In the plane of one language:

1) The native nationally biased lexicon (mostly native words of this language): «ale» (ель) etc.

2) The borrowed nationally biased lexicon (mostly loan words, to put this in another way, words of foreign origin, that are used in the vocabulary of a language or loan translations which are morpheme or word for word translations of the names of objects foreign to this nation as well the transcribed nationally biased lexicon of the other language: «brynza» (румун.) (бринза), «business» (амер.) (бізнес), «satellite» (рос.) (супутник) etc.

In the plane of two languages:

1) The external nationally biased lexicon (equally foreign to both languages): «fiord» (фіорд) (the external nationally biased word for Ukrainian, Bulgarian or any other language except the Norwegian language).

2) The internal nationally biased lexicon (the words which belong to one language of a pair, consequently, foreign for the other language of it: «fiord» (фіорд) (this word «fiord» is the eternal nationally biased word for Norwegian language in the pair of Ukrainian and Norwegian languages).

There are two essential difficulties when translating the nationally biased lexicon:

1) Absence of the correspondences (equivalents, analogues) in the target language because of absence of an object, which this nationally biased word defines, in the native speakers’ language.

2) Necessity not only to pass the subject meaning (semantics) of the nationally biased word, but its connotation and national and historical colouring.

This process of translation is complicated by necessity to take into account a number of circumstances that prevent to give one answer for all the problems of translation. It is absolutely clear that there are no any recipes of faithful and successful translation. A translator, taking into account theoretical explanations and being guided by the own knowledge of the language, own experience and insight, and above all the things by «contextual circumstances», chooses the way that is the most appropriate and sometimes the only possible in each separate case.

In practice of translation there are such devices of the nationally biased lexicon translation:

1) Transcription and transliteration.

2) Replacements.

3) Contextual translation.

1) Transcription of the nationally biased lexicon foresees mechanical transference of the nationally biased word from the target language in the source one by the graphic devices of the latter with the maximal approaching to the original form. For example: «Whig» (віг, член партії вігів), «Utah» (Юта – Штат США) etc.

The desire and necessity of using transcription when passing the nationally biased lexicon is conditioned by the circumstance that a translator can get possibility to overcome the difficulties of translation, but if the choice between transcription is done incorrectly, it can very complicate understanding of a text translated by the reader.

Transliteration of the nationally biased lexicon foresees passing letters, which make the English word, by the letters of the source language. For example: «Waterloo» (Ватерлоо), «Murray» (р. Муррей) etc.

2) Replacement as a device of passing the nationally biased lexicon to the source language is used when transcription or transliteration is impossible or undesirable in some this or those cases.

After transcription and transliteration creating a neologism is a most suitable way of saving the meaning and colouring of the nationally biased word translated. It is often possible to obtain the good effect of the translation with creation of a new word or word-combination. For example: «carpet-bagger» (саквояжник – сіверянин, який добився впливу та багатства на Півдні), «seven-league boots» (чоботи-скороходи) etc.

Approximate translation of the nationally biased lexicon is used more frequently than any other method. Using this method it is often possible to pass the subject meaning of the nationally biased lexicon, though not exactly enough, but the colouring is often lost as a replacement of the expected connotative equivalent for neutral one in style in other word with zero connotation takes place.

There are several cases of replacement in translation:

a) A principle of replacement by unit of correspondent gender and kind allows passing meaning of the nationally biased lexicon by the unit with more widespread meaning (rarely, narrower meaning) and permits replacing the superordinate concept by the gender term. As a matter of fact, replacing a kind by gender, more partial concept by more general one, a translator applies method of generalization that is known in the theory of translation. For example: «cottage» (будинок) etc.

This method of translation is possible if allowed by context.

b) A functional analogue is the element of final utterance that causes the east reaction at the Ukrainian reader. This way of translation of the nationally biased lexicon allows, for example, the name of one game unknown to the reader of translation to replace by the other, familiar, one or to replace the name of one musical instrument by the other neutral name, not coloured nationally in the source language text etc. An analogue should represent indeed the functional replacement of the nationally biased lexicon that is translated. For example: «baseball» (лапта), «cricket» (лапта) etc.

A functional analogue is often comfortable for passing the nationally biased lexicon that names measures, in particular, when they are intended for creation of some qualitative ideas or conceptions at the reader. For example: «hundred poods» (сто пудів) means «very heavy» (дуже важкий), «couple of pounds» (пара фунтів) means «a little; not much; not many; a few» (небагато) etc.

с) Description, explanation, interpretation, as a method of approximate translation is used in those cases, when there is no the other way and notion that can not be passed by transcription is necessary to be explained. For example: «the boys were playing fly up» (хлопчики грали у м’яча) etc.

An approximate translation of the nationally biased lexicon is not faithful, as it doesn’t pass the meaning of the proper unit fully. In concern to the national and cultural colouring, a reader can guess of it, only if a translator managed to suggest it by the choice of devices of expression.

3) Contextual translation is usually contrasted to «dictionary translation», thus marking out the correspondences, which a word can have in a context unlike given in a dictionary. This mean of translation lies in replacement of dictionary correspondences when translating by contextual, logically related ones. At the same time the absence of some correspondences of a word translated is a distinctive feature and the meaning of a word is passed by the context transformed properly. For example: «How much are accommodations at health resorts?» (Скільки коштує путівка на курорт?) etc.

Thus, these are the basic devices of translation of the nationally biased lexicon. Every time they put a translator before an alternative of transcribing or translating. The choice depends on some preconditions: