Если у вас возникли сложности с курсовой, контрольной, дипломной, рефератом, отчетом по практике, научно-исследовательской и любой другой работой - мы готовы помочь.
Предоплата всего
Подписываем
|
Losses and their compensation It will be recalled that some marginal elements of information may be lost in translation. Some of them may be compensated for by use of different devices, sometimes in a different portion of the message, for instances the Russian vernacular Ho Baше дело рисковое (Sholokhov) may be translated as “but, your job is damn risky” where the use of a low colloquial lexical item (damn) compensates for a substandard morphological form (рисковое). In the phrase Навязать идейку derogatory connotation is expressed by the Russian suffix. In the English phrase `to sell the idea` the noun is neutral but the derogatory connotation is shift to the verb. Adequate, literal and free translation There is fundamental difference between formal equivalence, on the one hand and semantic and pragmatic equivalence, on the other. Formal equivalence may accompany semantic and pragmatic equivalence but is by no means mandatory. It has been pointed out that the translator does not set himself the task of preserving the syntactic relations of the original. Nor does he aim at formal equivalence between the original and the translation. Usually formal equivalence results from similarity of pragmatical forms and lexical items of the two languages. But it does not arise out of a deliberate effort. Adequate translation may be defined therefore as that which is determined, by semantic and pragmatic equivalence between the original and the TL text. Cases of formal equivalence without semantic or pragmatic equivalence are usually described as literal translation. Literal translation reproduces the linguistic form of the original without any regard for semantic-pragmatic equivalence. It may reproduce the morphological and sound form as, for instance, in Chukovsky`s famous examples: композитор for compositor, Черри Орчад (Cherry Orchard) instead of Вишневый Сад. It may also reproduce lexical items, overlooking the integral meaning of the phrase (a dozen times- дюжину раз, God, bless my soul - Боже, благослови мою душу.). ` |
Levels of equivalence This problem was briefly discussed in the previous lecture in COnnection with the distinction between semantic and pragmatic equivalence. In the theory of translation different ideas have been put forward concerning the types and levels of equivalence in translation. For instance, V. Gak and Levin distinguish the following types of equivalents: formal, semantic and situational. As to situational equivalence, it is , in our view, another variety of semantic equivalence that differs from the first type in that it is based not on the same semantic components but on the equivalence of meanings, made of different semantic components. In other words, sums of different semantic components may be semantically equivalent (a+b = c+d) : (upside down - вверх ногами ). We therefore shall speak of two types of semantic equivalence: componential (identity of semantic components) and equational (equivalence of different semantic components). The latter is preferable to “situational equivalence” for the descriptions of the same situation are not necessarily semantically equivalence. |
The main directions in the contemporary linguistic theory of translation
The earliest linguistic theory of translation was developed by Soviet scholars Rezcker and Fedorov who pioneered in propose a linguistic analysis of translation problems. Their theory came to known as the theory of regular correspondences.
Translation, theу argued, is inconceivable without a sound linguistic basis, and this basis can be provided by a contrastive study of linguistic phenomena and the establishment of certain correspondences between the language of the original and that of the translation. The authors of the theory were mainly concerned with a typology of relationship between linguistic units ( equivalents-permanent correspondences, not sensitive to context, such as the League of Nations Лига Наций and context-sensitive variant correspondences, such as slander клевета, навет, поклеп but аlзо investigated, some translation technique, such as autonomic translation, thus mapping out some ways of dealing with translation as a process.
In the -60s some linguists (V.J.Roencveig in the USSR and E.Nida the USA) proposed, a theoretical model of translation, based, on generative or transformational grammar. E. Nida subdivided the process of translation into three stages: analysis where an ambiguous surface structure is transformed into non-ambiguous kernel sentences to facilitate semantic interpretation (the foundation of a school - (somebody) founded a school or - a school has a foundation), transfer where equivalents in the target language are found, at the kernel or near-kernel level and restructuring where target-language kernel sentences are transformed into surface structures.
It is true that in some cases it is necessary to paraphrase the SL structure to facilitate its translation. Such transformations came in handy when the SL structure is ambiguous or when it has no parallel in the TL, e.g. He stood with his feet planted wide apart - Он стоял, его ноги были широко расставлены; Он стоял, широко расставив ноги.
Transformations in terms of generative grammar are not the only types of paraphrases used in translation. What is more, in some cases, when close parallel exists between the SL and TL structures, they are not even necessary.
