References Andriescu, Alexandru. 1956. Valoarea stilistic a
expresiilor idiomatice, n ,,Studii i cercetri tiinifice, Filologie,
Iai, vol. VII, nr. 1: 63-75 Bally, Charles. 1951. Trait de
stylistique franaise, 3e d. Genve-Paris, Librairie Georg & Cie
S. A., Librairie C. Klincksieck Boroianu, Ioana. 1974. Conceptul de
unitate frazeologic; tipuri de uniti frazeologice (I), n ,,Limb i
Literatur, nr. 1.: 24-34 Boroianu, Ioana. 1974. Conceptul de
unitate frazeologic; tipuri de uniti frazeologice (II), n ,,Limb i
Literatur, nr. 2: 243-247 Ciobanu, Fulvia, Hasan, Finua. 1970.
Formarea cuvintelor n limba romn. Compunerea, vol. I. Bucureti:
Editura Academiei Colun, Gheorghe. 2000. Frazeologia limbii romne.
Chiinu: Editura Arc Coeriu, Eugen. 1994. Prelegeri i conferine
(1992-1993), Supliment la Anuarul de lingvistic i istorie literar
al Institutului de Filologie Romn Al. Philippide, Iai, XXXIII,
1992-1993, seria A., Lingvistic Coeriu, Eugen. 1994. Lingvistica
din perspectiv spaial i antropologic. Trei studii, cu o prefa de
Silviu Berejan i un punct de LiBRI. Linguistic and Literary Broad
Research and Innovation Volume 1, Issue 1, 2010 72 vedere editorial
de Stelian Dumistrcel. Chiinu: Editura tiina Coeriu, Eugen. 1996.
Lingvistica integral (interviu cu Eugeniu Coeriu realizat de
Nicolae Saramandu). Bucureti: Editura Fundaiei Culturale Romne
Coeriu, Eugen. 1997. Sincronie, diacronie, istorie. Problema
schimbrii lingvistice, versiune n limba romn de Nicolae Saramandu.
Bucureti: Editura Enciclopedic Coeriu, Eugeniu. 2000. Lecii de
lingvistic general. traducere din spaniol de Eugenia Bojoga, cuvnt
nainte de Mircea Borcil, Chiinu, Editura Arc Coeriu, Eugeniu. 2004.
Teoria limbajului i lingvistic general. Cinci studii, ediie n limba
romn de Nicolae Saramandu. Bucureti: Editura Enciclopedic Coteanu,
I. 1973. Stilistica funcional a limbii romne. Stil, stilistic,
limbaj. Bucureti: Editura Academiei Deroy, Louis. 1956. L'emprunt
linguistique. Paris: Les Belles Lettres Dimitrescu, Florica. 1958.
Locuiunile verbale n limba romn. Bucureti: Editura Academiei
Dumistrcel, Stelian. 1980. Lexic romnesc. Cuvinte, metafore,
expresii. Bucureti: Editura tiinific i Enciclopedic Dumistrcel,
Stelian. 2001. Pn-n pnzele albe. Expresii romneti. Iai: Editura
Institutul European Dumistrcel, Stelian. 2006 a . Limbajul
publicistic romnesc din perspectiva stilurilor funcionale. Iai:
Editura Institutul European Dumistrcel, Stelian. 2006 b . Discursul
repetat n textul jurnalistic. Tentaia instituirii comuniunii fatice
prin mass-media. Iai, Editura Universitii
Alexandru Ioan Cuza Florescu, Cristina. 2007. Probleme de
semantic a limbii romne. Iai: Editura Universitii Alexandru Ioan
Cuza GA = Gramatica limbii romne, vol. I, ed. a II-a, revzut i
adugit. Bucureti: Editura Academiei, 1966 Grciano, Gertrude. 1983.
Signification et dnotation en allemand. La smantique des
expressions idiomatiques. Paris: Librairie Klincksieck Guiraud,
Pierre. 1962. Les locutions franaises. Paris: P.U.F. Hristea,
Theodor. 1977. Contribuii la studiul etimologic al frazeologiei
romneti moderne, n Limba romn, anul XXVI, nr. 6. Bucureti: Editura
Academiei. p. 587-598 Hristea, Theodor. 1984. Frazeologia i
importana ei pentru studiul limbii, n ,,Limb i literatur, vol. I:
5. Hristea, Theodor (coord.). 1984. Sinteze de limba romn,
Bucureti: Editura Albatros Iordan, Iorgu. 1975. Stilistica limbii
romne, ediie definitiv, Bucureti: LiBRI. Linguistic and Literary
Broad Research and Innovation Volume 1, Issue 1, 2010 73 Editura
tiinific Manca, Mihaela. 1972. Stilul indirect liber n romna
literar, Bucureti: Editura Didactic i Pedagogic Munteanu, Cristinel
(ed.). 2007. Discursul repetat ntre alteritate i creativitate.
Volum omagial Stelian Dumistrcel, Iai: Institutul European Slave,
Elena. 1966. Structura sintagmatic a expresiilor figurate, n ,,Limb
i literatur, nr. 11: 398-407 Slave, Elena. 1967. Organizarea
sintagmatic i semantic a proverbelor n Probleme de lingvistic
general, vol. V: 173-190. Bucureti: Editura Academiei Tabarcea,
Cezar. 1982. Poetica proverbului. Bucureti: Editura Minerva Zafiu,
Rodica. 2001. Diversitate stilistic n romna actual, Bucureti.
Editura Universitii din Bucureti Zaharia, Casia. 2004. Expresiile
idiomatice n procesul comunicrii. Abordare contrastiv pe terenul
limbilor romn i german. Iai: Editura Universitii Alexandru Ioan
Cuza Zugun, Petru. 2000. Lexicologia limbii romne. Prelegeri. Iai:
Tehnopress.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Akhmanova O.S. Lexicology: Theory and Method. M. 1972. Amosova
N.N. English Contextology. L., 1968. Arnold I.V. The English Word .
M. 1986. Arnold I.V. English lexicology. - M., 1986. Barantsev C.T.
English Lexicology in Practice, Kiev, 1954. Burchfield R.W. The
English Language. Lnd. ,1985
7.
8. 9. 10.
11. 12.
13. 14. 15. 16. 17.
18. 19. 20. 21. 22.
Folia Anglistica 2000: autumn 2000 series: Theory and Practice
of Translation (articles by D. Shveitser, V. Zadornova, M.
Konurbayev, A. Lipgart). , , 2000. Ginzburg R.S. , Khidekel S.S.,
Knyazeva G.Y., Sankin A.A. A course in Modern English Lexicology.
M., - 1979. Jespersen, Otto. Growth and Structure of the English
Language. Oxford, 1982. Konurbayev Marklen, On Linguopoetic
Approach to the Translation of Connotative Meaning in Fiction //
Folia Anglistica. Theory and Practice of Translation. Moscow: Max
Press, 2000. Kunin A. V. English Idioms. 3d ed. M., 1967.
Lexicology of the English Language. oc . ( ). Coc: . . , ..., .-
1995. Rayevska N N. English Lexicology. - K., 1979. .. . . 1956. ..
. - ., 1963. .., .., .. . ., 2001. .. : (. ); [ 2-3 - - . ]. .,
1977. .. . . - ., 1999. .. . . : , 1975. .., .. . . 1971. .. . M.,
1977. .. , . 3, . - ., 1977.
23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38.
39.
40. 41.
.. . ., 1999. .., .., .., .. . - ., 1955. .., .. . - ., 1956. ..
. . . ., 2000; . - ., 1998. .. . , 1961. .. . ., 1989. .. . .: . ,
1984. .. . - ., 1948. .. . - ., 1977. .. . , 1966. .. . , 1980. ..
( ) .: , 1973. .. . ., 1986. .. . . 1972. , , . - , , 1974. .. . -
., 1974. III / .: .. , .. , .. . - ., , 1999. - 72 . .. . . - .,
2000. (The Style of the Author and the Style of the Translation) (
.., .. .). : , 1988.
