mpersonal criteria-what makes the
most sense and what is logical . Feelers make
decisions based primarily their personal values
and how they [! about the choices. (Author's note:
the terms thinkers and feelers apply primarily to
modes of decision-making and do not extend to such
matters as p resence or absence of intellectual
interests. )
"Judgers prefer structured, ordered, and fairly
predictabIe environment, where they make
decisions and have things settled. Perceivers prefer to
experience as much of the world as possibIe, so they
like to keep their options and are most
comfortabIe adapting. So, Judgers tend to
organized and productive while Perceivers tend to
note: the dichotomy of judger-perceiver also
considered dimension of how much control
person feels the need to have the environment
and/or as product-oriented vs. process-oriented
distinction. )
SOME CAVEATS ABOUT
RES U LTS. The resu!ts, to discussed be!ow,
certainly very interesting and, furthermore,
they intuitive!y satisfying. However, there
45

are number of factors that erode their
, significance as revealers of ultimate truth. First
vs of 1l, the sample is small and not
representative of 1l translators and interpreters.
N The translators and interpreters who received
and responded to the request for volunteers
tend to of certain type(s) , which would
.....:] then end u over-represented in the results.
Slavic and especia1ly Russian speakers are over-
represented in the sample.
The Myers-Briggs procedure is based
= "forced choice" paradigm, in which people are
?;f compelled to choose between two alternatives.
:f!:. though the particular test we used here
..CI allows choice of " I' really in between , "
t:::; profiles are based this " eitherjor" model,
and people who score 50% extreme and
50% the other are assigned (we do not know
what basis) to or the other. While forced
choice procedure produces clear-cut and easily
interpretable results, it unfortunately belies the
"bell-shaped" nature of psychological
phenomena, real shortcoming of Myers
Briggs profiling. In addition this particular test,
especially since it allows people to say they are
in the middle , undoubtedly produces results
that are somewhat different from other, and
especially more extensive tests. lt is quite
for people who are not extreme way classification oftranslators and interpreters
personality dimension to assessed as, e.g. ,
introverted particular test and
extraverted another. The particular test
admnistered is short form of the Myers
Briggs and has not as extensively validated
as longer ones. 1 have statistical validation
data the form of the test used to supplement
the [ validity of the questions and results.
Next , the separation of the two professions
studied here , interpreting and translating, as
mirrored in the use of two different profession
names in English , much more extreme
in the U nited States than it is in other cultures,
where most nuu, traductores, etc . , are
expected to engage in both oral and written
translation. It is thus not possible to sure that
the differences found here would extend or
meaningful in other cultures.
' ,
RES U LTS. The Myers- Briggs procedure
produces profiles associating people with
particular endpoint in category, regardless of
the extent to which answers of type
dominate answers of the opposite type . I ndeed,
if 50% of individual 's answers are
classified as belonging to each of two opposing
poles, he or she is still classified as associated
with pole or the other the basis of
undisclosed algorithm. Because this seemed
of dubious legitimacy, results were classified
two ways, using the dichotomies indicated
the traditional profiles , and using
approach in which people whose
predominance in category was less than
5 9 % in either direction were put in
intermediate classification . Dichotomous
results were further compared to the published
population norms in each category.
Comparisons of translators vs. interpreters
(and of each group vs. published population
statistics) were tested using the Chi square
statistic for both the two-way classification and
the three-way classification of personality types
for every personality dimension. Note that this
statistic is based solely the number of people
who [ into each category and does not take
into account each particular " score . " The two
were tested separately agai nst population
norms published the website of the Myers
and Briggs Foundation. ( Note: these norms are
undoubtedly based results of test different
and more extensive than the we used and
thus differences from population must
considered suggestive only. ) Three-way norrns
for the overaH population are not available.
The foHowing results achieved statistical
significance . (Note that terms like judging and
thinking are here used only in their Myers
Briggs definitions provided . )
Two-way classification
As groups:
1 . Translators are significantly more likely
to introverted than interpreters or the
population at large.
46
 i' .
2. I nterpreters significantly likely 4. Translators significantly likely :3
to intuitives than the population at large , to judgers than the population as whole
which is heavi1y skewed towards sensing. The the group of interpreters. ::::

difference this dimension between the
The differences between translators and =
translator and interpreter group the
interpreters noted persisted when results
translators and the population was not
statistically significant.
were reclassified to include neutral " middle "
category. ';:::
=
::;
3. Translators significantly likely =
00
to thinkers than interpreters the
population.