The situational model of translation is based, on situational analysis in linguistic developed by Gak (USSR) and J. Catford (UK) and other. It is based, on the assumption that languages use somewhat different sets of sеmantic соmponents (elements of meaning) to describe identical ехtralinguistic situations. Russian verbs of motion contain the component of mode but not always the direction of mоvеment while their English equivalents are often neutral with regard to the mode but always specify the direction (cf. Вот он идет. Here he comes. / Here he gоеs). The situаtionаl model provides some interesting insights into the mechanism of translation, especially when a situation is described in different semantic categories (сf. Sprinfed pond.-проточный пруд and Воttle fed child - искуственник ) but does not seem to apply to sentences going beyond a mere description of a situation.
Different translation models complement each other and should therefore be combined in analyzing translation as а ргосеss.
The effect of the translator’s angle of view
Another pragmatic factor relevant to translation, is the socio—psychological and ideological orientation of the translator himself. As far back as 1936 K.l. Chukovsky wrote that “every translator translates himself, i.e., deliberately or inadvertently reflects his class affiliations. And in doing so he does not necessarily set himself the task to falsify the original”. This view may be somewhat oversimplified but it is true that although ideally the translator should identify himself with the author, this is not always the case. What is more, sometimes it is impossible. Therefore, classics are retranslated as each generation rereads them from its own vantage point. Chukovsky cites an instructive example: in translating Shakespeare’s Coriolanus the Russian translator Druzinin tried to reproduce the original accurately. Yet he advertently adapted the tragedy to his own political views of a liberal opposed, to the revolutionary raznochinzi of the 1860s.
Nonuniqueness of the translator’s decisions
Translation is a process determined by quite a number of factors. In addition to conveying the semantic information contained in the text. The denotational meanings and emotive-stylistic connotations, the translator has to take into account the author’s communicative intent, the type of an audience for which the message is intended, its socio-psychological characteristics and background knowledge. A process, governed, by so many variables cannot have a single outcome. What is more, the synonimic and paraphrasing potential of language is so high that there may be several ways of describing the same extralinguistic situation, and even though they may not be quite identical, the differences may be neutralized by context. It should also be remembered that the translator’s decision may vary depending on the receptor (c.f. the translation of realia for the specialist and for the layman) and the purpose of the translation. Cf. the old and the modernized version of the Bible; a woman Who had an evil spirit in her that had kept her sick for eighteen years. - … a woman who for eighteen years had been ill from some psychological cause. Cf. also the poetic transitions of Shakespeare by Pasternak and the scholarly translation by Prof. Morozov.
Grammatical equivalence in translation
The grammatical structure of language is an important part of its overall system, no less important, in fact, than its lexicon or vocabulary. The elements of the grammatical structure, such as affixes forms of inflection and derivation, syntactic patterns, word order, function words, etc., serve to carry meanings which are usually referred to as " grarnmatical '' or "structural" meanings, as distinct from lexical meanings. The rendering of these meanings in the process of translation is an important problem relating to the general problem of translation equivalence which must be considered at length.
Grammatical forms of different languages only very seldom coincide fully as to the scope of their meaning and function. As a rule there is only partial equivalence, that is, the grammatical mea- nings expressed by grammatical forms, though seemingly identical, of two different languages coincide only in part of their meaning and differ in other parts of the same meanings. Thus, for instance, the category of number of nouns in English and in Russian seems to coincide and, indeed, does coincide in very many cases of its use: cf. table - стол, tables - столы, ETC. However, there are many instances where this is not the case, in other words, where an English plural form is rendered through a Russian singular form and vice versa; this is especially common among the so called Singularia and Pluralia Tantum, that is those nouns that have only a Singular and Plural form whose distribution is often arbitrary and motivated only historically. Compares oats - овес , peas - горох , onions - лук , cherries - вишня, (used collectively), outskirts (of town) - окраина, billiards - биллиард, measles - корь; and OF THE OTHER hand, money -деньги, ink - чернила, information - новости, данные etc. Also, the form of Number in two languages often do not coincide when the noun is accompanied by a numeral, thus in Russian all nouns preceded by numeral двадцать один, сто тридцать один - and other ending in один are used in the singular form while in English in corresponding patterns a Plural form must be used: twenty one tables, one hundred and thirty one passengers, etc.