42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48.
.. : [ - - . ]. ., 1977. .. . // . , 1964. .. . , , 1983. ..,
.., .., .. . ., 1969. .. (The Art of Translation) Academia, , 1936.
.. . ., 1971. .. . , , (The Theory of Translation. Status,
Problems, Aspects) , 1988.
Dictionaries 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60.
Collins V. H. A Book of English Idioms. London, 1960.]
Encyclopaedic Dictionary of English Usage, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1974. Hornby The Advanced Learners
Dictionary of Current English. Lnd. 1974. Longman Dictionary of
Contemporary English, Third Edition, Longman Dictionaries, 1995.
Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs. M. 1986. Websters New World
Dictionary of American English. N.Y. 1978. Wyld H. The Universal
English Dictionary. 1998. .. - . M. 1993. .. . , , 1969. .. - . .
1967. /. . .. - , , 1990. /. . .. - , 1974.
61.
/. . .. , 1999.
Translation is a process of rendering a text, written piece or a
speech by means of other languages. The difference of translation
from retelling or other kinds of rendering a given text is that
translation is a process of creating an original unity in contexts
and forms. The translation quality is defined by its completeness
and value. The completeness and value of translation means definite
rendering of the contextual sense of the original piece and a
high-grade functional-stylistic conformity. While translating, we
should remember that different lexical, grammatical, stylistic
elements of the original might be translated differently if
accepted by the norms of conformity to the whole original. As far
as idioms and phraseological units are concerned in translation,
the first difficulty that a translator comes across is being able
to recognize that he/she is dealing with an idiomatic expression.
This is not always so obvious. There are various types of idioms,
some more easily recognizable than others. Those which are easily
recognizable include expressions which violate truth conditions,
such as Its raining cats and dogs, Throw caution to the winds,
Storm in a tea cup, Food for thought. They also include expressions
which seem ill-formed because they do not follow the grammatical
rules of the language, for example Blow someone to kingdom come,
Trip the light fantastic, By and large, etc. Generally speaking,
the more difficult an expression is to understand and the less
sense it makes in a given context, the more likely a translator
will recognize it as an idiom, because they do not make sense if
interpreted literally. Provided a
translator has access to good reference works and monolingual
dictionaries of idioms, or, better still, is able to consult native
speakers of the language, opaque idioms which do not make sense for
one reason or another can actually be a blessing in disguise. The
very fact that he/she cannot make sense of an expression in a
particular context will alert the translator to the presence of an
idiom of some sort. There are two cases in which an idiom can be
easily misinterpreted if one is not already familiar with it: 1.
Some idioms are misleading; they seem transparent because they
offer a reasonable literal interpretation and their idiomatic
meanings are not necessarily signaled in the surrounding text. A
large number of idioms in English, and probably all languages, have
both a literal and an idiomatic meaning, for example Take someone
for a ride (deceive or cheat someone in some way). Such idioms lend
themselves easily to manipulation by speakers and writers who will
sometimes play on both their literal and idiomatic meanings. In
this case, a translator who is not familiar with the idiom in
question may easily accept the literal interpretation and miss the
play on idiom. 2. An idiom in the source language may have a very
close counterpart in the target language which looks similar on the
surface but has a totally or partially different meaning. Apart
from being alert to the way speakers and writers manipulate certain
features of idioms and to the possible confusion which could arise
from similarities in form between source and target expressions, a
translator must also consider the collocation environment which
surrounds any expression the meaning of which is not readily
accessible. Idiomatic and fixed expressions have individual
collocational patterns. They form collocations with other items in
the text as single units and enter into lexical sets which are
different from those of their individual words. Once an idiom or
fixed expression has been recognized and interpreted correctly, the
next step is to decide how to translate it into the target
language. The difficulties involved in translating an idiom are
totally different from those involved in interpreting it. Here, the
question is not whether a given idiom is transparent, opaque, or
misleading. An opaque expression may be easier to translate than a
transparent one. The main difficulties involved in translating
idioms and fixed expressions may be summarized as follows: An idiom
or fixed expression may have no equivalent in the target language.
The way a language chooses to express, or not express, various
meanings cannot be predicted and only occasionally matches the way
another language chooses to express the same meanings. One language
may express a given meaning by means of a single word, another may
express it by means of a transparent fixed expression, and a third
may express it by means of an idiom, and so on. It is therefore
unrealistic to expect to find equivalent idioms and expressions in
the target language as a matter of course.
Like single words, idioms and fixed expressions may be
culture-specific. Formulae such as Merry Christmas andSay when
which relate to specific social or religious occasions provide good
examples. Idioms and fixed expressions which contain
culture-specific items are not necessarily untranslatable. It is
not the specific items and expressions but rather the meaning it
conveys and its association with culture-specific contexts that can
make it untranslatable or difficult to translate. An idiom or fixed
expression may have a similar counterpart in the target language,
but its context of use may be different; the two expressions may
have different connotations, for instance, or they may not be
pragmatically transferable. An idiom may be used in the source text
in both its literal and idiomatic senses at the same time. Unless
the target language idiom corresponds to the source language idiom
both in form and in meaning, the play on idiom cannot be
successfully reproduced in the target text. Using idioms in English
is very much a matter of style. Languages such as Arabic and
Chinese which make a sharp distinction between written and spoken
discourse and where the written mode is associated with a high
level of formality, on the whole, avoid using idioms in written
texts. We may observe the effect of using idioms in general and
using specific types of idiom in the source and target languages
and quiet rightly conclude that translation is an exacting art.
Idiom more than any other feature of language demands that the
translator be not only accurate but highly sensitive to the
rhetorical nuances of the language. References 1. Basnett Mc.Guire
Translation features. New-York Publishing House, 1980 2. Newmark P.
Approaches to translation. Oxford University Press, 1981
Table of Contents: I. Introduction. II. Translation of Word.
2.1. Lexical Correspondences. 2.2. Translation of the Words that
dont have Direct Lexical Correspondences in the Russian language.
III. Translation of Connected Word-Combinations (Phraseological
Units). 3.1. Characteristics of English Figurative Phraseology.
3.2. Methods of Figurative Phraseology Translation. 3.2.1. Using of
Phraseological Equivalent. 3.2.2. Using of Phraseological Variant
(Analogue). 3.2.3. Replication of Phraseological Units. 3.2.4.
Descriptive Translation. 3.2.5. Translation of Specific National
Phraseological Units. IV. Lexical Transformations and Methods of
Creation of Contextual Substitutes. 4.1. Kinds of Lexical
Transformations. 4.1.1. Additions. Semantic additions are
inadmissible in translation. 4.1.2. Omissions.
4.1.3. Substitutes. 4.2. Methods of Creating of Contextual
Substitutes. 4.2.1. Method of Concretization. 4.2.2. Method of
Generalization. 4.2.3. Method of antonymic translation. 4.2.4.
Method of Compensation. 4.2.5. Method semantic development. 4.2.6.
Method of complete interpretation. V. Conclusion. List of used
literature: Lexical Problems of Literary Translation. I.
Introduction. In process of translation grammatical and lexical
phenomena are taken in as inseparably connected. Only consisting of
a sentence functions of a word are discovered and their particular
meaning is determined. A word keeps its semantic identity standing
in different contexts. The context determines a proper meaning of a
used word in every concrete case but all possible meanings of words
are present constantly in a translators mind. In process of
translation a translator has to confront with close to meaning
English and Russian words to decide if he can use one or another
word in translation. In order to confront correctly English and
Russian lexical units in translation of a concrete text a
translator must know basic types of similar comparisons and which
factors should be considered to choose a final variant of
translation. Most of words both in the Russian and English
languages are polysemantic. Different meanings of a word are
connected between each other and as a rule combined around common
basic datum value. Semantics of a word reveals itself in the
context, depends on lexical surroundings of the word. Therefore,
for discovering exact meaning a word should be considered not
isolated but in connection with other words and sometimes more
large context is needed. A notion about translation as a simple
substitution of words of one language with wordsequivalents from
another one is mistaken as most of words are polysemantic and the
whole system of the polysemantic word cant coincide with the system
of a word of another language. Cases of equivalent correspondences
of polysemantic words havent been registered. Only terms and the
words that by their nature are close to them can have equivalents.