PREDOM INANT PERSONALIY PROFILES AMONG TRAN S LATORS AN D

INTERPRETERS
The percentage of individ uals havin g personality profiles identical and similar to the dominant translator and
dominant interpreter profi les in the two professional groups and in published fig ures for the popu lation as
whole presented in graphic form below.

(1)

(4)
(3)
(2)
(5)

Translator-l i ke pro f i l e s I n t ermediate p ro f i les I n terpreter-l i ke prof i l es

80%
70%
60%
CII
(1 )
... 50%
...
nI
iii 40%

nI
... 30%
1-

2 0% (2)

1 0% (3)
0% I (5) 1
Tran s l a t or-l i k e p r o f i l e s I n te r m e d i a t e p ro f i l e s I n ter p reter-l i ke pr o f i l e s

47

50%
40 %
111
...
+'
3 0%
... (1 )
.. 2 0%
...
+'
1 0% (2)
00
= , ,,::
=
""'-J
0%
8 Tran slator-l i ke pro files
i!. Legend (1) refers to the percentage of group mem bers with the dominant translator profile;
:2s (2) to those with of the four profiles similar to ( 1 ) ; (3) to those with
1--
'-' between the dominant translator and dominant interpreter profiles; (4) to those with the dominant interpreter
profile and (5) to those with of the four profiles similar to (4) .
As stated, the questionnaire identifies each
individual with four-letter ro in which
each letter represents one of the extreme points
in the [ categories. single type, I SJ
(introverted , sensor, thinking, and judger) was
the predominant personality type in translator
sample , accounting [ 34% of the translators
tested (as compared to 1 2% representation of
this type in the general population) . According
to the literature , people of this type tend to :
"cautious, conservative , and quiet; literal ,
realistic , and practical ; careful and precise;
logical, honest, and matter of fact; resistant to
change and comfortable with routine ; hard
working and responsible. " (With the possible
exception of "literal , " this would seem to
group of qualities that any client wishing to
[ relationship with translator, especially
technical translator, would value. )
Perhaps, o f even i nterest than the
predictability of the dominant ro is the fact
that the [ ros similar to the
dominant one . . , differing [ro it in only one
of the [ characteristics) account [ another
3 7 % of the translators, so that those with the
dominant translator ro similar
ro totalled 7 1 % of the translator sample.
The m total [ these personality
types would 3 3 % in the population as
whole . The ro opposite to that of the
dom i nant one (accounting [ 8% of the
' .\:
(4)
(3) (5)
I n termed iate p ro f i les I n terpreter-li ke pro files
of the six profi les intermediate
general population) is completely absent in the
translator group, while ros differi ng [
the opposite one only slightly ( i .e . , in only
dimension) in only 7% of the translator
group. In the translator group as whole,
introvert and judger the most prevalent
i ndividual indicators and would seem to
correspond well to the work conditions of
the average translator-relative isolation and
the opportunity to create p recisely
appropriate and well-defined finished product.
The high sensor value would refer to the way
translation decisions potentially based
analysis and research, and especially
considered [ as long as the translator wishes
to think about them.
These results almost surprisingly
consistent with the idea that certain type of
person (one with the dominant I SJ ro) is
likely to attracted to and successful at
translation as profession . Those differing
[ro this type only slightly also likely to
enter the profession, while those with
different personality types likely to less
than in this group and than in the
population as whole.
The picture presented the interpreter
group is different. As perhaps befits the
freewheeling nature of their work, the
picture presented the i nterpreter ros at
first glance appears chaotic. The most
48
 ,;}"
1'00' "
personality ro for our interpreter
sample is exactly the opposite of the
predominant translator ro, as if to