Another example is the category of tense. Both English and Russian distinguish the form of the predicate verb as Present and past, their general grammatical meanings being, on the whole, iden- tical cf. He lives in Moscow- Он живет в Москве, he lived in Moscow - он жил в Москве, ETC. However, in certain cases the Tense forms of the two verbs - English and Russian - do not coin- cide, thus, for instance, in English there exists a grammar rule "Sequence of Tenses" according to which the predicate verb in the subordinate object clause following the main clause in which a Past form is used must, with a few exemptions, also be used in the Past form, where as in Russian this is not so and a Present form is quite common in the same position: He said he lived in Moscow - Он сказал, что живет а Москве
The difference is Even more striking when we consider other grammatical categories which semantic content and function diverge to a greater extent that in the examples given above. Take for instance, the category of Gender . Russian distinguishes three genders: Masculine, Feminine and Neuter which are formally expressed in the following ways:
through agreement e.g., этот юноша, эта девушка, дедушка пришел, бабушка пришла.
by the inflectional forms of the noun itself, e.g., CTOЛ (masc) -zero ending, "hard" stem; вода (fem) - the ending -a, OKHO (neut) - the ending - 0, etc.
by means of pronominal substitution, e.g., зверь (masc.)-он, дверь (fem.) - она, etc.
In English, the same three genders are also distinguished; however, the only formal way to express the distinction is through pronominal substitution, e.g., boy - he, girl - she, house - it, there being no agreement in gender or difference in inflectional (case) endings. Consequently, the category of gender in English is expressed, actually, not in the noun itself but in the corresponding personal (possessive, reflexive) pronoun. It follows, then, that many nouns in English are not marked as to the gender and can be used as Masculine, Feminine depending on the context, whereas in Russian a choice between the two genders is necessary which can be made only if the wider context is taken into consideration cf. artist-художник, художница, worker- рабочий, рабочая, student - студент, студентка, teacher - учитель, учительница, writer - писатель, писательница, cook - noвap, кухарка, friend - дpyr, npиятельница, пoдpyra, acquaitance - знакомый, знакомая.
The above must not be taken to mean that there is absolutely nothing in common between the grammatical structures of two different languages. On the contrary, there exist in all languages the so called grammatical inverses, that is categories that are found in all languages and without which no language can function as a means for communication.
These, however, are mainly the so called deep gramlmatical categories i.e., categories that are semantic rather than formal ( for instance: object, process, quality, relation, actor, goal (of action) instrument, cause and effect, etc.). These can be found to exist in all languages, though the formal way by which they are manifested may be widely different. The translator's task here (as with lexical means) is, first, to assign the correct meaning to this or that form and, secondly, to find an appropriate form in the TL for the expression of the same meaning, taking into account various factors which will be described below.
Moreover, it should be born in mind that the content which in one language is expressed grammatically may be expressed lexically in another language. If no grammatical forms are available in the TL, The translator must look for lexical means to render the same semantic content. Thus, for instance, the English language does not distinguish between the forms of the Perfective and Imperfective aspect (совершенный - несовершенный вид) that are so typical of the Russian verb. Consequently, while translating a sentence like: Что делал Бельтов в протяжении этих десяти лет? Все или почти все. Что он сделал? Ничего или почти ничего. the only way to convey in English the semantic difference between the Perfective and the Imperfective verb form of Russian is through lexical difference between two verbs, for instance; "What did Beltov do during these ten years? Everything, or almost everything. What did he achieve? Nothing, or almost nothing".
Another example: in the sentence "Out came the chaise, - in went the horses - on sprang the boys - in got the travelers" inversion is employed to convey the additional meaning of rapidity of movement. In Russian the same meaning cannot be conveyed by inversion and lexical means must be resorted to for achieving adequate translation, as for instance: Быстро выкатили коляску, мгновенно запрягли лошадей, мальчишки-форейторы вскочили в седло, и путешественники поспешно уселись на свои места.
