5. Translational Implications - Надежда Рябцева

5. Translational Implications

Difficulties in translating culture-specific deception idioms from Russian into English, as well as many others, metaphorically describing interpersonal relations, are twofold, pertaining to their metaphoric meaning and stylistics. Though their culturally colored metaphoric meaning and inner form make them untranslatable, they still can be paired with analogous English idioms which can successfully substitute them in speech. This is confirmed by lexicographic practice and literary translations, e.g. by Sophia Lubensky’s (1995) Russian-English Dictionary of Idioms, where most set phrases from Table 1 have the English expression to pull the wool over smb’s eyes as a possible equivalent. But their stylistics is culturally colored either, as they are highly emotionally charged being motivated by the communicative burden of ethical reproach and marked by highly colloquial character.

In fact, the burden of any phraseology, as well as of all other super-segmental language devices – intonation, intensification, metaphorization, modality, evaluation, style, etc. – is to express and convey some additional extra-linguistic information: personal, interpersonal, cultural, social, etc., cf. (Nikolaeva, 1999: 259). But every phraseology has its own preferences in choosing what and how to convey. In this respect, Russian phraseology is not only expressive, as phraseologies of most languages are, but very emotional and highly colloquial as well. This is because Russian oral speech in general is very emotional, open and “sincere” in exposing the speaker’s inner states and attitudes, and thus abounds with specifically colloquial speech patterns formed exclusively in and for informal communication. All this is in accord with the Russian speech culture and mentality, in contrast to the English language, where there are no analogous “emotional” means and where less emotional expressive patterns and idioms are used. That is why the stylistic coloring of most Russian colloquial speech patterns and idioms cannot be fully transferred into English, as the latter has no corresponding stylistically marked means. But perhaps, it needn’t, as an adequate translation should not reproduce all and everything, and, perhaps, some neutralization will be more authentic than complete “re-dressing” of what has no direct grammatical, lexical or idiomatic equivalents in another language. And though “Whatever can be meant can be said” (Searle, 1969: 47), sometimes it should not.

Further extensive linguistic evidence illustrates that the translation problems pointed above extend far beyond the metaphoric expressions describing deception. For example, the fact that Russians are more biased towards an emotional apprehension of a problem (in one’s soul) than towards its rational consideration (in one’s mind), is congruent with a long list of “emotional” verbs which are used in Russian as if they are “action verbs”, that is, describing a conscious, purposeful and voluntary action (Wierzbicka, 1988: 254) – bespokoit’sa, trevozhit’sa, gorevat’, toskovat’, skuchat’, grustit’, pechalit’sa, volnovat’sa, unyvat’, uzhasat’sa, negodovat’, etc., – while modern English has only one such verb – to worry which is used similarly. In addition, each such Russian verb, very widely used in everyday speech, has a number of derivatives describing its various aspectual correlations, cf. nervnichat’: raznervnichat’sa, iznervnichat’sa, perenervnichat’, etc., most of them having a causative form as well: bespokoit’, trevozhit’, volnovat’, etc. In contrast, almost all their English counterparts describe inner involuntary passive states, but not “emotional actions”, and thus cannot be considered as their exact translations, cf. radovat’sa vs. to be happy; gordit’sa vs. to be proud; stydit’sa vs. to be ashamed; zlit’sa vs. to be angry, gnevat’sa vs. to be outraged, etc.

There is a number of key notions in Russian which reflect this national disposition and related nationally specific attitudes, in particular, towards other people, one’s life and the outer world, for example, of readiness for displaying such feelings as concern, compassion, sympathy, resignation and submission, cf. sud’ba ‘destiny’, vera ‘belief’, zhalost’ ‘pity’, toska ‘yearning’, beda ‘grief’, gore ‘misfortune’; terpenie ‘patience’, bol’ ‘suffering’. These concepts are also connected with nationally relevant inclinations toward collectivity, with readiness to be patient and to rely and hope on outer external and higher forces and one’s destiny, to follow one’s feelings rather than mind or reason, cf. kak Bog na dushu polozhit ‘as God will put it on one’s soul: “as God knows alone” (Kuzmin, 2001: 20)’ vs. any old way; Pobojsa Boga! ‘Be afraid of God!’ vs. be reasonable, etc. (Bulygina & Shmelev, 1997). In Russian, even time is “submissive”: vremja terpit ‘the time bears it’ ~ there is no rush, to say nothing of the man, cf. sam Bog velel (terpet’) ‘God himself suffered and told us to suffer’ vs. Its only natural to do smt.

