Cover Page

Cite item


The article addresses the differential-psychological aspect of translating abilities as a component of language abilities. The peculiarity of translation is described including both linguistic and paralinguistic aspects of translating a content and a sense from one language into another accompanied by linguistic and cognitive actions. A variety of individual and psychological peculiarities of translation based on the translation dominant were revealed. It was demonstrated that these peculiarities are relevant to communicative and linguistic types of language abilities discovered byM.K. Kabardov. Valid assessment methods such as M.N. Borisova’s test for investigation “artistic” and “thinking” types of Higher Nervous Activity (HNA), D. Wechsler’ test of verbal and nonverbal intelligence, and a test developed by the authors of the article for individual specificity of interpreter’s activity as communicative and linguistic types of translating abilities assessment were used. The results suggest that all the typological differences are based on special human types of HNA. Subjects displaying the “thinking” type use linguistic methods when translating, whereas subjects displaying the “artistic” type try to use their own subjective life experience and extralinguistic methods when translating foreign language constructions. Extreme subjects of both types try to use the most developed components of their special abilities in order to compensate the components of the other type which are not well developed to accomplish some language tasks. In this case subjects of both types can fulfill these tasks rather successfully.

About the authors

Natalia Ya Bolshunova

Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University

Author for correspondence.

Doctor of psychology, Professor, Professor of the Chair of General Psychology and the History of Psychology of Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University

Viluiskaya str., 28, Novosibirsk, Russia, 630126

Aleksey V Dyachkov

Novosibirsk State University of Architecture, Design and Arts


head of the Foreign Languages Chair of Novosibirsk State University of Architecture, Design and Arts

Krasnyi prospect, 38, Novosibirsk, Russia, 630099


  1. Alekseeva, L.M. (2010). Methods of teaching translation of the special text. Perm University Herald. Russian and Foreign Philology, 2(8), 77-84. (In Russ.).
  2. Bolshunova, N.Ya. (1980). Sootnoshenie signal'nykh sistem i individual'nykh osobennostei regulyatsii poznavatel'nykh i sensomotornykh deistvii. Voprosy Psychologii, (5), 121-126. (In Russ.).
  3. Borisova, M.N. (1956). Metodika opredeleniya sootnosheniya pervoi i vtoroi signal'nykh system. In Tipologicheskie osobennosti vysshei nervnoi deyatel'nosti cheloveka (pp. 307-332). Moscow: APN RSFSR. (In Russ).
  4. Chepel', T. L. (1988). Individual'no-tipicheskie sposoby i predposylki ovladeniya shkol'nikami orfografiei rodnogo (russkogo) yazyka. Ph.D. in Psychology Thesis. (In Russ).
  5. Cools, E., Armstrong, S. J., & Verbrigghe J. (2014). Methodological practices in cognitive style research: Insights and Recommendations from the Field of Business and Psychology. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(4), 627-641. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2013.788245.
  6. Dyomina, Ye. V. (2008). The Psychological variation of human language abilities. Editorial International Journal of Science Mir nauki, kultury, obrazovania, (5), 169-172. (In Russ.).
  7. Dyachkov, A.V., Dyachkova, N.V. (2014). Individual typological specificity of language constructs' translation under the different correlation of the first and the second signaling systems of a person. Theory and practice of social development, (2), 133-136. (In Russ.).
  8. Golubeva, E.A. (2005). Sposobnosti, lichnost', individual'nost'. Dubna: Feniks+, 2005. 512 p. (In Russ).
  9. Kabardov, M. K., Artsyshevskaya, E. V. (1996). The types of linguistic and communicative abilities and competence. Voprosy psichologii, (1), 34-49. (In Russ.).
  10. Kabardov, M.K. (2013). Yazykovye sposobnosti: psikhologiya, psikhofiziologiya, pedagogika. Moscow: Smysl. 400 p. (In Russ.).
  11. Kolga, V. A. (1991). Issledovanie kognitivnykh stilei v SSSR. In Integral'noe issledovanie individual'nosti: stil' deyatel'nosti i obshcheniya (pp. 17-36). Perm: Perm. gos. ped. in-t. (In Russ.).
  12. Leont'ev, A.A. (2007). Yazyk, rech', rechevaya deyatel'nost'. Moscow: Kom.Kniga. 216 p. (In Russ.).
  13. Novikova, I. A., Novikov, A. L., Rybakov, M. A. (2015). Psychological aspect of modern of polycultural models. In Mnogomernye miry yazyka: International scientific conference proceedings (pp. 339-353). Moscow: PFUR Publ. (In Russ.).
  14. Novikova, I.A., Novikov, A.L., Rybakov, M.A. (2015). Psychological and linguistic features of the Russian language acquisition by international students. Bulletin of Peoples' Friendship University of Russia. Series: Psychology and Pedagogics, (1), 61-66.
  15. Pavlov, I. P. (1951– 1952). Complete set of works. Moscow: AS USSR, 3(2). 439 p. (In Russ.).
  16. Popelysheva, E. V., Puzakov, A. V. (2010). Sushchnost' ponyatiya “dominanta perevoda”. Germes: Miscellanea, (2), 60 - 63. (In Russ.).
  17. Retsker, Ya.I. (2016). Teoriya perevoda i perevodcheskaya praktika. Ocherki lingvisticheskoi teorii perevoda. Moscow: Auditoriya. 244 p. (In Russ.).
  18. Rohani, G., Ketabi, S., Tavakoli, M. (2012). The Effect of Context on the EFL Learners' Idiom Processing Strategies. English Language Teaching, 5(9), 104-114. doi: 10.5539/elt.v5n9p104.
  19. Samms, C., Friedel, C. (2012). Relationship between dissimilar cognitive styles and use of learning strategies in undergraduate students. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 16(3), 113-130.
  20. Shveitser, A.D. (1988). Teoriya perevoda: Status, problemy, aspekty. Moscow: Nauka. 215 p. (In Russ.).
  21. Teplov, B.M. (1961). Problemy individual'nykh razlichii. Moscow: Аcademy of Pedagogical Science RSFSR Publ. (In Russ.).
  22. Uhrig, K. (2015). Learning styles and strategies for language use in the context of academic reading tasks. System, (50), 21-31. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2015.02.002.
  23. Yakobovits, L.A. (1976). Izuchenie inostrannogo yazyka: Opyt psikholingvisticheskogo analiza. Metodika prepodavaniya inostrannykh yazykov za rubezhom (vol.2, pp. 109-123). Moscow: Progress. (In Russ.).
  24. Zafar, S., Meenakshi, K. (2012). Individual learner differences and second language acquisition. Journal of Language Teaching and Research. 3(4) 639-646. doi: 10.4304/jltr.3.4.639-646.
  25. Zlobin, A. N., Utochkina A. K. (2010). Vliyanie lingvokul'turnogo dissonansa na kachestvo perevoda. Germes: Miscellanea, (2), 32-35. (In Russ.).

Copyright (c) 2017 Bolshunova N.Y., Dyachkov A.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies