The Comparative Analysis of the Functioning of Interjections in the English and Spanish Languages - Иностранные языки и языкознание дипломная работа
Главная
Иностранные языки и языкознание
The Comparative Analysis of the Functioning of Interjections in the English and Spanish Languages
Interjections in language and in speech. The functioning of interjections in Spanish and English spoken discourse. Possible reasons for the choice of different ways of rendering an interjection. Strategies of the interpretation of interjections.
посмотреть текст работы
скачать работу можно здесь
полная информация о работе
весь список подобных работ
Нужна помощь с учёбой? Наши эксперты готовы помочь!
Нажимая на кнопку, вы соглашаетесь с
политикой обработки персональных данных
Студенты, аспиранты, молодые ученые, использующие базу знаний в своей учебе и работе, будут вам очень благодарны.
Министерство образования и науки Российской Федерации
Федеральное государственное бюджетное образовательное учреждение
высшего профессионального образования
«Московский государственный лингвистический университет»
Факультет гуманитарных и прикладных наук
Кафедра грамматики и истории английского языка
Сравнительный анализ функционирования междометий в английском и испанском языках
по специальности 031201 «Теория и методика преподавания иностранных языков и культур»
Автор: Миронова Анна Юрьевна группа 0-10-9
Мачина Ольга Аркадьевна канд. филол. наук, доцент кафедры грамматики и истории англ. яз.
MOSCOW STATE LINGUISTIC UNIVERSITY
Faculty of humanities and applied sciences
Department of Grammar and History of the English Language
The Comparative Analysis of the Functioning of Interjections in the English and Spanish Languages
Assistant professor of the department of Grammar and History of the English Language
Professor of the department of Lexicology of the English Language
Глава I. Междометия в языке и в речи
1.Сущность и определение междометия
Глава II. Функционирование междометий в испанском и английском устном дискурсе
1. Абсолютная и относительная частотность междометий в испанском и американском английском примерах
2. Использование непроизводных и производных междометий в испанском и американском английском примерах
3. Абсолютная и относительная частотность функций, выполняемых междометиями
2. Возможные причины выбора разных стратегий передачи
Chapter I. Interjections in language and in speech
1.The notion and definition of the interjection
4. Borrowing in the class of interjections
Chapter II. The functioning of interjections in Spanish and English spoken discourse
1.Absolute and relative frequency of interjections in the Sp and AE samples
2. The use of primary and derived interjections in the AE and Sp sample
3. Absolute and relative frequency of different functions of the interjections
Chapter III. Interpretation of interjections
1. Strategies of the interpretation of interjections
2.Possible reasons for the choice of different ways of rendering an interjection
The interjection is quite a controversial unit of language. Language scholars, grammarians and linguists generally preferred to limit its role to a marginal element with respect to other aspects of language because of its nature and the difficulty in attributing it to the categories of traditional grammar. That is probably why interjections have been quite poorly analyzed. The interjection, as one of the, perhaps, least discussed upon classes of words, is the focus of this pursuit.
The aim of this paper is to trace the peculiarities of the use of interjections in two distinct languages - English and Spanish. We will try to find the differences and similarities in the functioning and frequency of interjections in the original English sample and its Spanish translation and distinguish the strategies to which translators resort in order to render interjections.
This work is topical and new, as the language and cultural variation in the use of interjections has so far been neglected.
In order to achieve our aim the following tasks were singled out:
- to study theoretical works on interjections in order to compare different approaches to the grammatical description of the interjection and work out our own interpretation of this language unit;
- to research the functions of interjections in language;
- to compare the frequency of interjections in the speech of the representatives of different nations;
- to investigate the functions performed by interjections of various types with respect to the peculiarities of both languages;
- to research the cases in which different interjections express the same function, and study their cultural variation;
- to ascertain whether there are universal interjections that can be found in the majority of languages;
- to analyze different ways of translating interjections from English to Spanish and other strategies of rendering emotions originally expressed with the help of interjections;
- to analyze the reasons for the choice of given ways of rendering.