That is why it is easy to explain why Russians make an extensive use of the word bol’no (~ ‘painfully’) as an intensifier, cf. bol’no ‘painfully’ xitryj/ umnyj/ dorogoj ~ too cunning/ clever/ expensive, as well as of the word beda (‘misfortune’) – to mean “very/ too much”, cf. Ludej tam beda skol’ko! Their usage displays and confirms a highly emotional, involved and readily expressed attitude of Russians towards unordinary things which they conceptualize as causing pain or suffering. Further, in Russian, the notion beda is closely connected with the no less emotional notion gore “grief”. They both denote a deep and intensive feeling – “being upset to the utmost” and enter into a large number of set expressions which are widely and actively used in speech, cf. beda-to kakaja, dolgo li do bedy, bedovaja golova, bedolaga; bedstvovat’, sem’ bed odin otvet; gorevat’, prigorunit’sa; goremyka, goremychnyj, goresti i napasti; ubityj gorem, xlebnut’/ xvatit’ gorja, pomoch’ gorju, s gorja, gore lukovoe; jemu i gorja malo, gore mne s toboj, s gorem popolam, gorushko-gore, and which cannot be fully rendered into English, cf. Ne beda ‘it is not a misfortune’ vs. It doesn’t matter; Ne velika beda ‘the misfortune is not very big’ vs. Its not the end of the world; Chto za beda! ‘It is not a real misfortune’ vs. What harm is there in that?; Lixa beda nachalo ‘It is not an extreme misfortune to start’ vs. A good start is half the race; na bedu/ na moje gore ‘it’s my misfortune/ grief’ vs. unluckily/ unfortunately. There is only one word in English which has a similar function and plays an analogous role in the English phraseology. It is the word trouble. But it differs greatly from beda, gore in that it is quite rational, matter of fact and commonsensical. It means a difficulty, inconvenience, that is, “an obstacle; smt. preventing”. That is why derivatives, set phrases and idioms connected in Russian with beda, gore are more emotional than their more rational English equivalents, including their most direct counterpart trouble, cf. to give smb trouble, to put smt to trouble, to take the trouble, to be in/ to get into trouble, to make trouble for smb, to look for trouble.

Besides, there are a lot of catch-phrases that reveal the predominance of a rather passive and awaiting attitude of Russians towards the future and one’s possibilities, “un-readiness” to face difficulties and troubles, cf. vyshe golovy ne prygnesh’ ‘you cannot jump higher that your head’, plet’u obuxa ne pereshibesh’ ‘a lash would never break a butt’ ~ you cannot chop wood with a penknife, avos’ proneset ‘perhaps everything will be all right’, ne sud’ba ‘the destiny does not want it’, ne dano ‘it is not given to me to do this’, for detail, see (Riabtseva, 1997), cf. kuda krivaja vyvedet “to wait and see how the situation will develop”; zhdat’ u morja pogody “to wait for an opportunity to come; to do nothing but wait”. Thus, “Comprehension of the fact that you can’t do more that you can, that you cannot surmount the obstacles in your way impacts your entire way of thinking, impacts your way of life” (Kuzmin, 2001: 111, 287; 355).