These kinds of words in language are no more then 30%. Since terms
belong to a special vocabulary a proportion of the
words-equivalents in news materials and fictions reduces still
more. It should be taken into account that sometimes conditions of
the context force to refuse even equivalent correspondence. A task
for a translator consists in finding of variant correspondences and
creating of contextual substitutes in those cases when variant
correspondences can not be used by the terms of the context. Thus,
a work of a translator on transformation of ST into TT implies both
a skill to use ready formulas and regularities that have been
determined by practice of translation and solving of creative
tasks. The aim of this term paper is to show lexical problems of
translation on the material of translation the novel Theatre by
Somerset Maugham. For this it is necessary to solve the following
tasks: 1. To show in what way translation of the words that have
(and dont have) lexical correspondences in the Russian language is
realized. 2. To analyse characteristics and methods of translation
of English figurative phraseology. 3. To give a notion of lexical
transformation and its kinds. 4. Describe methods of creation of
contextual substitutes. II. Translation of Word. 2.1. Lexical
Correspondences. First of all a translation of a word starts from
an attempt to discover in the Russian language the word that is
coincident in the meaning with given one. There is a good deal of
the Russian words which have a close meaning to English words. In
the theory of translation that sort of words is named lexical or
lexicographic correspondence.
Two basic types of semantic relations between words of the
English and Russian languages are discovered: 1. A meaning of an
English word corresponds completely to a meaning of a Russian one.
That kind of correspondence implies that in all (or almost all)
cases of using of an English word it will be conveyed in
translation with this Russian word. Such permanent equivalent
correspondences we will name equivalents. For examples, English
words London, cypress, twenty, Monday, March have equivalent
correspondences in the Russian language: , , , , . Terms (not all),
proper names, place-names, numerals, names of days of the week and
months, etc. are also represented by equivalents in another
language. There is not a lot of equivalent correspondences in
languages as most of words are polysemantic. As a rule,
polysemantic words dont have one equivalent; an equivalent can have
just single meaning of these words. For example, figure ; . 2.
Meanings of several Russian words correspond partially to the
meaning of an English word, i.e. this word has several lexical
correspondences, similar by meaning. This type of correspondences
is named variant correspondence. A skill of a translator to a great
extent consists in the ability to find a number of correspondences
to English word and choose the variant that is more appropriate by
the terms of the context. Lets take, for example, the follow
sentence from the novel: # He said they could not afford to let
sentiment stand in the way of business. (Chapter 7, page 61). A
dictionary gives 4 meanings of the word sentiment: 1) , , , ; 2) ,
; 3) ; 4) . First meaning of the four suits most of all. There are
variant correspondences in the first meaning among that a
translator has to choose most closely apt one. The translator of
the novel chose the word and translated this sentence in that way:
, . (. 52). Very often a sequence of lexical variant
correspondences given in a dictionary doesnt satisfy a translator.
He/she cant make use of them, for instance, for stylistic reasons.
In that case a translator prolongs a sequence of lexical
correspondences. A word in particular context can take on special
significance that is not constant but arises only in given context.
However, contextual meanings of words, though they are not
constant, are not casual. They are not in dictionaries but there is
always bond between a contextual meaning and a basic object-logical
one. So a translator can throw a bridge from the meaning given in a
dictionary to the originated contextual one. For example: # Weve
had a couple of duds. The next plays bound to be all right and then
we shall get back all weve lost and a packet into the bargain.
(Ch.9, p.77). A dictionary gives the following meanings of the word
dud: 1) , ; 2) ; 3) , ; 4) . No one of the indicated in the
dictionary meanings of this word suits for given context but it can
be guessed by the next sentence. It means failure as between dud
and failure the associative consecution can be built. So the word
dud has the contextual meaning, the translator gives it with a mark
here and translates: , . , . (.64). 2.2. Translation of the Words
that dont have Direct Lexical Correspondences in the Russian
language. Many English words dont have any direct correspondences
among Russian lexical units. They are neologisms, the words which
express specific notions and realities, little known names.
Practice of translation has some ways of conveying of these words:
1) transliteration; 2) descriptive translation;
3) replication. 1. When a translator has to convey an English
word which doesnt have any correspondence in the Russian language
he can try to recreate a form of the English word in translation in
order to bring a lexical unit into the Russian language that
corresponds to the translated English word. A foreign form in
translation can be conveyed by two ways: transliteration and
transcription. Transliteration is based on conveying of graphical
image of an English word, i.e. English letters. Transcription is
based on phonetic principle, i.e. on conveying of the sounds of an
English word by Russian letters. The last way conveys sounding of
an English word more exactly as it proceeds from not English
spelling but from its real sounding. # Mrs. De Vries had seen Julia
act in Middlepool. She gave parties so that the young actors might
get to know managers, and asked them to stay at her grand house
near Guildford, where they enjoyed a luxury they had never dreamed
of. (Ch. 8, p.68). . , , , , . (.57). 2. There is not such a word
that couldnt be translated into other language at least
descriptively, in other words, by extended combination of words of
given language. Usually, entire explanation of a meaning of a word
doesnt keep within the frameworks of TT, and a translator has to
reduce to a minimum a translation-explanation, give only a part of
the description or to footnote. Here are the examples from the
novel: # Evie was Julias dresser and maid. She was a cockney,
(Ch.10, p.83). . . (.69). The English word cockney is conveyed by
not only transliteration but descriptively. The translator makes a
foot-note: - ( ); . # You can get back with the milk, hed said.
(Ch.13, p.122). , . (.96). For English reader this sentence is
natural and clear because it is an English tradition to drive milk
in mornings but for TR it will be strange without any explanation.
3. For conveying of the lexica that doesnt have any correspondences
in TL replication is also used. It is creation of a new word, a
word-combination or a compound word for notation of a corresponding
object on bases of the elements which exist materially in a
language. This word is named calque (backbencher - , sky-scraper -
, influence ). Here are the examples from the text: # I might be
squint-eyed and hump-backed. (Ch.7, p.60). () . (.52). # She felt
like a high-born damsel, (Ch.6, p.58). , (.50). Replication of set
expressions is widely used (people of good will , on the brink of
war ): # When Julia and Michael had decided to try their luck in
London (Ch.8, p.68). - , (.57). # They drove the rest of the
journey in stormy silence. (Ch.8, p.71). . (.59). Replication is
applied sometimes on conveying some place-names (Cape of Good Hope
, St. Lawrence River . ): # They had a small flat at Buckingham
Gate (Ch.7, p.60). - - (.52). # When Michael went away to the war
Dolly pressed her to come and live in her house in Montagu Square,
(Ch.8, p.68). - , , , -, (.57). III. Translation of Connected
Word-Combinations (Phraseological Units). 3.1. Characteristics of
English Figurative Phraseology.
The predominance of importance of the whole over importance of
components is a character of phraseological units (further PU),
i.e. connected word-combinations. Therefore, a translator has to
translate a PU as a single whole. PUs are subdivided into
figurative and not figurative. The main task for a translator in
translating of not figurative PUs is to keep up the norms of
compatibility of words in the Russian language as quite often
influence of English compatibility leads to literalisms (to make a
sacrifice , to have a good sleep , to pay attention ). # took the
matter in his own hands. (Ch.8, p.76). . (.62). # He took no notice
of the flippant rejoinder. (Ch.2, p.23). . (.26). # Julia spent a
happy morning in bed reading the Sunday papers. (Ch.8, p.71). , .