emphasize the differences rather than
commonalities between the activities. Eighteen
percent of the interpreter group (compared to
8% expected the basis of population figures)
had assigned the ro ENFP (extravert,
intuitive , feeler, perceiver) . The literature
describes this type as follows: friendly, outgoing,
and enthusiastic; affectionate, articulate, and
tactfu! ; high!y empathetic but easily hurt;
creative and original; decisive and passionately
opinionated ; productive , organized, and
responsible . The most important things to
ENFPs are their re!ationships and the
opportunity to communicate and connect with
others. Again, this is apt description of at
!east some of the characteristics of good
interpreter. Such individuals wou!d seem well
fitted to displaying empathy (extraversion, and
orientation to feeling) , picking u
verbal, as well as verbal cues (F) , rendering
global meaning and not getting bogged down
in details (N/intuitives/) , instantaneously
(instinctive!y?) finding appropriate rendition
in the target language rather than being moved
to agonize over the best possible (feelers,
perceivers) , and tolerating the ambiguity and
!ack of closure of real-time performance
(perceivers) .
However, when the rest of the data for the
interpreter group is examined, we find that the
other ros do not show the have maximally dissimilar personality. An
expected similarity to the dominant ENFP.
Although ENFJ (differing only feature
from ENFP) is of the two ros tied for
second most in this group; the other is
ISJ, the ro as dissimilar as possible from
the predominant interpreter ro , and the
dominant for translators! The rest of the
ro data for this group is consistent with the
idea that there are two dominant types of
interpreters with two very different
personalities: exactly like and the other
diametrically opposed (at least the Myers
Briggs-scale) to that of translators.
D I S C U S S I ON : ltl :
speculative hypothesis to explain this situation
would that among those who choose to study
languages or to make them their career, the :
:z
characteristics 1 , S , , J are moderately ,
predominant (as 1 , , and J are in
academic fields) . Over the years some of the 3
"translator types" stray into interpreting for
=
whatever reasons and find this work acceptably 00
compatible , possibly because of the features it
shares with translation. However, the great t--<
majority of those in whom the opposite
characteristics predominate either always S'
have intended to interpreters, or, perhaps,
f1ee into it at the first opportunity. It is
interesting that some of our interpreter samp!e
reported that they found trans!ating boring,
while quite few translators mentioned the
stress engendered interpreting.
Well, then, are translators and interpreters
members of the same or different species? First,
the group data shows that the who!e, the
translator sample differs significantly from the
interpreter samp!e three of the four -
dimensions and approaches significant
difference the fourth. Thus as whole, our
group of translators seems to significantly
more introverted, judging, thinking and sensing
than the interpreters. When we consider not
group averages but frequency of individua!
ros, the answer seems to that good
number of interpreters share the dominant
personality type of translators while more
intriguing if somewhat equivoca! resu!t! It
should noted here that in spite of these
tests and statistics, personality is means
career destiny. There are number of peop!e in
each of our samples whose ro shows little
similarity to the dominant ones, and yet, as far
as we know, they are happily and productively
pursuing their careers without m that
they are not the right type. 1 myself have
profile shared ! person in the
translator group ( results were not part of the
sample) and at in the interpreter
group; yet as soon as 1 started working as
translator 1 felt this was the work 1 was m for.
49
 " " ;i:",
_
"".

. .

- , .
J1 : , , ,
1. bl bl (
,
bl bl
, ,
) bl bl , ,
bl .
.
2.


-
, , , ,
, ,
: , .
. bl ,
.
(
,
bl
) ,
,

,
( ,
, ,
; , ,
) .
,
3. bl !
-
,
- bl, bl,
, .
,
, , :
, , ,
, , ,
, .
. n
1 . , ,
, bl
( )
u ( -
, -
)

ASME 46. 1 Surface Texture (Surface
: !
.
Roughness, Waviness, Lay) . ,

50
 f':- .
(lay), : , :
. -

, Coulomb 's law ( - :::::::

( - ) , Dutchman !2:
) ( ) , -
-+=-
- (?) regulatory .---.
"-'
[ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4] . , agency ( - -9
. ) .. , . . - - 8
lay, , . 00

- ( ,

) (, ) temporary strainer.
, -
. [ 1 , -
3 4] , , ,

, : . ,
. ,
, , , , ,
, . m.
, . conversion
, to natural gas n n
- , . . ,

- ( ( ) .
) . ,
?
- . - .
, -
, Google , :
Conversion ( Natural Gas Glossary (
.
) .
, , , ,
: ) ,
, , n (
; ) AGA , . . American Gas Association ) :
; ) Changing the gas service to ultimate customers
(, .. n /ro /l other than natural gas to natural gas,
including adjustment 0/ consumers ' appliances to
) peiform satis/actorily with natural gas.
, . , nu n
, (,
, )
: ASME 46. 1 ,
(, , n .
) . ,
n .
2. -
,
-
,
?
. -

51
 >";,
- surface casing,

"" , - conductor'a
CKu, -- ( ) . 2)

j , .
..... .
? , , ,
00
8 - .
,
wet film thickness ( , absolute altitude true altitude.
::;- , -
.
= , ,
, , - -
L.-' ,

- ) . (r altitude.
(, , absolute altitude,
)
. - , -
. .
28246-89 . , , ,
: 4. 2. . .
, 3. "doubIe random length:
, (er denoting the length / pipe. In shipment
/ pipe / double random length, the minimum
, average length/or each order is 35/eet. "
.
random . , [6]
, : 1_ ,
- ; ; ;
; ;
: 2_ . ( ).
n . [5] : 1 ) ;
, - 2) 3)
- ( 4) 5)
, ) , (. , ) ;
, 6) .
. 1) .
: Pipe is supplied and re/erred to lengths:
single random, doubIe random, longer than
. ( double random, cut lengths. :
single random length Single random pipe length is
)
- usually 18-25 /eet plain end or 18-22 /eet
, , conductor suiface threaded and coupled pipes; double random
casing. lengths random length pipes are made
between 38-40 /eet; longer than double random
. , : he length o/ longer than double random pipes
conductor . , are more than 38-40 /eet; cut length ! length
, pipes are made in fvced lengths within +/- 1/8
, - inch. -

52
 , '''-'

, , ::
(cut .
""
length) , , , --t
, ? , - SZ::
(single random length, double random length ( ) , - ii!1-
longer than double random) . , ? ;;
background'a ( - ( ?) , , -9
. . 2 ) : 8 35 77 .
9 - 8
, - , ! 00

, 5 . , , -
. : cut washer. -
(
f
, -
- !) , . ?
, , Glossary Google'y Cut Washer
. , Glossary : flat washer lejt in the
- raw state a/ter it has n punched out / the
, n! sheet stock, ..
, (!) - (punch out) .
-
: single random length ,
( cut punch out .
18 25 , ..
5, 5 7, 62 ) ; double random length .
( ( ,
,
35 , .. 10, 7 ); longer than
double random

( , , . )
38-40 , . . , 1 0462- 81
1 1, 6- 12, 2 ); cut length .
(
1/8 ,
"
:
) .
4. . . .
shot 6 .
coke, .. - . , .
Google'e Shot Coke, .. ,
Shot Coke Glossary. Google , ,
, : Shot coke
Due ( mechanisms n! we/l understood, the coke ,
from some crudes /orms into small, tight, :
attached clusters that look like pe/lets. . . ( ,

looks like pellets, ) , ,
. [71 , .
.

:
.

53
 <: ( , ,
- , ,
, ,
) , - , ,
3 , , .
..... >} . , , National Electrical Code,

Use compressed asbestos substitute gasket
00
8 10 profecf flange during l . ,
: ,
n n , ,
::;- . , , : The National Electrical Code
z::. , ( - (NEC) is United States standard / the sa/e
2i ) , - instaZlation / electrical wiring and equipment.
1--
L-' substitule,

. , ( , ,
,
) ,
, -
(
, , , ) ,
, -
n , .
-
. - ,
, Google' a
( : :
asbestos substitute,
asbestos substitute gasket) 1 .
: ,
.
, ,
. ) . ,

.
7 .

, . ,
.

, - >}
. . U :
1 928 . ,
, . :
, : ,
,
, ,
, ?
(
) - 2 .

. - . -

54
 , 2. -
! , , , 2 . , . -
.. .. . r"I
- .
: , 1 997.
3 . , 3. - -
- ! - , . .+:>.
(control - * .. . : N
, adequate * , , 1 989. ..9
1'-.>
sabotage - *, .. . . ) , 4. - - :5
, - , . 00

. .. , . . -

: , 1 997.
, 5. -
. , - , . ..
. : . , 2007 .

, !
6. -
( ), 3 . , .
. . . .
.
: , 1 993.

7. - ,
1 . - . 3, . . . . :
, . . . , 1 996.
. :
, 1 969.

..

: ,
*

1 . Ti mes N e w Roman, ,
. ,
Wi ndows Vista , ,
,
, , . ,
, ,
, , . ,
. :
2 - g Lotta L stop [ / ']
, ,
, ,
. [ J /Q ],
3 -
. , [ t/ , ]
- 7 - [ :/ ]
, . -
2 .
( ), , .

. . N!! 1(17), N! 2(18).

.
*

55
 <
1-'1:"';
1

i n th e (a r" ;z!

. .

1 . . . , ,

. . .
. , ,

,
, ,
: <<- ,
, ;

, .
, , , ,
, ,
- ,
, -
.

, ,

( , ,
.
, ) .

- . (
- - . - . ) :
. ' I s that again , sir? ' inquired the sergeant in
rather awed voice. ( P. G . Wodehouse . "Thank ,
Jeeves")
()
Chuffy puffed out his chest. 'I'll attend to ! '
, <<
' N o , ' 1 said firmly, '[ will attend to him. the
, whole conduct of the affair to . ' ( P. G . Wodehouse.
() , "Thank , Jeeves" )
. , ,
, . (. . )
- ,

. . . .
. (. . )
I
. , NQ 4( 1 6)/2007

56
 ,id;:

:3

,
,.....,
- -i
, . ::z !2:
, -
. , r:::::;
, , 3 I'-J

- 8
00
, -
. (

, , -
- , w
. - . ) : , '&

. , , , ::t:
, ,
. ,
.
Writing stories 1 enjoy. It is the thinking them -
out that is apt 10 01 1he sunshine from life.
(P.G. Wodehouse) 2 -
.
- ,
,
. ,
-
, .
. ,
-
c , -
. ,
,
, (
. ) ;

,
. , .
,
. , -
- .
-
2 , -,

3 ,
, :
, , . ,
. (
. ?
):
. - , . :
. mlllJlJ;!1 .
.
- .

57
 :: :;-:r, :
( ,
\j
, -
. :
, .. ( 1 ) Jack read n article yesterday.
: (2) Jack read the article yesterday.

::::.::


) . ,
,
00 -
8 (n article) ,
'""-J
,
(Jack read;
5' , -
yesterday)

.q- ,
' .
z::: . -
:: , -
,
t::; --
" What did Jack read yesterday? "
1::)

- , -
, (the)
,
article
.
,

yesterday, Jack -
,
,
,
-
j
. ,


-
" When did Jack read the
, 4 .
article? " , " Who read the article
, -
yesterday? "

,


-
, ,


,
,
, ,
, ,
, ,
.
, .
-
,



-
, -
() , ()
4
.
bI
bIbI ':,' ,
bI .
. .: Glve .

Ihe book . Give the book 10 ( bI
) . , - ,
,
bI ,
,
bI. ,

58
 . , .',

, :
.
,.-,
, ,
!2:
, - :z
, -:
- N
,
. g
00
, -
-
, -

.
-
,
,
, -
.


,

-
,

, .
,


in the inder fahren m,
.

-
: .
() ,
, , ,
,
, ,
,

.
eH

.
- ,

,
: !
.
-

:JD

,
, . . ,
. , , - .
, . ! , -
. ,
. ,
- . . .
. ,
. -
- ,

59
 ,

. .

, . UJ

,
-
UJ
, , - ,
.
, .
,
.
UJ ,
. ,
, , ,
, , , . m ,
, . ,

, ,
,
, -.
, .
: 700-
UJ ,
. , . . ,
XI I -XI I I , -
, ,

, , , ,
, ,

(La Escuela de Traductores de Toledo ) . (castellano) .
, ,
, ,
UJ

60
 '" j,'
"",,1ii ., ,

, , :
-
, , , .
, !2:
=
, , ,

, N
, . -

=
. , , . - 00
, -
, -
, , , .

. VI I I , :.
, , , ,


, , - .
, ,
, ,
. ,
. ,
,
- . , ,
. , . ,
, ,
. II ,
. n
(emendador) -
. ,
.