6. Conclusion

It has become common knowledge that learning a foreign language should be accompanied by acquiring the corresponding foreign culture. But yet there is no such textbook as “An introduction into Russian/ English/ French/ Tunisian, etc. culture”. If there were, its burden should be to present behavior patterns, which are culture specific from some external or contrastive point of view. The problem here is that such patterns are but only implicitly present in a foreign culture and are so deeply embedded in it that they are considered by their owners as absolutely natural rather than predominantly cultural or culture-specific and thus cannot be easily explicated. But the national and cultural biases of native speakers are linguistically relevant. They are captured in linguistics by the notion of the worldview incorporated into a national language. The worldview is revealed through its key cultural concepts and their manifestations in various lexical and grammatical phenomena.

The notion of the world view is based on the fact that language can communicate knowledge not only discursively, that is, by verbalizing it, but non-discursively as well, that is, implicitly, indirectly, “tacitly”. This non-discursive knowledge is conveyed through presuppositions, implications, connotations, categorization, metaphorization, or the modality of lexical and grammatical items, as well as through their combinatory possibilities, usage restrictions, stylistic qualities, inner form, etc. The tendency here is that the most common, customary, and habitual cultural patterns and values are grammaticalized. Besides, this non-discursive knowledge is of a background character and thus includes culture-specific, nationally bound and ethnically colored attitudes, preferences and inclinations. They do not only constitute native speakers’ mentality but also motivate culture-specific metaphors.

Culture-specific metaphors are best represented in phraseology. Native language idioms and set phrases can blend together ethno-specific concepts pertaining to the worldview of its speakers, to their national character, as well as to their traditional social relations, thus becoming an embodiment of national dispositions and spiritual values. They are presented metaphorically – indirectly and figuratively, which is why culture-specific metaphors produce idioms that have no corresponding counterparts in another language and are difficult for non-native speakers to understand, use, and translate, as their motivation is not transparent for them. Their cognitive description can make learning and understanding a foreign language easier by explaining why it is natural for foreign language native speakers to describe this or that cultural phenomenon in this particular way – by blending these particular mental spaces or image schemes to convey this particular idea.

A contrastive comparison of Russian and English idioms describing deception – a socially, mentally and ethically marked behavior – testifies to the effect that they are coached in their own cultural concepts that form and reflect an integrated ethno-cultural space and its values. In particular, in contrast to the English language, Russian is rich in idiomatic expressions, which metaphorically – figuratively, symbolically, and in a stylistically marked manner – picture deception as manipulating the other person’s body parts. As many other Russian phraseological units, they compress over and conceptually blend together Russian speakers’ culture-specific attitudes towards one’s own personal space, towards interpersonal relations, community norms of behavior and the mode of interpersonal communication – all these being diametrically opposed to the attitudes, norms and modes implicitly present in the English language.

Arutiunova, N. D. (1999). Jazyk & mir cheloveka. Moskva: Jazyki russkoj kultury.

Brosnahan, L. (1998). Russian and English Nonverbal Communication. Moscow: Bilingua.

Bulygina, T. V. & A. D. Shmelev (1997). Jazykovaja konceptualizatija mira. Moskva: Jazyki russkoj kultury.

Cienki, A. (1999). “Metaphors and cultural models as profiles and bases.” In: W. Raymond & Jr. Gibbs & Gerard J. Steen (eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 189-203.

D’Andrade, R. (1987). “A folk theory of the mind.” In: D. Holland & N. Quinn (eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 112-148.

Fauconnier G. & M. Turner (1998). “Conceptual integration networks.” Cognitive Science, 22/2: 133-187.

Grady, J. & T. Oakley & S. Coulson (1999). “Conceptual blending and metaphor.” In: G. Steen & R. Gibbs (eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins; www.blendaphor.html: 1–27.

Holland, D & N. Quinn (eds.) (1987). Cultural Models in Language and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Keesing, R. (1987). “Models, “folk” and “cultural”: paradigms regained?” In: D. Holland & N. Quinn (eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 369-394.

Kuzmin, S. S. (2000). Translators’ Russian-English Phraseological Dictionary. Moscow: Flinta.

Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Levontina, I. B. & A. D. Shmelev (2000). “Za spravedlivostju pustoj.” In: N. D. Arutiunova (ed.), Logichesky analyz jazyka: Jazyki etiki. Moskva: Jazyki russkoj kultury, 281-292.

Longman (1995). Dictionary of Contemporary English. Longman dictionaries.

Lubensky, S. (1995). Russian-English Dictionary of Idioms. New York, etc.: Random House.

Lutz, C. (1987). “Goals, events, and understanding in Ifaluk emotion theory.” In: D. Holland & N. Quinn (eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 290-312.

Nikolaeva, T. M. (1999). “O parallelizme v funkcionirovanii rechevyx klishe & nekotoryx supersegmentnyx prosodicheskix modelej.” In: V. Telia (ed.), Phraseologija v kontexte kultury. Moskva: Jazyki russkoj kultury, 250-259.

Ozhegov, S. I. (1981). Slovar’ Russkogo Jazyka. Moskva: Russkij Jazyk.

Riabtseva, N. K. (1997). “Axiologicheskie modeli vremeni.” In: N. D. Arutiunova (ed.), Logicheskij analiz jazyka: Jazyk & vremja. Moskva: Indrik, 78–95.

Riabtseva, N. K. (2001a). “Contrastive phraseology in a cross-cultural and cognitive perspective.” In: M. Thelen & B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (eds.), Translation and Meaning. Part 5. Proceedings of the Maastricht – Lodz Duo Colloquium, 2000. Maastricht: Maastricht School of Translation and Interpreting, 365–378.

Riabtseva, N. K. (2001b). “Mental vocabulary in a cognitive perspective.” Journal of Philology, 2 (8): 16-25.

Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shakhovsky, V. I. & N. N. Panchenko (1999). “Nacional’no-kulturnaja specifika koncepta “obman” vo phraseologicheskom aspekte.” In: V. Telia (ed.), Phraseologija v kontexte kultury. Moskva: Jazyki russkoj kultury, 285-288.

Shmelev, A. D. (2000). “Pluralizm eticheskix sistem v svete jazykovyx dannyx.” In: N. D. Arutiunova (ed.), Logichesky analyz jazyka: Jazyki etiki. Moskva: Jazyki russkoj kultury, 380-389.

Shore, B. (1996). Culture in Mind: Cognition, Culture and the Problem of Meaning. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

Stepanov, Y. S. (1997). Konstanty: Slovar’ russkoj kultury. Moskva: Jazyki russkoj kultury.

Ter-Minasova, S. (2000). “Jazyk, lichnost’, intellekt.” Vestnik MGU. Seria 19: Linguistika i mezhkulturnaja kommunikacia, 4: 35–42.

Uzilevsky, G. & M. Minakova (2001). “K probleme osnovanij antropologicheskoj paradigmy jazykoznania.” In: M. Remneva & A. Polikarpov (eds.), Russian Language: its Historical Destiny and Present State. The International Congress of Russian Language Researchers. Moscow: Moscow State University, 434-435.

Wierzbicka, A. (1988). The Semantics of Grammar. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Wierzbicka, A. (1992). Semantics, Culture, and Cognition: Universal Human Concepts in Culture-Specific Configurations. New York: Oxford University Press.

Wierzbicka, A. (1996). Semantics: Primes and Universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wierzbicka, A. (1997). Understanding Cultures Through Their Key Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wierzbicka, A. (1999). Emotions Across Languages and Cultures: Diversity and Universality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zalizniak A. A. (2000). “O semantike schepetilnosti.” In: N. Arutiunova (ed.), Logichesky analyz jazyka: Jazyki etiki. Moskva: Jazyki russkoj kultury, 101-118.

* * *

(********) N. Riabtseva. COMBINATORY DICTIONARIES IN TEACHING AND PRACTICING TRANSLATION // "Grundfragen der Ubersetzungwissenshaft": YI Internationale Konferenz, Abstracts. Leipzig, 1996.