The aim and the tasks determine the structure of the paper and the materials that were used.
The paper consists of Introduction, three Chapters, Conclusion and Bibliography.
In the Introduction the subject matter of the paper and its aims are stated.
Chapter I covers theoretical points of the work and offers a close look at different approaches to grammatical description of the notion of the interjections. It also gives a detailed classification of interjections and their various functions and provides the basis for further investigation of the peculiarities of the use of interjections in the given languages.
Chapter II is devoted to the practical analysis of the collected material, with the aim of tracing the differences and similarities in the functioning of interjections in various communicative situations by speakers of different nationalities and the characteristic features of the occurrence of interjections belonging to different classes from morphological and functional points of view with examples illustrating these peculiarities. In Chapter III we analyze the ways of rendering interjections and distinguish the strategies used for this purpose. We also provide some possible reasons for the choice of particular strategies. During the work on the paper we used theoretical books on grammar and linguistics by both Russian and foreign authors. Our analysis was carried out on the basis of two American sitcoms: “How I Met Your Mother” and “Friends”. The list of materials is presented in the Bibliography section.
The theoretical value of the paper lies in the contribution to the theory of the interjection, its functioning in language and cultural differences between the English and Spanish discourse. Our practical results may be applied to teaching. They may also be valuable for the general linguistic course as they provide a deeper insight into the problem of social variation in the use of emotive language.
CHAPTER I INTERJECTIONS IN LANGUAGE AND IN SPEECH.
1. The notion and definition of the interjection
The term interjection entered the English language probably in the 13th or 14th century from Latin interjicere (-jacere) with the meaning to throw or cast between, from «inter» between + «jacere» to throw.
The interjection has long been thought to be a linguistic "problem", because of its nature and the difficulty in putting it in the categories of traditional grammar; language scholars, grammarians and linguists therefore generally preferred to reserve it a role of a marginal element with respect to other aspects of language. However, this has not been more than an attempt to evade the problem of definition, which has led to a patent confusion about many aspects related to interjection and made it one of the most controversial issues in history of grammatical and linguistic studies. From this prospective it is not surprising, that in his work E. Sapir admits that interjections are among the least important elements of speech (E. Sapir, 1921).
As many authors point (L. Blanch 1956; A. Perez 1985; Rojas 1981; F. Ameka 1992a; V. Veiga 2003), if it goes back to Greek grammarians, the interjection was considered a subgroup of adverbs: this was the position of Dionysius of Thrace presented in his traditional classification of words in eight parts of speech. In the classification of Latins particularly in Remmio of Palaemon (first century AD.), the interjection becomes one of the eight parts of speech, since, unlike the Greeks, the Latin language lacked the class of articles and its introduction was a strategy for keeping the number of parts of speech.
However, due to the Latin grammarian Donatus the interjection was introduced with the following definition "pars orationis affectum mentis significans voce incognita" i.e. part of the sentence that means an emotion of the mind through a voice (or word) unknown.
In this prospect interjections can be considered as an expression of human affective state, that were the first words of the men which served as the starting point for the development of the first language.
Some of the definitions and theories, that link the interjection to the original language due to its «primitive» nature, have already been thoroughly rejected.
E.Goffman in his essay «Forms of Talk» includes the interjections between response cries, screams reaction, interjections not lexicalized, which are not fully words (E. Goffman, 1981).
A. Smirnitsky in the «Morphology of the English Language» says that interjections are opposed to notional words as being purely the elements expressing feelings and emotions that have no nominative function. (A. Smirnitsky, 1959, c. 392)
Many linguists separate discourse markers and interjections and do not include interjections in the group of discourse markers(W. Cueto, A. Lуpez), some grammarians include interjections in the group together with prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs and adjectives ( L. Barhudarov, 1975).