(.59). Cardinal problems in the field of translation of set
expressions are connected with translating of figurative
phraseology which imparts vivacity, brilliance and pliancy to
language. The task for a translator is to convey into the Russian
language not only the meaning of a PU but its figurativeness and
expressiveness. # Julia was a damned good sort and clever, as
clever as a bagful of monkeys; you could talk to her about anything
in the world. (Ch.8, p.75). , , . (.62). As a rule, an English PU
has a lot of variant correspondences in the Russian language and
every time a translator has to make a choice. # She laid it on with
a trowel. (Ch.8, p.75). (Lay it on with a trowel , - , , ). .
(.62). 3.2. Methods of Figurative Phraseology Translation. Best way
of translating of a figurative PU is using of a correspondence.
These correspondences can be equivalent and variant. 3.2.1. Using
of Phraseological Equivalent. Phraseological equivalent is such a
figurative PU in TL which entirely corresponds to one in SL by
meaning and stylistic and which is based on the same image. To this
group belong international expressions. They are in most of Europe
languages and have common origin. Usually, they bear
biblical-mythological or literary character (sword of Damocles , to
cross the Rubicon , to shed crocodile tears ). # I believer youre
prouder of your family than of looking lake a Greek god. (Ch.3,
p.30). , , , . (.31). # Then, shark naked, she skipped on to the
bed, stood up on it for a moment, like Venus rising from the waves,
(Ch.11, p.105). , , , , , , (.84). # She was as strong as a horse
and never tired (Ch.11, p.92). , , , (.75). # Poor lamb, he must be
as poor as a church mouse. (Ch.11, p.101). , ! , , . (.82). There
are two kinds of equivalents: absolute and relative. Absolute
equivalents of set expressions coincide with an original in every
respect: grammatically, lexically and stylistically (to cast a
glance , the bitter truth , to play with fire , to read between
lines ). # The strange thing was that when she looked into her
heart (Ch.18, p.185). - : , (.142). # she realized that it would be
a bitter blow to his pride (Ch.8, p.75). - , ,(.62).
Relative equivalents of set expressions have grammatical or
lexical differences from an original though they entirely coincide
by meaning and stylistic (grass widow , to kill the goose that lays
the golden eggs , ). # Of course some of those Middlepool
manufacturers were rolling in money, (Ch.3, p.36). - , , (.35). #
that she was head over ears in love with him. (Ch.4, p.40). - .
(.38). # He hankered for complimentsThey were food and drink to
him. (Ch.9, p.82). , . (.67). 3.2.2. Using of Phraseological
Variant (Analogue). There is a few figurative PUs in the English
and Russian languages which coincide with both meaning and
figurativeness. More often a translator has to use a Russian PU
that has a similar meaning but based on another image (to work ones
fingers to the bone , , to hit the bird in the eyes , on foots
horse ). # he looked every inch a soldier. (Ch.7, p.63). - . (.54).
# You can twist her round your little finger. (Ch.8, p.69). . (.58)
# Gosh, Im going down like a barrel of oysters. (Ch.4, p.41) , !
(.38). # It was the only chink in his armour. (Ch.9, p.82). .
(.68). 3.2.3. Replication of Phraseological Units. To keep
figurativeness of an original in translation of a PU that has
neither equivalent nor analogue in the Russian language sometimes a
translator uses replication or literal transmission of the image
which is in English PU. It is possible if the received expression
is taken in by TR easily and naturally, in compliance with norms of
the Russian language (liars must have good memories , love me, love
my dog , ). # Men were creatures of habit; that gave women such a
hold on them. (Ch.16, p.165). , . (.127). # Plain living and high
thinking, Miss Phillips. (Ch.10, p.86). , . (.70). 3.2.4.
Descriptive Translation. If an English PU has neither equivalent
nor analogue in the Russian language and literal translation could
lead to obscure literalism a translator has to refuse to convey
figurativeness and use descriptive translation, i.e. to explain the
meaning of a PU by free state words (a skeleton in the cupboard
(closet) ; , ). # Julia could almost have wished that it had failed
like the others in order to take him down a peg or two. (Ch.9,
p.78). (To take sb. down a peg or two - -, ). , , , - . # For once
his cunning found its match. (Ch.9, p.78). (To find ones match ). -
- . (.64). 3.2.5. Translation of Specific National Phraseological
Units. Translating this kind of figurative units a translator
should be guided by three basic rules: 1. To use literal
translation only in the case if the English realities, which are a
part of the PU, are well known to TR. For example: to carry coals
to Newcastle , because everybody knows that Newcastle is a centre
of England coal industry; but to dine with Duke Humphrey , because
TR doesnt know who Duke Humphrey was. 2. To try to convey English
PUs with vivid national coloring by Russian ones without national
coloring (he will not set the Thames on fire ; to fight like
Kilkenny cats , ; Queen Anne is dead! !). 3. To use never Russian
PUs which have specific national realities as they are unlikely to
be applicable to English life. For example, to English PU to carry
coals to Newcastle suits Russian
one , but it would be better here to use literal translation; or
to the phrase what will Mrs. Drundy say? suits ? but is more
appropriately. IV. Lexical Transformations and Methods of Creation
of Contextual Substitutes. 4.1. Kinds of Lexical Transformations.
Work of a translator on a word and a word-combination doesnt add up
to finding of equivalent or variant correspondence only. It
involves also the work on lexical reforms or transformations. There
are three kinds of lexical transformations: 1) additions; 2)
omissions; 3) substitutes. 4.1.1. Additions. Semantic additions are
inadmissible in translation. A translator can do semantic
additions, i.e. explanations, only out of TT, in his/her notes that
are taken outside of a text by footnotes. However, a translator has
sometimes to add some words into the text so as not to break the
norms of the Russian language. # Over the chimney-piece was an old
copy of Lawrences portrait of Kemble as Hamlet. (Ch.1, p.14). .
(.18). ( (1769-1830) - a footnote is at the foot of the page). #
They opened with a failure and this was succeeded by another.
(Ch.9, p.77). , , , . (.63). # She bustled Julia upstairs. (Ch.10,
p.84). . (.69). 4.1.2. Omissions. Sometimes, a translator can do
some omissions if its necessary in order to avoid breaking of
linguistic or stylistic norms of the Russia language. However,
every omission must be justified. Its not allowed to abuse this
rule and omit everything that is difficult to translate. It is
typical of the English language using of paired synonyms. One of
equivalent synonyms is omitted in translation as well as
semantically surplus words. (The treaty was pronounced null and
void. .). # if he had been an actor who loved her so much and had
loved her so long (Ch.11, p.97). , , , (.78). # and then went into
the bathroom to wash her face and eyes. (Ch.11, p.96). - . (.78). #
She leant back in the chair and turned her head aside. (Ch.11,
p.95). . (.77). 4.1.3. Substitutes. Substitutes can be lexical and
contextual. Lexical substitute is replacement of single concrete
words or word-combinations of SL with that of TL which are not
their lexicographic correspondence, i.e. they have other lexical
meaning than the words of ST. Characteristics of the context can
force a translator refuse to use both variant and equivalent
correspondences in translation. In that case he/she looks for the
variant of translation that suits for the concrete case. That kind
of translation is named contextual substitute. # he held himself
with an arched back to keep his belly from sagging. (Ch.9, p.81). -
, . (.67). # Oh, well, its no good crying over spilt milk. (Ch.10,
p.83). .(C.69). Nature of a contextual substitute depends on
characteristics of individual context and a translator has every
time to look for special ways of translation. This task requires
creative solution, therefore, its not possible to have fundamental.
Nevertheless, there are same methods which are used for creating of
contextual substitutes: 1) method of concretization; 2) method of
generalization; 3) method of antonymic translation; 4) method of
compensation;
5) method of semantic development; 6) method of complete
interpretation. 4.2. Methods of Creating of Contextual Substitutes.