Dictionaries have always been an indispensable linguistic support in teaching and practicing translation. Traditional dictionaries are now supplemented by dictionaries of quite a new type - those that are called active. Dictionaries of an active type reproduce the linguistic competence of a native speaker and thus provide a new perspective in teaching and assisting translation.

The linguistic competence of a native speaker is a composition of two opposite and complementary linguistic abilities: passive understanding of speech plus its active generation. The active linguistic competence means the ability to express one and the same meaning and intention in different/various linguistic ways; and the ability to (subconsciously) combine words idiomatically in discourse. The theory of linguistic competence and its lexicographic application have been developed by Yury Apresjan, Igor Melchuk and their colleagues since 1968. Lexicographically the linguistic competence is simulated (modeled, “reproduced”) by two kinds of active dictionaries - of synonymous expressions (cf. I want to emphasize - It is important), and in combinatory ones. The most prominent example of the latter is "The BBI Combinatory Dictionary of English" [1986].

Combinatory dictionaries represent lexical and grammatical combinatory preferences - which are selective, language specific and ethno specific, as they are motivated by the national mentality and national experience in world conceptualization: national mentality is imprinted in the language and in the way it is used - in words collocations, combinations and co-occurrences in discourse. That is why the idiomatics of discourse collocations is most difficult for a foreigner to acquire.

My personal undertaking in this domain is a compilation of a "Combinatory dictionary of English scientific collocations". It registers combinatory - grammatical, lexical and rhetorical - peculiarities of general scientific notions in English and the most typical patterns of academic style, so that to assist scientists in writing their articles in English. It can be used either when generating a scientific paper, translating it, or when teaching how to do it correctly.

* * *

(*********) N.Riabtseva. STUDYING LINGUISTIC COMPETENCE AND TEACHING TRANSLATION // Second International Conference on Current Trends in Studies of Translation and Interpreting. Abstracts. Budapest, 1996, pp. 91–92.

The theory of translation has its own traditional topics of research and is rather autonomous of general linguistics, often ignoring even its most prominent conceptions. “The theory of linguistic competence” is one of them (cf. Yu.Apresjan, I.Melchuk, A.Zholkovsky).

Linguistic competence is a prominent feature characteristic to subconscious human intelligence. It is a composition of four major linguistic abilities revealing a native speaker, the most intricate of which is the ability to subconsciously combine words idiomatically in discourse. Combinatory preferences are selective and language specific; for example, in English we follow smb's words, but in Russian we "follow after them". From interlinguistic, translational point of view, most part of word combinations in discourse turn to be idiomatic, as they can't be translated word by word. Combinatory preferences expose how native speakers combine words idiomatically in discourse; but this very task causes main troubles in translating into a foreign language. The main difficulty here is that a native speaker does it subconsciously, while acquiring it by a foreigner needs to consciously realize it first, and only then make it "automated".

Words co-occurrence in discourse has become a matter of lexicographic description since 1986, when "The BBI Combinatory Dictionary of English" appeared. Dictionaries of that type are called active as they help to generate speech, in contrast to its passive understanding. Another component of linguistic competence is the ability of a native speaker to express one and the same meaning in different (various) ways. It is simulated by another type of an active dictionary - in a dictionary of synonymous expressions. Two dictionaries of this type have been already published in Russia, under the editorship of Yu.Apresjan. But the lexicographic approach is not the only one, which could benefit from the underlying linguistic conception. Through its assimilation the theory of translation would as well substantially promote and update its practical applications, teaching translation among them.

My personal undertaking in this area is a compilation of “A combinatory dictionary of English scientific collocations”. It registers combinatory - grammatical, lexical and rhetorical - peculiarities of general scientific notions and the most typical patterns of academic style, so that to assist scientists in writing their articles in English. It can be used either when generating a text, translating it, or when teaching how to do it correctly.

* * *

(**********) List of some other publications in English by the same author

  1. N. Riabtseva. TRANSLATION AS A SPECIAL TYPE OF ACTIVITY AND ITS THEORETICAL MODEL // Grundlage der Translationstheorie. Abstracts of an Intern. Conf. Leipzig, 1986.