So we may see that the interjection so long ignored by the linguists is considered mostly as a notionless expression of feelings and emotions that is syntactically independent and can function either as an independent part of a sentence or as a separate sentence. Some linguists consider it to be the ancestor of the notional words, transitional stage of inarticulate sound flow to articulate speech. However, the status of the interjection is not still specified as long as there are theories that are contrasting in the problem of the grammatical status of the interjection.
Two large groups can be distinguished within the entirety of English interjections on the grounds of their phonemic contents, their immediate origin and their overall formal characteristics: primary interjections and derived interjections. Primary interjections are words like aha! auh! bah! boo! coo! cor! eeeek! eh! gee! gee-whiz! ha! ha-ha! ho! hooey! hoo-ha! hoy! huh! hullo! hum! oho! ooh! oops! uh! uh-huh! uh-uh! These short forms are usually one or two syllable segments with emotions as referents, and with indisputable purpose in language communication.
Derived interjections, e.g.begone! behold! bingo! blast! blimey! bother! bullshit! crazy! crikey! damnation! the devil! doggone! god! good! goodness! gracious! grand! hell! honestly! indeed! look! nonsense! silence! so! sod! soft! son of a bitch! son of a gun! upon my soul! up with! upsy-daisey! well! woe! no wonder!, have more word-like or phrase-like forms with identifiable referents outside language or figurative meaning and are clearly suggestive of emotional reactions to linguistic or non-linguistic stimuli. They present oaths, warnings, orders, instructions or value judgments. Even though they normally belong to other word classes, their repeated use in particular situational contexts and with corresponding prosodic features and intensity qualified them for the classification in this word class.
According to Z. Tuebekova, on the basis of semantics, both primary interjections and derived interjections can be monosemantic and polysemantic (Tuebekova, 1984). Every monosemantic interjection possesses one meaning in any context. As for the polysemantic interjections, their meaning is highly context dependent, thus one and the same interjection can express a whole range of emotions in different communicative situations.
The table below illustrates the correspondence between semantic and morphological classes of interjections:
ahem, alas, bah, er,eugh, faugh, fie, ha-hum, he-he-he, hmm, ho-ho, hum, mmm, mmmph, mps, pah, phew, pooh, pshaw, tush, tutsetc
ah, amen, aye (ay), ha, pray, ugh, umm, whew etc
blast him, bless me, bother, curse it, damn, damn it, dear dear, for God's sake, goodness me, Good Gracious, God knows, Jesus Christ etc
dear me,why, oh, dear, well, what, why, really, hell, hang it etc
language english interjection speech
The interjection “Eugh” in all contexts expresses disgust and can serve as an example of a monosemantic primary interjection.
1. - I saw it on Discovery channel about the jelly fish and how to… EUGH! UGH!
- You peed on yourself?! Eugheugheugh!!!
b. -Me going out with Richard's son…
On the contrary the interjection “Oh, my God” is evidenced as a polysemantic derived interjection. In different context it can express:
(voice mail) -Hey, Monica, this is Chip…
- Oh my God! We were in conversation!!!
(entering an empty room after everything was stolen)- Oh my God! What da hell happened here?!
-Oh God, you didn't hear? Mark died.
- Oh, Oh my God! Oh my God, we are so sorry!
(a billboard saying: Wedding blowout!) Oh my God, can you believe it-some camp out to save a few bucks.
Interjections in the English language can also be divided into several semantic groups according to the semantic fields where they belong. We can allocate the following groups which are very common in English - religious words and rude words, evaluative descriptors There can also be found some non-classified interjections.
Here belong interjections containing the words God, Gosh, Lord, Jesus Christ, Devil, etc.
Such interjections are usually used for performing different emotive functions, they can express positive emotions like surprise, anxiety and excitement, satisfaction and recognition, relief, pleasure, delight; negative emotions - fright, grief and pity, disappointment, irritation, pain, disgust and such emotions as realization or pleading.