4.2.1. Method of Concretization. Concretization represents
substitution of a word of ST with more large meaning on the word of
TL with narrower one. There are a lot of words in the English
language with general wide meaning which should be concretized in
translation. For example: come , , , , .. leave , , , , , ..
provide , , , , , , , , , .. # two of her front teeth were missing
but, notwithstanding Julias offer, repeated for years, to provide
her with new ones she would not have them replaced. (Ch.10, p.84).
, , , . (.69). By the example of the word thing that is met quite
often in the novel it is seen how this word is concretized in
different contexts. # Extravagant little thing, arent you?...
(Ch.6, p.56). , . (C.49). # We know a thing or two about financing
plays now. (Ch.8, p.69). , . (C.58). # and she thought of him as a
nice old thing. (Ch.11, p.93). - , . (.75). # If he tried that sort
of thing shed play the outrage heroine on him, (Ch.11, p. 93). ,
(.76). # Then Julia did a disgraceful thing. (Ch.11, p.94). .
(.77). # When tempers were frayed his good humour, his real
kindliness, smoothed thing over. (Ch.9, p.79). , , . (.66). # But
he was not a man who let a thing drop when he had set his mind to
it. (Ch.8, p.69). , , . (.58). 4.2.2. Method of Generalization.
Generalization is substitution of a word with more narrow meaning
on the word with larger one. This method is opposite to the method
of concretization. # but he wanted to be his own master and now in
the last year of his articles he had broken away and taken this
tiny flat. (Ch.11, p.102). - , , . (.82). The word article as a
noun has the meanings , , , , , , , . The meaning suits more
because there is also a verb article . Combined these meanings the
translator extended the meaning of the word article and translated
it as though this word has its own translation in English: studies,
learning, and apprenticeship. 4.2.3. Method of antonymic
translation. The essence of this method is replacement of
affirmative construction with negative one and vice versa that is
accompanied by corresponding lexical substitute of SL unit with its
antonym in TL. # Oh, my love, dont you know there isnt anything in
the world I wouldnt do for you?... (Ch.8, p.72). , , , ! (.60). #
Julia wondered why servants stayed with them. (Ch.8, p.76). , .
(.62). # Oh, I know people always lie about their debts, she said
with a laugh. (Ch.14, p.129). , , , , . (.101). Metaphrase (or
literal translation) of these sentences would contradict to
stylistic norms of the Russian language and do them clumsy.
# He was a trifle excited but that is not unusual with him. , .
Here we have litotes an affirmative utterance in a negative form.
Litotes is widespread in the English language owing to a good deal
of negative prefixes. It can be translated literally not always as
in the Russian language the negative and the negative prefix -
coincide in sounding. The words with the prefix - go rarely
together with the negative particle because of such combination is
discordant. 4.2.4. Method of Compensation. This method is applied
in that case when some linguistic phenomenon cant be conveyed in
TL. Compensating for loss which arises in translation because of
some linguistic unit of ST cant be translated a translator conveys
the same information by the other means. Compensation is often used
where its necessary to convey merely linguistic characteristics of
ST (dialecticisms, individual features of speech, incorrect
linguistic forms, pun, etc.) that have not always correspondences
in TL. In translation of contaminative speech a translator can
substitute for one linguistic means by others (grammatical lexical,
phonetic grammatical and so on, in compliance with the Russian
language norms). # For the little I eat Ive got all the teeth I
want. Itd only fidget me to ave a lot of elephants tusks in me
mouth.(Ch.10, p.84) the words of Julias maid who was a cockney. , .
, . (.69). Method of compensation illustrates clearly one of the
basic positions of theory of translation not single elements should
be translated adequately but all text as a whole. In other words,
there are untranslatable particulars but there are not
untranslatable texts. 4.2.5. Method semantic development. Using in
translation of a word or a word-combination, whose meaning is
logical development of the meaning of a translating unit, is named
semantic development. It means deviation from direct lexical
correspondence of given word or wordcombination. Thus,
fundamentally semantic development doesnt differ from more simple
methods of lexical transformation, concretization and
generalization. Distinction is only in nature and degree of
complexity of the method. Its necessary to have in view that
semantic development always applies to not a single word but to a
word-combination or a semantic group. Most often the meanings of
such words and word-combinations in ST and TT are connected by
cause-effect relations. At that substitution of cause by its effect
(or vice versa) doesnt break exactness of translation and, quite
the contrary, is the best (at times the only) way of adequate
conveying of ST content. # Mrs. De Vries was a widow. She was a
short stout woman with a fine Jewish nose and fine Jewish eyes, a
great deal of energy, a manner at once effusive and timid, and a
somewhat virile air. She had a passion for the stage. (Ch.8, p.68).
. , , , , , , , . (.57). # On the other hand if he was shattered
and tongue-tied, shed be all tremulous herself, (Ch.11, p.93). , ,
, (.76). 4.2.6. Method of complete interpretation. This method is
used when there is not possible to proceed from lexical
correspondences or contextual meanings of single words of SL but
there is a need to understand semantic meaning of the whole and
re-express it into TL by other words. This is one of the most
difficult methods of transformational translation. This method is
wide used in translation of PUs which reflect specificity of the
English live spoken language (help yourself, please ( ); good
riddance! ! ! ( ), etc.). # He had tact and a pleasant manner, and
he knew how to pull strings adroitly; it was inevitable that he
should get on the staff of some general. (Ch.7, p.62). , , - .
(.53).
# Though they said he drove them like slaves, and they never had
a moment to themselves, flash and blood couldnt stand it, it gave
them a sort of horrible satisfaction to comply with his outrageous
demands. (Ch.2, p.19). , , , , - . (.21). But the same phrase flash
and blood couldnt stand it (Ch.11, p.95) was translated ? (.77) V.
Conclusion. Language is a basic means of expression of any fiction.
Nevertheless, the main task and difficulty of literary translation
is not reproduction of linguistic, especially
structurally-linguistic elements of a foreign speech but, taking
into account inequality of linguistic system, to recreate
artistically totality of ST images. For a translator of fiction
language is especially important just in literary respect,
regarding its stylistic, figurative and expressive means which are
provided by its particular literary function. A translator should
not oppose language to literature but use both in the interests of
literary translation.
Translation procedures, strategies and methodsby Mahmoud
Ordudari Abstract Translating culture-specific concepts (CSCs) in
general and allusions in particular seem to be one of the most
challenging tasks to be performed by a translator; in other words,
allusions are potential problems of the translation process due to
the fact that allusions have particular connotations and
implications in the source language (SL) and the foreign culture
(FC) but not necessarily in the TL and the domestic culture. There
are some procedures and strategies for rendering CSCs and allusions
respectively. The present paper aims at scrutinizing whether there
exists any point of similarity between these procedures and
strategies and to identify which of these procedures and strategies
seem to be more effective than the others. Keywords: Allusion,
culture-specific concept, proper name, SL, TL.
1. Introduction ranslation typically has been used to transfer
written or spoken SL texts to equivalent written or spoken TL
texts. In general, the purpose of translation is to reproduce
various kinds of textsincluding religious, literary, scientific,
and philosophical textsin another language and thus making them
available to wider readers. If language were just a classification
for a set of general or universal concepts, it would be easy to
translate from an SL to a TL; furthermore, under the
circumstances the process of learning an L2 would be much easier
than it actually is. In this regard, Culler (1976) believes that
languages are not nomenclatures and the concepts of one language
may differ radically from those of another, since each language
articulates or organizes the world differently, and languages do
not simply name categories; they articulate their own (p.212). The
conclusion likely to be drawn from what Culler (1976) writes is
that one of the troublesome problems of translation is the
disparity among languages. The bigger the gap between the SL and
the TL, the more difficult the transfer of message from the former
to the latter will be. The difference between an SL and a TL and
the variation in their cultures make the process of translating a
real challenge. Among the problematic factors involved in
translation such as form, meaning, style, proverbs, idioms, etc.,
the present paper is going to concentrate mainly on the procedures
of translating CSCs in general and on the strategies of rendering
allusions in particular. 2. Translation procedures, strategies and
methods The translating procedures, as depicted by Nida (1964) are
as follow: I. Technical procedures: A. analysis of the source and
target languages; B. a through study of the source language text
before making attempts translate it; C. Making judgments of the
semantic and syntactic approximations. (pp. 241-45) Organizational
procedures: constant reevaluation of the attempt made; contrasting
it with the existing available translations of the same text done
by other translators, and checking the text's communicative
effectiveness by asking the target language readers to evaluate its
accuracy and effectiveness and studying their reactions (pp.