  2. N. Riabtseva. MACHINE TRANSLATION OUTPUT AND TRANSLATION THEORY // Computers and Translation. 1987, N. 3.

  3. N. Riabtseva. TRANSLATION AS A SPECIAL TYPE OF ACTIVITY AND ITS THEORETICAL MODEL // Ubersetzungswissenschaftliche Beitrage. N.11: Semantik, Kognition und Aquivalenz. Leipzig, 1988.

  4. N. Riabtseva. CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND FOR INTERLINGUISTIC INTERFERENCE // Ubersetzungswissenschaftliche Beitrage. 12. Leipzig, 1989.

  5. N. Riabtseva. ON TRANSLATION OF POLYSEMANTIC GRAMMATICAL STRUCTURES // Ubersetzungswissenschaft und Sprachmittlerausbildung. Akten der 1 Intern. Konf., Berlin, Mai 1988. Berlin 1990. Band 2.

  6. N. Riabtseva. SCIENTIFIC COLLOCATIONAL PATTERNS IN COMPUTER SYSTEM "VERSION" // Colloq. Intern. "Phraseologie et Terminologie en traduction et en interpretation". Abstracts. Swiss, Geneva, October, 1991, p. 46.

  7. N. Riabtseva. ACADEMIC STYLE: TEACHING, TRANSLATING, INVESTIGATING // International Сonference "Lingua e Tecnologia". Abstracts. Italy, Florence, December 1991.


  9. N. Riabtseva. COMBINATORY DICTIONARIES: COMPUTER ASSISTANCE IN TEACHING AND PRACTICING TRANSLATION // East-West Intern. Conf. "Computer Technologies in Education". Sympheropol, Sept. 1994. Proceedings, v 2, pp. 86-89.

  10. N. Riabtseva. ENGLISH FOR SCIENTIFIC PURPOSES. GUIDE TO ACADEMIC WRITING. COMBINATORY DICTIONARY OF SCIENTIFIC USAGE. Moscow, Nauka–Flinta, 1999; 2-d ed. 2002; 3-d ed. 2004; 4-th ed. 2006.