Finally, it should be noted that there are cases when grammatical meanings are not rendered in translation at all, that is, when this or that grammatical form is not used freely, according to its own meaning but then its use is predetermined by purely linguistic factor: syntactic construction, rules of agreement (grammatical concord) or government , etc. In this case we can speak of the bound USE OF The grammatical form, as opposed to its free use. The example will show the difference: in English the choice of the tense form of the verb in an independent clause is free and depends on the proper meaning of the tense form itself: cf. He lives in Moscow - He lived in Moscow. In a dependent clause the use of tense form is not free and is determined by the so called "the sequence of tenses rule", i.e., when the tense form of the main clause is Past, that in the dependent clause must also be Past: He said he lived, in Moscow. Consequently, in the first case the difference in the tense form (Present - Past) must find a reflection in translation: Он живет - жил в Москве. In the dependent clause, on the other hand, the use of the English Past form is purely formal, as there is no corresponding "sequence of tenses" rule in Russian, it is not necessary (or even possible) to render the meaning of the Past in the Russian translation, the rules of Russian syntax require the use of the Present form to express nonpriority (i.e., simultaneity) of the action: Он сказал, что живет в Москве.
On the whole the choice of the grammatical equivalent in the TL is determined by the following factors:
The meaning inherent in the grammatical form itself стол - table, столы - tables or живет - lives, жил - lived (see examples above).
The lexical character of the word or word-group used in this or that form. Thus, the use of the Plural form in Russian is impossible with certain nouns while possible with others: cf. workers of all industries - рабочие всех отраслей промышленности , other philosophies - другие философские течения (направления). Here the grammatical meaning of plurality has to be rendered, lexically as the corresponding Russian nouns lack the plural form.
factors of style, for instance, both English and. Russian have the Passive form of the verb, however, in Russian the use of this form is mainly confined to the literary or bookish (formal) style. Correspondingly, though the English Passive structure such as "At the station he was met by his brother" can, theoretically speaking, be translated as на станции он был встречен братом we feel that latter translation is unacceptable as it sounds too formal and can hardly be used in colloquial speech or in the style of fiction. The proper version would be: На станции его встретил брат.
In official language, for instance, in newspaper reports, this turn of speech is quite acceptable: cf. At the station the delegation was met by a group of students - На станции делегация была встречена группой студентов.
Another example: both English and Russian make use of the so called Historical Present (the present tense used to denote past events); however it is only in English that this form is employed in newspaper headline. Consequently, the headline "Prominent Scientist Dies" cannot be rendered as Известный ученый умирает taking into account the fact Russian headlines are usually nominal in character, i.e., formed as Noun phrases, it is preferable to translate the above headline as Смерть известного ученого.
Frequency of use. Speaking about this factor, the American linguist and translator E. Nida writes: Rare forms of words may also constitute serious obstacles to a proper communication load. For example, translators often find convenient formal parallels between constructions in the SL and the TL, and, regardless of the relative frequency of such constructions in the language concerned, endeavor to match the forms more or less automatically. This both source and receptor languages may have passive forms of words but in the source language they may be relatively frequent, while in the receptor language they are rare. (English and Russian are precisely the case). If under these considerations one attempts to translate every source language passive by corresponding passive in the receptor language, the result will be an inevitable overloading of the communication.
Thus Russian uses both subordinate clauses and verbal adverb (деепричастие) to express adverbial relations, however, if a translator does not make use of the latter, his translation will sound unnatural and too "havy". Also, both in English and in Russian subordinate and coordinate structures are used, but their relative frequency is different: English often prefers subordination whereas Russian more often than not makes use of coordinate structures. Therefore, subordinate syntactic structures of English, are quite commonly replaced by coordinate structures in Russian translations, though, from the point of view of formal grammar rules, such a replacement is not always necessary.
Grammatical transformation in translation
Grammatical structures of two languages are different to such an extent that any attempt at word-for-word is doomed to failure. In the course of translation, it is always necessary to perform various grammatical and lexical changes or translations to achieve translation equivalence. These transformation can be divided into four types:
transposition,
replacements,
additions,
omissions.
It should be born in mind that this classification is, to some extent, arbitrary and that in practice it is hardly possible to find these elementary transformations in "pure form''. In most cases they are combined with one another, so that what we observe is a combined use of more that one type of transformation : transposition and. replacement, addition and omission at the same time, etc.