E.g.: 1) Damn all these people. God, how I want to kiss you. I'll ring you up in the morning. (Anxiety and excitement)
2) She told me this the day she met me, at check-in two weeks earlier, when she went to shake my hand, then cried, “Oh my God, you're that Heather Wells?” (Surprise)
This group includes interjections like Shit, Fuck, Blimey, Bullshit.
These interjections have a form of a word or a phrase and possess figurative meaning or identifiable referents outside language. They serve as emotional reactions to linguistic or non-linguistic stimuli.
They usually express negative or unpleasant emotions and present warnings, or value judgments.
“Shit! What the devil are you doing here?!”
The third semantic group of interjections singled out includes the so called evaluative descriptors. Derived from adjectives, they help to express the speaker's attitude or give an affirmative response.
Evaluative descriptors may refer to both positive and negative feelings and emotions.
It's really a good idea! - Yeah. Wonderful. ( skeptical)
Among the frequently used non-classified interjections we may list two common interjections “man” and “dude”, and some others.
1) Oh man, I am so excited! I couldn't sleep last night! I bet you guys couldn't either.
- Only the Gala event for the Grand Opening of Sharper's Image's 500th store!
2) Dude! What's up? …. I said: What's up, man!
- Hey, common, guys, it'll be great!
5) So, it's time to say good-bye, I suppose.
Interjections can also be classified into functional types such as emotive/ expressive interjections, volitive/ conative and phatic interjections. This classification can be elaborated on the basis of the communication theory of R.Jakobson (1960). This linguist considers that a communicative act consists of six linguistic components: the emmiter, the receiver, the context, the channel, the message and code. Around these factors he deduced the existence of six functions of the language. These functions depend on the orientation of the speaker towards one of the six linguistic components of the communicative act.
The six functions of language that considers R. Jakobson (1960) are:
1) Emotional or expressive (emitter) e.g. interjections
2) Conative or appellate (receiver) e.g. imperatives, vocatives
3) Reference (context) e.g. messages that report on the extralinguistic world
4) Phatic (channel) e.g. maintaining contact
6) metalinguistic (message) e.g. information about language itself.
From this classification it can be concluded that interjections perform emotional functions, conative and phatic. In other words the emitter can use the interjection to express their attitude towards a statement or extralinguistic situation (or in the emotive function), influence the receiver (or in the conative function) or control the contact with the receiver (in the phatic function).
The example of the emotive/ expressive interjection is “Yippee!” - the interjection uttered by one of the two friends who meet in the street by chance to express a feeling of happiness or pleasure motivated be the encounter.
As for the volitive or conative type, the interjection “Psss” uttered intentionally in overt communication to ask or order to be quiet can be considered as an example.
The use of the interjection in the phatic function can be illustrated by the interjection “Oh” as a reaction to the words of the communicative partner to express disappointment, understanding or surprise and show involvement into the dialogue.
However, most of the linguists suggest that the interjection's primary (or even only) function is the emotive function. Interjections are very often used to express emotions. It is important to stress here that one interjection can convey different emotions and several different interjections can be used to express the same emotion.
Below there is an attempt at grouping interjections according to their meaning, or rather, according to the predominant semantic features that their meaning is composed of, made by Vladimir Ћ. Jovanoviж in his work “The Form, Position And Meaning Of Interjections In English” (Facta Universitatis Series: Linguistics and Literature Vol. 3, No 1, 2004, pp. 17 - 28). Thus, the group of interjections that have certain emotional expressive potential can be further diversified into different emotions that particular interjections are indicative of:
damn! damnation! the devil! doggone! fuck! ha! hang it!
hell! hunh! rats! shit! what! zounds!
bother !damn! damnation! deuce! drat! drot! mercy! merde!
oof! ouf(f)! ouch! rot! son of a bitch! spells! tut! tut-tut! zut!
hear! hear! hubba-hubba! hurrah! keno! olй! so!