. ,

.
, , ,
. , -
, .
,
1 252 ,
. , .
,

. xv ,
, , , , . , ,
, ,
. .
,
, ,
. - -

61
 "-'f!:
,
<:::>
:: -
:t
.
. ,
1 994 , - ,

- - .

. -
00 ,
=
} , -
8 . .
:::,
---r
,
=
..CI . -
t:::: . , , ,
, ,
L - .
,
.
.
,
,

. ,

, ,
. .
.

. . u

,
,
, ,
, . ,

: ,
,
( .
) ,
. -

62
 > ;!
< '

. - :
: , -
,....,
. -1
1 ) !2:
, :z
,
; u :..
N
2) , - -9
"-J
/ . 25
, , 00


eH ; . -
3) , - .
- t::rJ
w
, ,

, , ,

1:::
4)
.


,
, ,
, . .
. ,
, ,
-
, , .
,
: ,
,
, , - ,
.
,

,
, ,
, ,
, ,
? .
,


.
.

,
. ,
, ,
, ,
. ( ,
, . .).
, -

 . '. :.:.,"
,

- ,
, .
( , , ,
. . ) ,

t::t . (,

, - , . . ) ,
8 , ,
r-,J
.
:;;- , ,
, - ,
2s (

, ) ,

.
,
,
, .

,
.
, :
,
.
,

. :
1)

. ,
( Jl .
) ,
,
, -
,
, .
,
, .. ,
,
-, '
,
,
, ,
, .

. 2) , ,

, -
, ,

64
 " ,:; ,
, ( . visualiser, :3
document m) - , -
, ::::::
!2:
::z
WiFi. , - ..,.. '

, . -

I'.J
( , , cTaBeT , =
=
WiFi, . . ) , , - CXJ
. ,

-
. , -
, , . t:1]
,
,

. -
, ,
,
,
. ,
,
, :
1 ) ,

,

;
2) ,
-




3)
,
. , (
) ,
, (, .. ) .
-
,
.
, (
,
..).
.
,
,
. , , -

65
 . -"1
.
' .

::! u ,
u . .

: - .
, ,
, , (
u . , u

, u ,
00
u
"-J u , ).
6'
.
,

.

,

u ,
,

,

.
u

, , ,
, ,
u.
,
u . .
, ,

, u
'
.
.
: , u
( , uu
.
) , ,
- ,
. u

u . , ,
, , . ,
, u
,
. -,
- u , -

, , .. , . - ::
,
, .
. SZ::
=
, - .0

'N
. , -9

=
, , . 00


. ,


. , , ,

. :::

. ,
,
, , .
, ,
. ,
. ,
. ,
,
.
.
(
) , , , (

. , ) ,
, () ,
, . ,
,

. ,
,
m
.
, .

,
. . . ,
.
,

, ,
, , .
, -

67
 '.';:, -
,
:::t

.

. ,
,
'-C:I


,

t::t

, , , .

=
. .
"'-1
- -

::;;:-

, . ,
,

J3 , ,
1-
. ,

L , - , ,
,
, . . .
(), ( ,
-

) . ,
-



. , ,
,
.
,
. :
-
, , ,
.
, ,

,
,
,
.

, :
. , ,
, ,

,

, ,
,
.
, , -,
, , .


. ,
, .
,
, ,
,

,

68
 "i.':-


- ( - :
, )

- , -
) . , , - !z:
::z
, , ,

, - N
, , , -9

=
. 00

,
, .
, .

P. S . , ,

- t:r:I
, ( ),
16-22 2008 .
,
. ,

;::

6n cn
r, &

,
, ,
, ,
, .
, ,
, .
, ,
. .
, ,
.
, ,
,
-, , -

.
, ,
. , ;
: , ? ;
, . .
,
. . .
, . -.: , 2005.
( ).

69
 - :I-'- ';

Cum grano salis

:,
' .