Transpositions
What is known as transposition is a change in the order of linguistic elements: words, phrases, clauses and sentences, in the text of translation as compared with the original. Most often this change of order is made necessary due to the necessity of preserving intact what is called `functional sentence perspective`, namely, the division of the sentence into two main parts from the point of view of communication: "known or theme" and "new or rheme". In Russian this division of the sentence is usually expressed by means of word order: what is already known or supposed to be known to the hearer (usually from the preceding context), that is, "theme" is placed at the beginning of the sentence whereas what is new, that is communicated for the first time and, therefore, what forms the semantically most important part of the message ( rheme ) is placed at the end of the sentence. In English the word order is arranged, on the whole, along the same lines; however, in certain cases the "theme" is placed at the end and the "rheme", correspondingly , at the beginning of the sentence due to the fact that the newness of the "rheme" is expressed differently, namely, by the use of the indefinite article (or with plural forms of nouns and with uncountable nouns of the zero article) with the noun which is the subject of sentence. Therefore, in Russian word order in these cases must be reversed, i.e., the sentence subject which is the "rheme" of the sentence mast be placed at the end: cf. A boy came in - Вошел мальчик but: The boy came in -Мальчик вошел. Likewise: A match flared, in the darkness -В темноте вспыхнула спичка. Light was coming into the cellar from somewhere - В подвал откуда-то проникал свет .
Cigarettes were passed after lunch - После завтрака подали сигареты. Within a complex sentence a similar tendency is observed: in Russian the first place is occupied by that part of the sentence ( main or subordinate clause) which must logically precede the second, whereas in English the position of both clauses, though not quite fixed, is in most cases governed by syntactic rules: namely, the main clause precedes, in most cases, the subordinate one. This often calls for a change in the order of clause in the process of translation, as for instance: He trembled as he looked up - Взглянув на верх он задрожал. (Note here the rendering of the English subordinate clause by means of the Russian verbal adverb; see above the preceding lecture).
Within a passage of discourse, independent sentences sometimes are also transposed as in the following example: "You goin` to court this morning?" asked Jim. We had strolled over. - Мы подошли. - Вы в суд пойдете? - Спросил Джим.
Here the transposition of sentences is used to make up for the absence in Russian of the difference between the Past Indefinite and the Past Perfect ( the action of the second English sentence precedes that of the first). See also below, on addition.
Replacements
Replacements are by far the most common type of grammatical transformations. Replacements can affect practically all types of linguistic units: word forms, part of speech, sentence elements, sentence types, types of syntactic relations, etc.
a) Word Forms
Replacement of word forms are quite common in translation. A few examples will suffice: The struggles of the Indian people in all parts of the US - Борьба индейского народа во всех районах США; a novel about the lives of common people - роман о жизни простых людей (replacement of plural by singular). He said he knew the man - ОН СКАЗАЛ, ЧТО ЗНАЕТ ЭТОГО ЧЕЛОВЕКА. (replacement of Past by Present). The door was opened by a middleaged woman -Дверь открыла пожилая женщина. (Replacement of Active by Passive). See also the preceding lecture.
b) Parts of Speech
This type of replacement is Also fairly common. Especially typical is the replacement of English noun (derived from verbs) by Russian verbs; English makes a far greater use of the so called nominalization, i.g., employment of verbal nouns to denote actions (Nomina Actions), that does Russian. Hence the necessity of replacement in translation, as in the following cases: It is our hope that… - Мы надеемся, что… The abandonment by Irene of all the glittering things he had given her - Когда Ирен оставила все безделушки,которые он ей подарил.
The same is true about the so called. "Nomina Agentis", which in English are usually represented by nouns with the suffix -er. Russian either has no nouns of the type at all (e.g., corresponding to Such English nouns as riser, packer, drinker, sleeper) or uses them to denote people of permanent occupation as, say, писатель which denote a person who indulges in professional writing whereas in English the word writer may denote 'a person who writes or had written .something` as in the `the writer of this note` - Тот, кто написал эту записку CF. He is an early riser -Он рано встает. John is a sound sleeper - Джон крепко спит. I am very rapid packer.-Я очень быстро укладываюсь. She is very good dancer - Она очень хорошо танцует.
Fairly often, English adjectives are replaced by Russian nouns (in an oblique case or preceded by a preposition): Australian prosperity - (экономическое) процветание Австралии. The Soviet acceptance of this proposal - принятие этого предложения СССР. Youthful joblessness - безработица среди молодежи. Generational style of life - образ жизни, свойственный для данного поколения ( the above examples are very typical of the so called `journalese` ).
English comparative forms of adjectives higher, lower, longer, shorter, better etc. are frequently replaced by Russian nouns (derived from adjective stems which, in their turn, are verbalized) повышение, понижение, увеличение, сокращение, улучшение и т.д.
They demand higher wages and better living conditions - Они требуют повышения заработной платы и улучшения жизненных условий.
c) Sentence elements
This is sometimes referred to as syntactic restructuring of the sentence in the process of translation. It consists in changing the sentence functions of words in a sentence, a process which is usually due to the same tendency as is observed in transpositions, viz., preserving the functional sentence perspective. In English, as in Russian the `theme` is generally (with some exceptions) placed at the beginning of the sentence; however, this placed is, of course, reserved for the sentence subject, the result being that the "theme" of the English sentence is, as a rule, also its subject, though semantically it is not always the doer of the action expressed by the predicate verbs: it may be its object (goal) or even denote some adverbial relation (time, place, cause, etc.). In Russian the word order is relatively free, therefore, the first word or word group within a sentence (its theme) must not necessarily be at the same time its syntactic subject. Hence the subject of the English sentence is often replaced in Russian by a corresponding secondary element, such as object, adverbial of time, place, cause etc., with concomitant changes in the stylistic pattern of the whole sentence, often with necessary lexical changes. See the following examples: He was met by his sister -Его встретила сестра. He was given money - Ему дали денег. The new film is much spoken about -О новом фильме много говорят. (and other Passive-Active transformations; see above ). Last week saw the 500 strong meeting of shop stewards and trade- union officials... - На прошлой неделе состоялось заседание старост и профсоюзных деятелей в котором приняло участие 500 человек. The tent sleeps six people - В палатке могут спать 6 человек. Rhodesia has hanged five African guerrillas. - В Родезии казнены 5 африканских партизанов. New terrorist attacks have injured six people -В результате нападения террористов 6 человек было ранено. The fog stopped the traffic - Из-за тумана движение транспорта было остановлено. Figure 2 gives a summary of the results of such experiments - На рис. 2 показаны сводные результаты этих экспериментов.
It is self-evident that in the process of translation from Russian into English the process goes in the opposite direction: cf. В комнате воцарилась тишина.- The room turned silent. В радио- технических устройствах часто встречаются системы из электропроводов. Radio equipment often includes systems of electric wires.
d) Sentence types
A very common transformation in the process of translation is the replacement of a simple sentence by a complex one and vice versa. Thus, while translating from English into Russian it often becomes necessary to render English structures with nonfinite verbal forms by means of subordinate clauses, thus turning a simple sentence into complex, as for instance:
I want you to speak English -Я хочу что бы вы говорили по-английски. I heard my mother go out and close the door - Я услыхала, как мама вышла из комнаты и закрыла дверь.
Here is a book for you to read - Вот книга,которую вы должны прочитать. The general is a good man to keep away from - Генерал, конечно не плохой человек, но лучше от него держаться подальше.
A substructure of this transformation is known as unification or, conversely, division of sentences in translation, that is, a replacement of two simple sentences by one complex or compound and vice versa: cf. Thousands of Algerians tonight fled from the dead city of Orleansville after a 12 second earthquake had ripped through central Algeria, killing an estimated 1,1000 people.
This is a typical "lead", that is the first sentence (and the first paragraph) of a news item which contains the bulk of the information the details of which are given below in the main text of the report. Such a device is alien to Russian newspaper articles, which makes it necessary to divide the English sentence into two or more Russian sentences, as below: Сегодня ночью в центральных районах Алжира произошло землетрясение, длившееся 12 секунд. Число жертв, по предварительным подсчетам, составляет 100 человек. Тысячи жителей бежали из полностью разрушенного города Орианвилля. ( Notice the change in the order of sentences).
More rarely, unification of two or more sentences into one complex or compound, sentence takes place as in the following case: The only thing that worried me was our front door. It creaks like a bastard,- Одно меня беспокоило - наша парадная дверь скрипит как оголтелая.
e) Types of syntactic relations
Both English and Russian have such types of syntactic relations as coordination and subordination. However, the former is more characteristic (i.e., occurs more frequently) of spoken Russian that of English; hence it is often necessary or desirable to replace subordination of sentences by coordination while translating from English into Russian, cf. He had a new father whose picture was enclosed... -У него новый папа - это он заснят на карточке… So I started walking way over east, where the pretty cheap restaurants are, because I didn't want to spend a lot of dough. Я пошел к восточным кварталам, где дешевые рестораны: не хотелось тратить много денег.
From the purely grammatical point of view this transformation is optional; however, taking into consideration what was said concerning the relative frequency of grammatical forms (see the preceding lecture). Such transformations are necessary if we want to make our translation sound natural, that is, to avoid undesirable heaviness in style.