246-47).
II.
Krings (1986:18) defines translation strategy as "translator's
potentially conscious plans for solving concrete translation
problems in the framework of a concrete translation task," and
Seguinot (1989) believes that there are at least three global
strategies employed by the translators: (i) translating without
interruption for as long as possible; (ii) correcting surface
errors immediately; (iii) leaving the monitoring for qualitative or
stylistic errors in the text to the revision stage. Moreover,
Loescher (1991:8) defines translation strategy as "a potentially
conscious procedure for solving a problem faced in translating a
text, or any segment of it." As it is stated in this definition,
the notion of consciousness is significant in distinguishing
strategies which are used by the learners or
translators. In this regard, Cohen (1998:4) asserts that "the
element of consciousness is what distinguishes strategies from
these processes that are not strategic." Furthermore, Bell
(1998:188) differentiates between global (those dealing with whole
texts) and local (those dealing with text segments) strategies and
confirms that this distinction results from various kinds of
translation problems. Venuti (1998:240) indicates that translation
strategies "involve the basic tasks of choosing the foreign text to
be translated and developing a method to translate it." He employs
the concepts of domesticating and foreignizing to refer to
translation strategies. Jaaskelainen (1999:71) considers strategy
as, "a series of competencies, a set of steps or processes that
favor the acquisition, storage, and/or utilization of information."
He maintains that strategies are "heuristic and flexible in nature,
and their adoption implies a decision influenced by amendments in
the translator's objectives." Taking into account the process and
product of translation, Jaaskelainen (2005) divides strategies into
two major categories: some strategies relate to what happens to
texts, while other strategies relate to what happens in the
process. Product-related strategies, as Jaaskelainen (2005:15)
writes, involves the basic tasks of choosing the SL text and
developing a method to translate it. However, she maintains that
process-related strategies "are a set of (loosely formulated) rules
or principles which a translator uses to reach the goals determined
by the translating situation" (p.16). Moreover, Jaaskelainen
(2005:16) divides this into two types, namely global strategies and
local strategies: "global strategies refer to general principles
and modes of action and local strategies refer to specific
activities in relation to the translator's problem-solving and
decision-making." Newmark (1988b) mentions the difference between
translation methods and translation procedures. He writes that,
"[w]hile translation methods relate to whole texts, translation
procedures are used for sentences and the smaller units of
language" (p.81). He goes on to refer to the following methods of
translation:
Word-for-word translation: in which the SL word order is
preserved and the words translated singly by their most common
meanings, out of context. Literal translation: in which the SL
grammatical constructions are converted to their nearest TL
equivalents, but the lexical words are again translated singly, out
of context. Faithful translation: it attempts to produce the
precise contextual meaning of the original within the constraints
of the TL grammatical structures. Semantic translation: which
differs from 'faithful translation' only in as far as it must take
more account of the aesthetic value of the SL text.
Adaptation: which is the freest form of translation, and is used
mainly for plays (comedies) and poetry; the themes, characters,
plots are usually preserved, the SL culture is converted to the TL
culture and the text is rewritten. Free translation: it produces
the TL text without the style, form, or content of the original.
Idiomatic translation: it reproduces the 'message' of the original
but tends to distort nuances of meaning by preferring
colloquialisms and idioms where these do not exist in the original.
Communicative translation: it attempts to render the exact
contextual meaning of the original in such a way that both content
and language are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the
readership (1988b: 45-47).
Newmark (1991:10-12) writes of a continuum existing between
"semantic" and "communicative" translation. Any translation can be
"more, or less semantic more, or less, communicativeeven a
particular section or sentence can be treated more communicatively
or less semantically." Both seek an "equivalent effect." Zhongying
(1994: 97), who prefers literal translation to free translation,
writes that, "[i]n China, it is agreed by many that one should
translate literally, if possible, or appeal to free translation."
In order to clarify the distinction between procedure and strategy,
the forthcoming section is allotted to discussing the procedures of
translating culture-specific terms, and strategies for rendering
allusions will be explained in detail. 2.1. Procedures of
translating culture-specific concepts (CSCs) Graedler (2000:3) puts
forth some procedures of translating CSCs: 1. 2. 3. 4. Making up a
new word. Explaining the meaning of the SL expression in lieu of
translating it. Preserving the SL term intact. Opting for a word in
the TL which seems similar to or has the same "relevance" as the SL
term.
Defining culture-bound terms (CBTs) as the terms which "refer to
concepts, institutions and personnel which are specific to the SL
culture" (p.2), Harvey (2000:2-6) puts forward the following four
major techniques for translating CBTs: 1. Functional Equivalence:
It means using a referent in the TL culture whose function is
similar to that of the source language (SL) referent. As Harvey
(2000:2) writes, authors are divided over the merits of this
technique: Weston (1991:23) describes it as "the ideal method of
translation," while Sarcevic (1985:131) asserts that it is
"misleading and should be avoided." 2. Formal Equivalence or
'linguistic equivalence': It means a 'word-for-word'
translation. 3. Transcription or 'borrowing' (i.e. reproducing
or, where necessary, transliterating the original term): It stands
at the far end of SL-oriented strategies. If the term is formally
transparent or is explained in the context, it may be used alone.
In other cases, particularly where no knowledge of the SL by the
reader is presumed, transcription is accompanied by an explanation
or a translator's note. 4. Descriptive or self-explanatory
translation: It uses generic terms (not CBTs) to convey the
meaning. It is appropriate in a wide variety of contexts where
formal equivalence is considered insufficiently clear. In a text
aimed at a specialized reader, it can be helpful to add the
original SL term to avoid ambiguity. The following are the
different translation procedures that Newmark (1988b) proposes:
Transference: it is the process of transferring an SL word to a
TL text. It includes transliteration and is the same as what Harvey
(2000:5) named "transcription." Naturalization: it adapts the SL
word first to the normal pronunciation, then to the normal
morphology of the TL. (Newmark, 1988b:82) Cultural equivalent: it
means replacing a cultural word in the SL with a TL one. however,
"they are not accurate" (Newmark, 1988b:83) Functional equivalent:
it requires the use of a culture-neutral word. (Newmark, 1988b:83)
Descriptive equivalent: in this procedure the meaning of the CBT is
explained in several words. (Newmark, 1988b:83) Componential
analysis: it means "comparing an SL word with a TL word which has a
similar meaning but is not an obvious one-to-one equivalent, by
demonstrating first their common and then their differing sense
components." (Newmark, 1988b:114) Synonymy: it is a "near TL
equivalent." Here economy trumps accuracy. (Newmark, 1988b:84)
Through-translation: it is the literal translation of common
collocations, names of organizations and components of compounds.
It can also be called: calque or loan translation. (Newmark,
1988b:84) Shifts or transpositions: it involves a change in the
grammar from SL to TL, for instance, (i) change from singular to
plural, (ii) the change required when a specific SL structure does
not exist in the TL, (iii) change of an SL verb to a TL word,
change of an SL noun group to a TL noun and so forth. (Newmark,
1988b:86) Modulation: it occurs when the translator reproduces the
message of the original text in the TL text in conformity with the
current norms of the TL, since the SL and the TL may appear
dissimilar in terms of perspective. (Newmark, 1988b:88) Recognized
translation: it occurs when the translator "normally uses the
official or the generally accepted translation of any institutional
term." (Newmark, 1988b:89)
Compensation: it occurs when loss of meaning in one part of a
sentence is compensated in another part. (Newmark, 1988b:90)
Paraphrase: in this procedure the meaning of the CBT is explained.