?
1
.. m u

N 1 - .
- -
?
?
- -
. , .
. .
: -, , , ,
- -
! ! , , .
, ! , , .
, - , ,
. .
-
, , .
, . - , -
- , . , .
, . . - , !
- , , . - , , ?
. - -
- . ?
. - - -! -.
. , , ? - ?
- -
, . .
. - , - .
. - ! ! ,
.
- , , ? ,
! , , , .
. , - , -. .
, . , .
- . , , . - .
- -. , - , .
. -. , - .
, , - - - ,
? .
I http://www. thinkaloud.ru -.

70
 N!!2 - , - - :
. - )
, , . . .
- , , , - - !2:
. - -
, .=::
'-.J
. . , - .9
- , - , '-.J
8
, ,
. - , - - 00
! , - . , ,

, . , -
, -
, : , -
, ! ;

. - , , -
- , - , . - -

- Q)
, - .
, - - !
, ? ,
- , - , - . !
! , .
, .
. - m
. , , . ,
, ,
, . :
, - ,
!
. ?

?
- , -
. . -
- , - , . -
. - , ,
? , . , -
, I PO , ?
: - ? - .
- . - - , .
, . , ,
. - , -,
- . , .
- , , , - ,
. - - !
-, - , - .
, - ,
! , , -
. .

71
 . . u, . . . .
, .
. - .: . , 2008. - 208 .

n
, ,
n ,
J) .

. . ,

,
.
-
, -
. 1 :

, ,
, ,


;
.
,



- . ,

(, , ,
) . -
,
-
, I .

:
-

72
 '" '. -.
{. .
. , 3
, -
r)
- :l
, -1


-
, , - :..
, , , 'N
, , . - -9
, . . . "-J
, 25
00 _

1 992 , .
-
: market maker () - -
.

,
; deregulation (

, ) - ;
management () - ;
, recruiter () -
; spot market (-nm) -
. ; derivatives ( ,
) - ; duration ()
, ; volatility (
) - .
, , ,
, , ,
.

1 980- 1 990- m
, ,
. ,
,
, - ,
, .


. ;
: ;
;
, ,
, .

. . ?
,
eH 1 990-e
m
( , ,
, .
, m
). , -

73
 . . ---'':- ',:
Z '';.,.!""

,
:::
::: , ,

.


- ,
ki , ,
00 , - ,
8
I".J
. 1 990-
= " " , .
,
:: ,
Z: .
...! .
1- , ,
'--' ,

. .
: ,
, , -

,

.
,
2 .


.


,
,


-

: ,

, ,
.
, . .
-
,
.
.
,
:
, , , ,
? ,

- -
. .

: , (, ,
, -
, - .
2-3 , , 3-5 , ,
3 . ,
.
,
2 . . . " ,
,
.

3 .. . "
, -
( 1 990-2005 rr. ) .

74
 ( .
, 4 . .. , , :
, -
yu ,
7'
,
=
. , -
: , ,
, - -
. . 8
- - 00

, -
, , ,
. , cs
- !::
- i'::

( . . , ( )
. . ) , 2005 . ,
, . -
aHM , , ,
. . ,
,
. .

,
,
,
( , .
, ) ,

,
. . ,
( . . , . . , ,
) -
.
.
yu
,
, ,
, .
,
. -
, - ,
-
, .
.
. . u

4 . . . ,> ,

) .

75
 - - 40- .
. ( - ) ( )
. . . . (mri sLts Association ) .
- , (
) () .

- , ,
. .
.

3 - ,
, . . . .

() - . .
. . (: )
.

- . .
() . . ,
, .

- , -
. .

() - ,
.
.

-
", ". . .,
ItrntiL LegaL gLish Certificate.

- , ,
.
( ) . .. . .

- , , , ,
. . . . .

- () -
. Swarthmore CoLLege.
,
- . 1995 5tavFiLe -
.
. - .

w - - ,
, ro, ,
, -
. . . , - . .
.

76
 '"
'' :
} 2008 (.!
. ;.11<,.

