This article studies the historical development of CONTRASTIVE Analyses (CA). The historical studies of languages have a long story and are to seen always when languages contact each other. But CA begins refrain from old suggestions first in the 18. century with the works of Sir William jones, who has compared Sanskrit with European languages and has interested the linguists for this subject. This part of linguistics is developed then in four branches with different goals. The historical-comparing-linguistics studies the familiar relationships between languages to find a first old language. The language-typology sorts out languages, how these show grammar relationships. The areal-linguistics studies the neighborhood languages in the same geographic area without genetic relationships to find out their similarities. The CONTRASTIVE Analyses occupies his self with foreign language learning and tries to propose how  L1 can help the learning of L2.

The translator is the first person for linguistic signs, cultural notions and sociolinguistic aspects, play an important role in the transmission of images and the poetic conceptions. The method of the translator is to approach as possible as to the two visions of world, it means two languages whit all their around. But if we certify that, like supporters of the idea of impossibility of translation, especially the idea of who that think the translation is a treason, the translation is only an application or a change of form and the linguistic signs, in this case, the work of the translator will be to invent, to make and to find the equivalents in his/her language source. But if we follow the idea of G. Mounin and E. Nida about the existence of universal terms in the languages and the possibility of translation, at least by an indirect translation, the work of the translator will be to interpret the target text and not the signs obviously. Whatever is his/her method, the translator will follow a CONTRASTIVE approach in his/her processes. This idea will be developed in this article and it will be illustrated by the Persian and French examples.   French: Approche CONTRASTIVE du traducteur: traduisibilite et intraduisibilite Le traducteur, etant le premier filtre des signes linguistiques, des notions culturelles et des aspects sociolinguistiques, joue un role crucial dans la transmission des images et des conceptions poetiques. Sa methode est de rapprocher autant que possible deux visions du monde, c’est-a-dire deux langues, l’une de l’autre, avec tout ce qui est considere comme ses entours. Mais si, avec les tenants des idees de l' impossibilite de la traduction, surtout avec celles de ceux qui considerent la traduction comme une trahison, nous constatons que la traduction n’ est qu’ une application ou du changement de forme et des signes linguistiques, le travail du traducteur serait d’ inventer, de fabriquer et de trouver des equivalents dans sa langue de source, mais si nous suivons les idees de G. Mounin et E. Nida concernant l' existence des universaux dans les langues et la possibilite de la traduction, ne serait ce que par le biais d' une application oblique, la tache du traducteur serait d' interpreter le texte cible et pas les signes evidemment. Quelle que soit sa methode, le traducteur suivra une approche dite CONTRASTIVE dans sa demarche. Cette idee sera developpee dans cet article tout en etant illustre par des exemples probants des textes persans et francais.Keywords: Traduction, Traducteur, Traduisibilite, Universaux, Approche CONTRASTIVE

The CONTRASTIVE analysis of languages is one the most important for recognizing the coherent templates to train vocabularies, grammar, semantics and pragmatics in different levels. In this regard, the present study investigates the CONTRASTIVE analysis of Persian and Arabic based on sentence. The authors try to study syntax (sentence) of Persian and Arabic from the views of semantics by descriptive-analytical and CONTRASTIVE approach. For realizing to syntactical CONTRASTIVE, a criterion common to both Persian and Arabic was presented studying syntactical issues in three areas including phrases, clauses and sentences. The mentioned criterion is based on semantic. In this way, the changes that were made for transferring the meaning between the two languages were explained to help translators and language learners.

Please click on the full text.

The inevitable changes that all aspects of a language undergo require lexicographers, especially those who compile bilingual dictionaries, to stay abreast of the latest changes. Each dictionary, indirectly, reveals the compiler's style, his knowledge of the source and target languages, and his knowledge of lexicography. This paper endeavors to undertake a CONTRASTIVE study of four English-Persian dictionaries: Aryanpour (1377), Baleni (1369), Ja'fari (1383) and Haghshenas (1381). The CONTRASTIVE study focuses on three areas 1. Semantic categorization, accuracy in choosing equivalents, and semantic domain 2. Grammatical usage and abbreviations, and 3. Phonetic transcription. At the end of each chapter a brief assessment of the above mentioned dictionaries will be provided. The wide-range uses of these dictionaries by students, language learners, researchers and, most especially, translators make such studies indispensable. However, this paper is not to find faults in the dictionaries, since the painstaking task of dictionary writing is clear to the users.

The purpose of this article is to study reciprocal verbal constructions in Persian and Spanish L2, to particularize the similitude and differences that exist between these languages. We should be able to analyze how both languages count with verbs that express reciprocities relation in natural and intrinsic ways and how by using the performs we can express a mutual relation by using a verb that doesn't express reciprocity in intrinsic ways for natural way. These two classes of words are called reciprocate and pseudo- reciprocate. As a result we have established another deviation of each one of these types as follows: marked reciprocate, no marks reciprocate, marked pseudo- reciprocate and no marked reciprocate. Equally we would study most conflictive cases of ambiguity that can present these structures.