Here the explanation is much more detailed than that of descriptive
equivalent. (Newmark, 1988b:91) Couplets: it occurs when the
translator combines two different procedures. (Newmark, 1988b:91)
Notes: notes are additional information in a translation. (Newmark,
1988b:91)
Notes can appear in the form of 'footnotes.' Although some
stylists consider a translation sprinkled with footnotes terrible
with regard to appearance, nonetheless, their use can assist the TT
readers to make better judgments of the ST contents. Nida
(1964:237-39) advocates the use of footnotes to fulfill at least
the two following functions: (i) to provide supplementary
information, and (ii) to call attention to the original's
discrepancies. A really troublesome area in the field of
translation appears to be the occurrence of allusions, which seem
to be culture-specific portions of a SL. All kinds of allusions,
especially cultural and historical allusions, bestow a specific
density on the original language and need to be explicated in the
translation to bring forth the richness of the SL text for the TL
audience. Appearing abundantly in literary translations, allusions,
as Albakry (2004:3) points out, "are part of the prior cultural
knowledge taken for granted by the author writing for a
predominantly Moslem Arab [SL] audience. To give the closest
approximation of the source language, therefore, it was necessary
to opt for 'glossing' or using explanatory footnotes." However,
somewhere else he claims that, "footnotes ... can be rather
intrusive, and therefore, their uses were minimized as much as
possible" (Albakry, 2004:4). 2.2. Strategies of translating
allusions Proper names, which are defined by Richards (1985:68) as
"names of a particular person, place or thing" and are spelled
"with a capital letter," play an essential role in a literary work.
For instance let us consider personal PNs. They may refer to the
setting, social status and nationality of characters, and really
demand attention when rendered into a foreign language. There are
some models for rendering PNs in translations. One of these models
is presented by Hervey and Higgins (1986) who believe that there
exist two strategies for translating PNs. They point out: "either
the name can be taken over unchanged from the ST to the TT, or it
can be adopted to conform to the phonic/graphic conventions of the
TL" (p.29). Hervey and Higgins (1986) refer to the former as
exotism which "is tantamount to literal translation, and involves
no cultural transposition" (p.29), and the latter
as transliteration. However, they propose another procedure or
alternative, as they put it, namely cultural transplantation. Being
considered as "the extreme degree of cultural transposition,"
cultural transplantation is considered to be a procedure in which
"SL names are replaced by indigenous TL names that are not their
literal equivalents, but have similar cultural connotations"
(Hervey & Higgins, 1986:29). Regarding the translation of PNs,
Newmark (1988a:214) asserts that, "normally, people's first and
sure names are transferred, thus preserving nationality and
assuming that their names have no connotations in the text." The
procedure of transference cannot be asserted to be effective where
connotations and implied meanings are significant. Indeed, there
are some names in the Persian poet Sa'di's work Gulestan, which
bear connotations and require a specific strategy for being
translated. Newmark's (1988a:215) solution of the mentioned problem
is as follows: "first translate the word that underlies the SL
proper name into the TL, and then naturalize the translated word
back into a new SL proper name." However, there is a shortcoming in
the strategy in question. As it seems it is only useful for
personal PNs, since as Newmark (1988a:215), ignoring the right of
not educated readers to enjoy a translated text, states, it can be
utilized merely "when the character's name is not yet current
amongst an educated TL readership." Leppihalme (1997:79) proposes
another set of strategies for translating the proper name
allusions: i. Retention of the name: a. using the name as such. b.
using the name, adding some guidance. c. using the name, adding a
detailed explanation, for instance, a footnote. Replacement of the
name by another: a. replacing the name by another SL name. b.
replacing the name by a TL name
ii.
iii.
Omission of the name: a. omitting the name, but transferring the
sense by other means, for instance by a common noun. b. omitting
the name and the allusion together.
Moreover, nine strategies for the translation of key-phrase
allusions are proposed by Leppihalme (1997: 82) as follows:
i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix.
Use of a standard translation, Minimum change, that is, a
literal translation, without regard to connotative or contextual
meaning, Extra allusive guidance added in the text, The use of
footnotes, endnotes, translator's notes and other explicit
explanations not supplied in the text but explicitly given as
additional information, Stimulated familiarity or internal marking,
that is, the addition of intraallusive allusion , Replacement by a
TL item, Reduction of the allusion to sense by rephrasing,
Re-creation, using a fusion of techniques: creative construction of
a passage which hints at the connotations of the allusion or other
special effects created by it, Omission of the allusion.
3. Conclusion Although some stylists consider translation
"sprinkled with footnotes" undesirable, their uses can assist the
TT readers to make better judgment of the ST contents. In general,
it seems that the procedures 'functional equivalent' and 'notes'
would have a higher potential for conveying the concepts underlying
the CSCs embedded in a text; moreover, it can be claimed that a
combination of these strategies would result in a more accurate
understanding of the CSCs than other procedures. Various strategies
opted for by translators in rendering allusions seem to play a
crucial role in recognition and perception of connotations carried
by them. If a novice translator renders a literary text without
paying adequate attention to the allusions, the connotations are
likely not to be transferred as a result of the translator's
failure to acknowledge them. They will be entirely lost to the
majority of the TL readers; consequently, the translation will be
ineffective. It seems necessary for an acceptable translation to
produce the same (or at least similar) effects on the TT readers as
those created by the original work on its readers. This paper may
show that a translator does not appear to be successful in his
challenging task of efficiently rendering the CSCs and PNs when he
sacrifices, or at least minimizes, the effect of allusions in favor
of preserving graphical or lexical forms of source language PNs. In
other words, a competent translator is wll-advised not to deprive
the TL reader of enjoying, or even recognizing, the allusions
either in the name of fidelity or brevity. It can be claimed that
the best translation method seem to be the one which allows
translator to utilize 'notes.' Furthermore, employing 'notes' in
the translation, both as a translation strategy and a translation
procedure, seems to be indispensable so that the foreign language
readership could benefit from the
text as much as the ST readers do. References Albakry, M.
(2004). Linguistic and cultural issues in literary translation.
Retrieved November 17, 2006 from
http://accurapid.com/journal/29liter.htm Bell, R. T. (1998).
Psychological/cognitive approaches. In M. Baker (Ed), Routledge
encyclopedia of translation studies. London & New York:
Routledge. Cohen, A.D. (1984). On taking tests: what the students
report. Language testing, 11 (1). 70-81. Culler, J. (1976).
Structuralist poetics: structuralism, linguistics, and the study of
literature. Cornell: Cornell University Press. Graedler, A.L.
(2000). Cultural shock. Retrieved December 6, 2006
fromhttp://www.hf.uio.no/iba/nettkurs/translation/grammar/top7cult
ure.html Harvey, M. (2003). A beginner's course in legal
translation: the case of culture-bound terms.Retrieved April 3,
2007 from http://www.tradulex.org/Actes2000/harvey.pdf Hervey, S.,
& Higgins, I. (1992). Thinking Translation. London & New
York: Routledge. Jaaskelainen, R., (2005). Translation studies:
what are they? Retrieved November 11, 2006
fromhttp://www.hum.expertise.workshop. Jaaskelainen, R., (1999).
Tapping the process: an explorative study of cognitive and
effective factors involved in translating. Joensuu: University of
Joensuu Publications in Humanities. Krings, H.P. (1986).
Translation problems and translation strategies of advanced German
learners of French. In J. House, & S. BlumKulka (Eds.),
Interlingual and intercultural communication (pp. 26375). Tubingen:
Gunter Narr. Leppihalme, R. (1997). Culture bumps: an empirical
approach to the translation of allusions. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters. Loescher, W. (1991). Translation performance, translation
process
and translation strategies.Tuebingen: Guten Narr. Newmark, P.