. NQ 1 (1 7)
. , . NQ 2(1 8)
. . . . NQ 3(1 9)
/
. . NQ 4(20)
.8. . ( . , : ) . NQ 2(1 8)
.. . . NQ 2(1 8)

. . NQ 1 (1 7)
. . . . NQ 2 ( 1 8)
. - . NQ 2(1 8)
, . . NQ 1 (1 7)
. . () . ( ). NQ 2(1 8)
. (). . NQ 4(20)
.. . . NQ 1 (1 7)
.. . . NQ 2(1 8)
.. , .. . , . NQ 3( 1 9)
. . .
. NQ 4(20)
.. . - . NQ 2 ( 1 8)
.8. , . , ? NQ 4(20)
. . : ,
. NQ 1 ( 1 7)
. . : ,
. ( ). NQ 2(1 8)
. . : ,
. (). NQ 4(20)
. ! . NQ 1 ( 1 7)
. ! ! ? ! .
NQ 3(1 9)
. , . NQ 4(20)
. . . NQ 4(20)
L. Razran Stone (USA). hllgs d Com promises i n the Translation of Pasternak . NQ 3(1 9)
L. Rz St (USA) . I nterpreters and Translators: Two Species? NQ 4(20)
. . . ? . . "ie". NQ 1 ( 1 7)

77
 2008 : i,
-"'

00
. . . NQ 1 (1 7)
=
= . . , ? NQ 2(1 8)
'"'-J

5'

. . . . NQ 3(1 9)
'
z::
/ -?

.. . -. NQ 1 (1 7)
. , . NQ 2(1 8)
. . . NQ 2(1 8)
.. . - . . . (
) . NQ 2(1 8)
-/

. . 3. . NQ 2 ( 1 8)
/

. . . - . NQ 3(1 9)
. . . " . NQ 4(20)
.. . - ! " -
. NQ 1 (1 7)
. (USA) . slti, d iti g, Fmtti g d fd ig Procedure. NQ 1 ( 1 7)

. . (). ? . NQ 1 (1 7)
J. Kates (USA) . Choices of voices . , 1 91 7-2007 . NQ 1 ( 1 7)
. . . . . " ? NQ 1 (1 7)
.

. (USA) . : ? NQ 1 ( 1 7)

. . . . NQ 4(20)
. . " i the " .. " . NQ 4(20)

. . . NQ 2(1 8)
. . . NQ 4(20)
. . . , . NQ 4(20)
Lynn Visson (USA) . hig I tt iig d i ig Teachers of I ttti: Crucial i n the US.
NQ 1 (1 7)
Lynn Visson (USA) . shig the Teacher the Psyche of Studts of Simultus I ttti . NQ 2(1 8)
. . NQ 3 ( 1 9)
Cum gr slis/ /

. ( " . . " . . . ) . NQ 3(1 9)

.. . ? . NQ 4(20)
- . "
(" , . . . ) NQ 4(20)

78
 .
:3

.8. . . NQ 4(20) r")
-i
-

::z
.. . . NQ 3(1 9) '0

..,..
,.-....
"-'

. . >, . ( << , 0 1 /0212008) NQ 1 ( 1 7) -9

"-'
=
=
, 00
( South China Morning Post 1 4 2007 .). N Q 2(1 8)
, ! ( , 1 1 2008 .) NQ 3(1 9)
l

.8. . "" . . . ( .. , 28 1 850 .).

NQ 3(1 9)
: . . . . < , 20 2008 .);
. , , 1 892 . "" . . . ) . NQ 2(1 8)
. . (<< . . . )
N 4(20)

, <
/ ,/ . . . )
N Q 4(20)
< ) . NQ 1 ( 1 7)
.. . , . . . ( . . , 1 798 .).
NQ 2(1 8)
. . . . ( 1 9 1 4) .
N Q 1 ( 1 7)
.. . . . . , . . . . NQ 1 ( 1 7)
. . . . . . < . . . ) .
N Q 1 ( 1 7)
.8. . . . . . <
. . . ) . NQ 2 ( 1 8)
. . 10 1 2 . . . ( 23 1 851 .).
NQ 1 ( 1 7)
.. . , . . . ( , , . . 1 845). NQ 2(1 8)
.. . . . . < ) . NQ 3(1 9)
?

- . . . ( NQ3(1 9)). NQ 2 ( 1 8).

79
 !
. ,
,
,
.
,
! !

http : / / www . rvalent . ru / trebovania . html

.
,
,
( tif, eps, j pg) .
2 009 .

(
),
( )
.
2 0 1 .

-


:

.:. , , ,
.:. - ,
.:. .

,
.

-
: www. vatent. ru
II I