bah! boo! booh! faugh! hum! humph! hunh! paff! paf! pah!
pfui! pho! phoh! phoo! phooey! pish! poof! pouf! pouff!
pooh! prut! prute! pshaw! puff! poff! quotha! rot! sho! shoo!
shuh! shah! soh! tcha! tchah! tchu! tchuh! tuh! tush! tusch!
ah! ach! coo! coo-er! goody! goodygoody! whacko! wacko!
aargh! bah! faugh! fuck! gad! humph! pah! phew! phooey!
pish! pshaw! pugh! rot! shit! shoot! ugh! yech! yuck!
chut! gah! pish! pooh! pshaw! psht! pshut! tcha! tchah!
tchu! tchuh! tut! tut-tut! why! zut!
cor! corks! doggone! hell! hoot! lord! lor'! lor! lors!lordy!
lord me! merde! sapperment! shit! upon my word!
heyday! hurrah! ole! whee! whoop! whoopee! yippee!
alas! dear! dear me! ewhow! lackaday! lackadaisy! las! och!
oche! wellaway! welladay! welliday!
aha! boy! crazy! doggone! good! heigh! ho! wow! yum! yumyum!
alas! ay! eh! hech! heck! heh! lackaday! lackadaisy! las!
mavrone! och! oche! wellaway! welladay! welliday! wirra!
ah! alack! blimey! boy! caramba! coo! cor! dear! dear me!
deuce! the devil! doggone! gad! gee! gee-whiz! golly! good!
goodness! gracious! gosh! ha! heck! heigh! heigh-ho! hey!
heyday! ho! hollo! hoo-ha! huh! humph! indeed! jiminy!
lord! man! mercy! my! nu! od! oh! oho! oh, no! phew! say!
shit! so! son of a bitch! upon my soul! well! what! whoof!
whoosh! why! upon my word! wow! yow! zounds!
blimey! crazy! gee! goodness! gosh! ha! heyday! oh! what!
It is obvious that interjections alongside performing an emotive function, can also serve as a discourse marker. For C. Velarde the “discourse particles function is to mark relationships that exceed the limits of sentence syntax” (Velarde, 1995).
Interjections functioning as discourse markers can be divided into two groups: interjections performing the textual function and those performing the interactional function.
Interjections in the textual function are used for marking or creating cohesion relations. The most commonly used are right, so, yes, year.
“Right. Are you through with that? Shall we go further? ”
These are fairly neutral with respect to attitude and emotion. They serve as links between utterances.
As for interactional, these are such interjections as yeah, mhm, right, fine, okay, well, so, see; that serve as transition points, conversational interaction cues, back channel responses.
“So, you'd rather I was insincere? You'd rather I lied?
However we can also say that an interjection serving as a discourse marker can also perform an emotive function.
e.g.: Ah, I didn't know you are here!
The interjection “Ah” performing the discursive function of introducing a speech act also performs an emotional function expressing surprise.
4. Borrowing in the Class of Interjections
One of the most productive sources of innovation in any given language is borrowing. For centuries for needs of various natures, speakers of a linguistic community have been borrowing linguistic structures from the languages used by other, genetically related or unrelated linguistic communities.
Interjections can be counted among the rather rare cases of borrowings that are not necessarily justified by the denominative needs arising with referential novelty. They are affective borrowings, and the adoption of such foreign words as interjections can probably be justified by the traditional claim of expressiveness (the “more striking phonologic value”) or by the prestige factor.
In other words the excessive usage of some interjections by the representatives of other linguistic communities leads to the substitution of the original interjection by a borrowed one. For example, the English interjection “Ok” can be found in a number of European languages, as well as some Slavonic languages, due to excessive usage by the younger generation and the use of the Internet as a global net.
We may say that borrowed interjections start as items used by specific groups, usually teenagers, which might spread successfully among all categories of speakers, but there is no guaranty of their survival over longer spans of time.
Most of the interjections borrowed are not included in the dictionaries, either due to their informal limited use, or due to their temporal character (things that are popular today are not likely to be popular tomorrow).
The Anglo-American are the most common borrowings nowadays, due to the expansion of the English language used as a language of international communication and the pervasiveness of the internet through which the process of borrowing is mostly carried out.
Usually, such borrowings are less specialized and less restricted to particular fields of activity or contexts of use. The most recent acquisitions to a number of languages (German, Spanish, Russian) in this category, dating probably to the last decades of the 20th century, seem to be English: wow, oops, ouch, cool,okay along with the slang or taboo based `swearing words' shit!, fuck!, (god)dam(n)(it)!, which have been adopted by these languages- usually - without undergoing any structural, semantic or categorization change.
Talking about the interjections borrowed from the English language by Spanish we may state that the international ok / okay as an agreement interjection imported from American English (though it has equivalents in the language: Vale, de acuerdo) is the most frequently used interjection that was borrowed.
Speaking about the interjections borrowed by the Spanish language from English we can also mention the interjection chin-chin (attested in English since 1795), as a toasting formula.
Here we can also enumerate the interjection «hurrа» (it came to the English language as a «hip, hip, hurrah!», used by the English sailors, originally from the Turkish servants that saluted the sultan with the help of this phrase), «stop» used in its original meaning as well as in its figurative meaning as the expression of a high degree of determination:
e.g. Stop! Aunque la muerte estuviera en la esquina con su escoba en alto, aunque la esperanza no fuera mбs que una Palmira gorda.
Other latest borrowings are the interjections wow!; oops; yeah!; cool, etc.
It is important to mention here that almost all the borrowings have equivalents in the Spanish language and are mostly used by the younger generation that seek to be a part of the international community whose mother tongue is English (Gabriela-Alina Sauciuc, 2006)
At the same time we may speak about the interjections borrowed by the English language from Spanish. Among this kind of borrowings, we may mention the following: (The English- Spanish Dictionary http://www.spanishdict.com )
Long live ... ! (used to express acclaim or support).
An expression of excitement. Hooray!
Caramba (from Spanish euphemism for carajo)
An exclamation of surprise or dismay
ay, chihuahua(from Mexican Spanish.)
1. Expression of surprise or shock.
e.g.: Ay, chihuahua! I didn't hear you coming.
2. Expression of dismay, annoyance, or resignation.
e.g.: Ay, chihuahua! The computer crashed and I'm going to have to start all over again
Since the social and historic background and geographic position differ from nation to nation or even from place to place in the same country, cultures may be more or less similar or different. Some cultures are emotional and frank, while others prefer to hide emotions, be reserved and demonstrate rational behavior; these differences are widely variable around the world. Cultures differ based on religious beliefs, educational systems, government, history and a wide range of other circumstances.
The aim of this chapter is to reveal the sociolinguistic peculiarities of the functioning of interjections among two different nations: Spaniards and Americans. We will analyze samples of spoken discourse as we admit that spoken discourse better reflects the peculiarities of the use of interjections, and provide illustrative examples.
· Study the types of interjections used in both Spanish and American English samples;
· Compare the frequency of the interjections of various types in both Spanish and American English samples;
· Investigate the functions performed by the interjections of various types with respect to the language differences;
· Research the cases in which different interjections express the same function, and study their sociolinguistic variation;
· Analyze different ways of translating interjections from English to Spanish and other strategies of rendering emotions originally expressed with the help of interjections.
In the text body of this chapter we made use of the following abbreviations:
1. Absolute and relative frequency of interjections in the Sp and AE samples
To expose various types of interjections and trace the differences in the use of interjections in the given two languages, we have examined the speech of the characters of the selected series. The use of interjections is property of the spoken register of the language. Therefore, interjections typically appear in the direct speech of the characters.