(1988a). A Textbook of Translation. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall.
Newmark, P. (1988b). Approaches to Translation. Hertfordshire:
Prentice Hall. Newmark, P. (1991). About Translation: Multilingual
Matters. Clevedon, Philadelphia, Adelaide: Multilingual Matters
Ltd. Nida, E. A. (1964). Towards a science of translation, with
special reference to principles and procedures involved in Bible
translating. Leiden: Brill. Richards, et al (1985). Longman
dictionary of applied linguistics. UK: Longman. Seguinot, C.
(1989). The translation process. Toronto: H.G. Publications.
Venuti, L. (1998). Strategies of translation. In M. Baker (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of translation studies(pp. 240-244). London and New
York: Routledge. Zhongying, F. (1994). An applied theory of
translation. Beijing: Foreign Languages Teaching & Research
Press.List of used literature: 1. W.Somerset Maugham Theater. .: ,
2001. 304. 2. .. . .: -, 2001. 228. .. 3. .. . .: , 1975. 80. 4. .
. .: ,1955. 310. 5. . . .: , 1971. 254.
Altenberg, Bengt. 1998. On the Phraseology of Spoken English:
The Evidence of Recurrent WordCombinations In A.P. Cowie
(ed.),Phraseology. Oxford: Clarendon Press. lvarez de la Granja,
Mara (ed.). 2008. Fixed Expressions in Cross-Linguistic
Perspective. A Multilingual and Multidisciplinary Approach.
Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac. Amosova, N.N. 1963. Osnovi angliyskoy
frazeologii. Leningrad. Anscombre, Jean-Claude & Salah Mejri
(eds.) 2011. Le figement linguistique : la parole en-trave. Paris:
Honor Champion. Arsentieva, E.F. 2006. Frazeologiya i frazeografija
v sopostavitelnom aspekte (na materiale angliyskogo i russkogo
yazikov). Kazan.
Burger, Harald, Dobrovolskij, Dmitrij, Kuhn, Peter, &
Norrrick, Neal. (eds.) 2007. Phraseology: An International Handbook
of Contemporary Research: Vols. 1-2, Berlin: de Gruyter. Cowie,
A.P. 1998. Phraseology: Theory, Analysis, and Applications. Oxford:
Oxford University Press. Cherdantseva, T.Z. 2007. Jazik I ego
obrazi: Ocherki po italyanskoy frazeologii. Moskva: URSS.
Everaert, Martin, Erik-Jan van der Linden, Andr Schenk & Rob
Schreuder (eds.) 1995; Idioms: Structural and Psychological
perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Glser, Rosemarie.
1998. The Stylistic Potential of Phraselological Units in the Light
of Genre Analysis In A.P. Cowie (ed.), Phraseology. Oxford:
Clarendon Press. Husermann, Jrg. 1977. Hauptprobleme der deutschen
Phraseologie auf der Basis sowjetischer Forschungsergebnisse.
Tbingen Knappe, Gabriele. 2004. Idioms and Fixed Expressions in
English Language Study before 1800. Peter Lang. Kunin, A.V. 1967.
Osnovnie ponjatija angliyskoy frazeologii kak lingvisticheskoy
disciplini. In Anglorusskiy frazeologicheskiy slovar, 12331264.
Moskva. Kunin, A.V. 1970. Angliyskaya frazeologiya. Moskva. Kunin,
A.V. 1972. 'F'razeologija sovremennogo angliyskogo yazika.
Moskva.
Kunin, A.V. 1996. Kurs fraseologii sovremennogo angliyskogo
yazika. 2-e izd. pererab. Moskva: Visshaya Shkola. Meluk I.A. 1995.
Phrasemes in Language and Phraseology in Linguistics. In Martin
Everaert, ErikJan van der Linden, Andr Schenk & Rob Schreuder
(eds.), Idioms: Structural and Psychological perspectives, 167232.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Mokienko, V.M. 1989. Slavjanskaya
frazeologiya. Moskva: Visshaya Shkola. Molotkov, A.I. 1977. Osnovi
frazeologii russkogo jazika. Leningrad: Nauka. Nazaryan, A.G. 1987.
Frazeologiya sovremennogo frantsuzkogo jazika. Moskva.
Raichshtein, A.D. 1980. Sopostavitelniy analiz nemetskoy I
russkoy frazeologii. Moskva: Visshaya Shkola. Shanskiy, N.M. 1985.
Frazeologiya sovremennogo russkogo yazika. Moskva: Visshaya Shkola.
Soloduho, E.M. 1982. Problemi internazional'noy frazeoologii.
Kazan. Zhukov, V.P. 1978. Semantika frazeologicheskih oborotov.
Moskva: Prosveshenie.
Altenberg, Bengt."On the Phraseology of Spoken English: The
Evidence of Recurrent Word-Combinations". Phraselogy. Ed.
A.P.Cowie. Oxford:Clarendon Press. 1998.101 Glaeser, Rosemarie."The
Stylistic Potential of Phraselolgical Units in the Light of Genre
Analysis". Phraselogy. Ed. A.P.Cowie. Oxford:Clarendon Press.
1998.125 Knappe, Gabriele. Idioms and Fixed Expressions in English
Language Study before 1800. Peter Lang 2004.4--5
Altenberg, Bengt. On the Phraseology of Spoken English: The
Evidence of Recurrent Word-Combinations //
Phraselogy. Ed. A.P.Cowie. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1998
lvarez de la Granja, Mara (ed.). Fixed Expressions in
Cross-Linguistic Perspective. A Multilingual and
Multidisciplinary Approach. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac. 2008
Amosova, N.N. Osnovi angliyskoy frazeologii. Leningrad, 1963
Arsentieva, E.F. Frazeologiya i frazeografija v sopostavitelnom
aspekte (na materiale angliyskogo i russkogo
yazikov). Kazan, 2006
Cowie, A.P. Phraseology: Theory, Analysis, and Applications.
Oxford, 2001 Cherdantseva, T.Z. Jazik I ego obrazi: Ocherki po
italyanskoy frazeologii. Moskva: URSS, 2007 Glser, Rosemarie. The
Stylistic Potential of Phraselolgical Units in the Light of Genre
Analysis // Phraselogy.
Ed. A.P.Cowie. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1998
Knappe, Gabriele. Idioms and Fixed Expressions in English
Language Study before 1800. Peter Lang, 2004 Kunin, A.V. Osnovnie
ponjatija angliyskoy frazeologii kak lingvisticheskoy disciplini //
Anglo-russkiy
frazeologicheskiy slovar. Izd 3-e, ispr. V dvuh knigah. Moskva,
1967. T. 2 P. 1233 1264
Kunin, A.V. Angliyskaya frazeologiya. Moskva, 1970 Kunin, A.V.
Frazeologija sovremennogo angliyskogo yazika. Moskva, 1972 Kunin,
A.V. Kurs fraseologii sovremennogo angliyskogo yazika. 2-e izd.
pererab. Moskva: Visshaya shkola,
1996
Mokienko, V.M. Slavjanskaya frazeologiya. Moskva: Visshaya
Shkola, 1989 Molotkov, A.I. Osnovi frazeologii russkogo jazika.
Leningrad: Nauka, 1977 Nazaryan, A.G. Frazeologiya sovremennogo
frantsuzkogo jazika. Moskva, 1987 Raichshtein, A.D. Sopostavitelniy
analiz nemetskoy I russkoy frazeologii. Moskva: Visshaya shkola,
1980 Shanskiy, N.M. Frazeologiya sovremennogo russkogo yazika.
Moskva: Visshaya shkola, 1985 Soloduho, E.M. Problemi
internazional'noy frazeoologii. Kazan, 1982 Zhukov, V.P. Semantika
frazeologicheskih oborotov. Moskva: Prosveshenie, 1978
External links Extensive bibliography in phraseology
http://www.krugosvet.ru/articles/82/1008287/1008287a1.htm