* * *

  • university.bystrickaya.ru/glava-8-vozbuzhdenie-arbitrazhnogo-sudoproizvodstva-uchebnoe-posobie-v-v-efimova-efimova-vlada-vladislavovna-kandidat.html
  • znanie.bystrickaya.ru/analiz-otcheta-po-etapu-proekta-avtomatizirovannoj-sistemi-federalnogo-kaznachejstva.html
  • portfolio.bystrickaya.ru/personalii-s-p-shavel-yo-v-izdanie-vtoroe-ispravlennoe-i-dopolnennoe.html
  • kolledzh.bystrickaya.ru/alla-latinina-istinnoe-proisshestvie.html
  • paragraph.bystrickaya.ru/lem-s-skazki-robotov-sbornik-per-s-pol-stranica-10.html
  • shkola.bystrickaya.ru/ozhidaemaya-prodolzhitelnost-zhizni-territorialnij-organ-federalnoj-sluzhbi-gosudarstvennoj-statistiki-po-chelyabinskoj-oblasti.html
  • upbringing.bystrickaya.ru/lev-aleksandrovich-tihomirov.html
  • bukva.bystrickaya.ru/tradicii-staroobryadcheskogo-cerkovnogo-peniya-sredstva-muzikalnoj-virazitelnosti.html
  • teacher.bystrickaya.ru/formi-otchetnosti-studenta-uchebno-metodicheskij-kompleks-disciplini-kulturologiya-specialnost-061100-080507.html
  • reading.bystrickaya.ru/kompyuternie-uchebnie-programmi-i-innovacii-3-2007-g-prikladnie-programmnie-sredstva-dlya-sozdaniya-i-preobrazovaniya-programm-programmnoe-i-informacionnoe-obespechenie-dlya-resheniya-stranica-8.html
  • thescience.bystrickaya.ru/ii-mezhdunarodnaya-nauchno-prakticheskaya-konferenciya-kontrol-i-avtomatizaciya-tehnologicheskih-processov-neftegazovoj-otrasli.html
  • composition.bystrickaya.ru/otchetnijdokla-dpredsedatelya-sverdlovskogo-regionalnogo-otdeleniya-std-rf-vto.html
  • control.bystrickaya.ru/eloiza-aloiza-stepanovna-pashkevich.html
  • thesis.bystrickaya.ru/proekt-doklada-o-rabote-desyatogo-mezhkomitetskogo-soveshaniya.html
  • doklad.bystrickaya.ru/vakuumnie-nasosi.html
  • shkola.bystrickaya.ru/pervichnie-uchyotnie-dokumenti.html
  • report.bystrickaya.ru/iii-rasskaz-o-maisovoj-lepeshke-viktor-gyugo-sobor-parizhskoj-bogomateri.html
  • kontrolnaya.bystrickaya.ru/provodit-xiv-mezhdunarodnaya-nauchnaya-konferenciya-posvyashennaya-pamyati-generalnogo-konstruktora-raketno-kosmicheskih-sistem-akademika-m-f-reshetneva-kuchastiyu-v-x.html
  • literatura.bystrickaya.ru/reshenie-ot-1-oktyabrya-1981-g-n-702-stranica-7.html
  • lektsiya.bystrickaya.ru/prikaz-po-mou-ksosh-3-ot-31-avgusta-2010g-182-stranica-4.html
  • laboratornaya.bystrickaya.ru/rabochaya-programma-gruppa-obsherazvivayushej-napravlennosti-dlya-detej-ot-6-do-7-let-2010-god-stranica-8.html
  • essay.bystrickaya.ru/bezrabotica-kak-ekonomicheskaya-kategoriya-ee-teoreticheskoe-obosnovanie-chast-2.html
  • kontrolnaya.bystrickaya.ru/programma-provedeniya-dnej-molodezhnoj-nauki-v-altajskom-gosudarstvennom-universitete-20-aprelya-2009-g.html
  • uchit.bystrickaya.ru/tema-5-gosudarstvennaya-razdroblennost-posobie-dlya-postupayushih-v-vuzi.html
  • gramota.bystrickaya.ru/vozobnovlyaemaya-energetika-ekologiya-i-zhkh.html
  • notebook.bystrickaya.ru/klinicheskie-osobennosti-i-patogeneticheskie-mehanizmi-regulyacii-sostoyaniya-trigeminalnoj-nociceptivnoj-sistemi-pri-migreni-14-01-11-nervnie-bolezni.html
  • student.bystrickaya.ru/1-organizacionno-ustavnie-voprosi-rabota-po-organizacionnomu-ukrepleniyu-stranica-3.html
  • letter.bystrickaya.ru/n-s-selskaya-prorektor-po-uchebno-metodicheskoj-rabote-docent-kand-teh-nauk.html
  • institut.bystrickaya.ru/territorialnoe-raspredelenie-rabochej-sili-kak-faktor-razvitiya-rinka-truda-v-rossii.html
  • shkola.bystrickaya.ru/t-s-germash-administracii-mkou-sosh-2.html
  • upbringing.bystrickaya.ru/konspekt-lekcij-po-istorii-iskusstva-9-stranica-10.html
  • letter.bystrickaya.ru/n-m-hajdarovoj-na-kollegii-ministerstva-obrazovaniya-i-nauki.html
  • ekzamen.bystrickaya.ru/reksi-rexes-reshenie-tehnicheskih-voprosov-mini-lekciya-shou-pokaz-svinok-nachalo-blagotvoritelnoj-loterei-v.html
  • uchitel.bystrickaya.ru/rabochaya-programma-po-discipline-r-02.html
  • letter.bystrickaya.ru/mezhdunarodnij-forum-po-nanotehnologiyam.html
  • © bystrickaya.ru
    Мобильный рефератник - для мобильных людей.