In order to find out the overall rate of recurrence of the interjections used in AE and Sp we have analyzed the same episodes of the chosen series first in AE and then in Sp and figured out the absolute frequency of the interjections used in the samples. It has turned out that in AE interjections occur 553 times and in Sp they occur only 368 times (See Table 1). In other words, the absolute frequency of interjections in AE is higher than in the Spanish sample, what gives us grounds for speaking about the process and result of the interpretation of interjections that will be discussed in Chapter III.
2. The use of primary and derived interjections in the AE and Sp samples
Now let us take a closer look at the types of interjections used in AE and Sp.
The analysis of the two language variants of the same material revealed the difference in the frequency of the use of primary and derived interjections in AE and Sp (see Table below):
From this table we can see that derived interjections are more frequently used in the Spanish language than in the English language where primary interjections prevail.
The table below provides the list of interjections found in both samples organized according to their type:
Oh, ah, ugh, eugh, wow, ouch, oups, hey, ow, hmm, mmm, uugh
ay, oy, ah, oh, wow, eh, ey, agh, yahoo, mmm, brr
My God, God, damn, come on, fuck, yeah, holy crap, dude, man, gosh, so, okay, well, no, oh crap, ... (what, where) da hell
vaya, venga, anda, oye, vamos, Dios mнo, madre mнa, por amor de Dios, madre de Dios, bueno, pues, tнo, vale, alto, mierda, okey, ni hablar
Analyzing primary interjections we set ourselves a goal to find out whether there are universal primary interjections that can be found in the majority of languages and whether they have the same functions in all these languages.
First we decided to take up the interjection “Oh” that seems one of the most frequently used in the English language and that can be found in different languages
The English dictionary of interjection (http://www.vidarholen.net/contents/interjections/ ) provides us with the following description of the functions of “oh”:
2. Expression of wonder, amazement, or awe.
3. Expression of understanding, recognition, or realization.
4. A word to precede an offhand or annoyed remark.
5. A word to precede an added or comment or afterthought.
6. An invocation or address (similar to the vocative in languages with noun declension).
7. Exclamation for drama or emphasis (often poetic).
9. Space filler or extra syllable, especially in (popular) music.
10. (interrogative) Expression of mild
The Comparative Analysis of the Functioning of Interjections in the English and Spanish Languages дипломная работа. Иностранные языки и языкознание.
Реферат: Социологические взгляды П.А. Сорокина о браке, семье, любви
Курсовая работа: Клас "Двостулкові молюски"
Реферат по теме Практикум по предмету Математические методы и модели
Реферат: Схема технологического процесса
Ннгасу Пример Отчета По Практике
Контрольная работа по теме Возмещение убытков при аварии на водном транспорте. Лицензирование лоцманской проводки судов
Курсовая работа по теме Мотивация и конфликтоустойчивость
Административная Контрольная Работа По Дисциплине Математика
Курсовая работа: Экономико-математические модели в управлении транспортом. Скачать бесплатно и без регистрации
Реферат: Наше общее будущее: две системы взглядов. Скачать бесплатно и без регистрации
Курсовая работа по теме Проектирование трехмерной сцены в нестандартном графическом режиме
Хозрасчетная Деятельность Учреждений Образования Реферат
Реферат: Comparing Setting And Mood In Frankenstein And
Как Писать Эссе По Русскому Языку План
Денежно-кредитная политика
Изложение: Історія України до ХVI ст
Курсовая работа по теме Совершенствование системы управления рисками отдела кадров на примере ООО 'Снежная компания СК'
Курсовая работа: Организация хозяйственных связей торговой организации с поставщиками товаров
Реферат На Тему Методы Работы Над Сказкой
Дипломная работа по теме Исследование связанных резонаторов в виде отрезка многопроводной линии передачи
Путеводитель по Краснодарскому краю: от идеи и до воплощения - Журналистика, издательское дело и СМИ дипломная работа
Забезпечення безпеки учасників кримінального судочинства - Государство и право реферат
Гражданские правоотношения - Государство и право курсовая работа