Semantic Distance Coefficient for Semantic Field ”˜Food”™ of Tatar Culture-Specific Concepts and their equivalents in English | Revista Publicando Revista Publicando
Semantic Distance Coefficient for Semantic Field ”˜Food”™ of Tatar Culture-Specific Concepts and their equivalents in English

Palabras clave

Contabilidad de costes
tiempos y movimientos
costo hombre
diagrama bimanual

Cómo citar

Mohtarovna Nurtdinova, G., & Olegovna Prosyukova, K. (2017). Semantic Distance Coefficient for Semantic Field ”˜Food”™ of Tatar Culture-Specific Concepts and their equivalents in English. Revista Publicando, 4(13 (2), 711-720. Recuperado a partir de


 In present time Intercultural communication is one of the issues of the day. Intercultural communication is closely connected with language worldview as any language reflects the world and culture worldviews. The article is aiming at OOV (out-of-vocabulary words) that present Tatar specific culture concepts. To research such words first we have arranged them into groups and then compared them with their equivalents in English. The more words we need to explain the meaning of the concept in other language the bigger is the difference in the sphere of concepts of the peoples whose languages we learn. We use the method of a dictionary article analysis, comparative and analytical methods to research the Tatar people specific concepts. We have investigated the semantic group “Food” and have calculated the semantic distance coefficient for this group. The coefficient made up 9.93 and it is showing that the sphere of concepts of this field differs much for Tatar and English people. The research results can be used in future research of the Tatar language and culture, Intercultural Communication as well as in Theory and Practice of Machine Translation.



Braí§aj, M. (2015). Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 6(1S1), DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n1s1, pp476-480.

Barchudarov, L.C. (1975). Yazyk & Perevod, Moscow: Mezdunarodnye Otnosheniya (The Language and Translation).

Fenenko, N.A. (2013). Franzhuzskiye i russkiye relii v aspecte teorii mezhyazykovoi renominatsii. Voronezh: Izdatelstvo Voronezhskogo Universiteta, Russia ((French and Russian Culture-specific concepts in the Interlanguage Denomination Theory approach).

Fenenko, N.A. (2006). Franzhuzskiye realii v kontekste teorii yazyka (Doctoral dissertation). University of Voronezh, Russia (French Culture-specific concepts in the Language Theory approach).

Jurgita Cvilikaite (2006). Lexical Gaps. Retrieved February, 8, 2016 from

Nutrtdinova, G.M. (2015). Journal of Sustainable Development. Volume 8, Issue 4, 2015, DOI: 10.5539/jsd.v8n4, pp169-176.

Nalimov, V.V. (1979). Veroyatnostnaya model yazyka: O sootnoshenii yestestvennych i iscusstvennych yazykov. Moscow: Nauka (On Natural and Artificial languages Correlation. The Probabilistic Language Model).

Titov, V.T. (2002). Obshshaya kvantativnaya lexicologiya romanskich yazykov (General Quantitative Lexicology of Romanic Languages). Voronezh: Izdatelstvo Voronezhskogo Universiteta, Russia.

Vereshshagin, E.M. & Kostomarov, V.G. (1990). Yazyk i Kultura (The Language and The Culture). Moscow.

Vlachov, S. & Florin,S. (1986). Neperevodimoye v perevode, (2nd ed.) (Lexical gaps in Translation). Moscow: Vysshaya Shkola.

Zakiev, M.Z. (1993). Tatarskaya grammatika (Tatar Grammar). Kazan: Tatarskoye knizhnoye izdatelstvo, Russia.


Tatarskiye narodnye skazki (Tatar Fairy Tales). (1958). Vol.I. Kazan: Tatarskoye knizhnoye izdatelstvo, Russia.(Tatar Fairy Tales)

Inglizcha-tatarcha suzlek. (2007). Kazan: Magarif, Russia. (English Tatar Dictionary)

Tatar telenen alnatmaly suzlege. (2005). Kazan: Matbugat jorty nashriyate, Russia. (Tatar Explanatory Dictionary)

ABBYY Lingvo x3 dictionary.

Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English – URL:


La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.