Likewise, both English and Russian make use of syndetic and asyndetic coordinate structure, but their relative frequency differ: Russian, especially spoken Russian, prefers asyndetic coordination in multimember structures where English often employs the syndetic type, as, for instance: All I have in it is two dresses and my moccasins and my underwear and socks and some other things. В нем только два платья, туфли, белье, носки и всякие мелочи.
In the original, the conjunction and is used four times while in the Russian translation it appears only once, before the last constituent, the rest being joined asyndetically.
Additions
Additions are caused by different factors. Very often they are necessitated by what may be called structural incompleteness of certain word groups in the source language . Thus, in English in many cases words are omitted that can be easily resorted from the context. While in Russian their actual presence in the word group is necessary, which calls for additions in translation; cf.: pay claim - требование повышения зарплаты, gun license - удостоверение на право ношения оружия, oil talks -переговоры по вопросу о нефти , solid engine - двигатель на твердом топливе, the Watergate judge - судья, назначенный для рассмотрения т.наз. Уотергейтского дела. Sometimes additions are necessary to compensate for lack of grammatical forms in the target language. Thus, that lack of plural forms of the corresponding nouns in Russian calls for lexical additions when translating the following phrases: workers of all industries -рабочие всех отраслей промышленности, modern weapons -современные виды оружия, enemy defenses - оборонные сооружения противника, other philosophies - другие философские теории /течения, направления/.
Omissions
Omission acts in the opposite direction as compared with addition and is used to ensure a greater degree of what is called, "compression", that is, reducing the redundancy of the text by omitting words which can be easily restored, form the context. Thus, the following sentence from J. Salinger's novel: "So I paid my check and all. Then I left the bar and went out where the telephones were" is translated by R. Rait-Kovaleva as: Я рассплатился и пошел к автоматам. The words left the bar are omitted, because of their redundancy ( the bar was mentioned in the preceding context and leaving is implied by the subsequent use of went out). Note also other transformations here, such as unification of sentences and replacement of a complex sentence by a simple one, all of which greatly reduce redundancy of the original text.
For other examples of addition and omission, as well as of other transformations, see also Л.С. Бархударов " Язык и перевод" , гл.5.
Stylistic aspects of translation
In different ccmmunicative situations the language users select words of different stylistic status. There are stylistically neutral words that are suitable for any situation, and there are literary (bookish) words and colloquial words which satisfy the demands of official, poetic messages and unofficial everyday communication respectively. A steed — скакун, aforesaid - вышеозначенный, gluttony — обжoрство, to funk -- трусить, slumber - сон, morn - утро, to swop — менять. The translator tries to preserve the stylistic status of the original text, by using the equivalents of the same style or, failing that, opting for stylistically neutral units.
The speaker may qualify every object he mentions in his own way thus giving his utterance a specific stylistic turn. Such stylistic phrasing give much trouble to the translator since their meaning is often subjective and elusive. Some phrases become fixed through repeated use and they may have permanent equivalents in TL, e.g. true love - истинная любовь, dead silence - мертвая тишина, good old England - добрая старая Англия. In most cases, however, the translator has to look for an occasional substitute, which often requires an in-depth study of the broad context.
A common occurrence in English texts is the transferred qualifier syntactically joined to a word to which it does not belong logically. Such combinations will be thought of as too bizarre in Russian or alien to the type of the text and the qualifier will have to be used with the name of the object it refers to. 'The sound of the solemn bells" will become «торжественное звучание колоколов» and "the smiling attention of the stranger" will be translated as "внимание улыбающегося незнакомца».
Another common type is "paraphrases". A frequent use of paraphrases is a characteristic feature of the English language.
Some of the paraphrases are borrowed from such classical sources as mythology or the Bible and usually have permanent equivalents in Russian (cf. Attic salt - аттическая соль, the three sisters - богини судьбы, the Prince of Darkness — принц тьмы). Others arc purely English and are either transcribed or explained in translation: John Bull - Джон Буль, the three R's - чтение, письмо и арифметика, the Iron Duke - герцог Веллингтон.
A special group of paraphrases are the names of countries, states and other geographical or political entities: the Land of Cakes (Scotland), the Badger State (Wisconsin), the Empire City (New York). As a rule, such paraphrases are not known to the Russian reader and they are replaced by official names in the translation. (A notable exception is "the eternal city" — вечный город.)
The ST author may imitate his character's speech by means of dialectal or contaminated forms. SL territorial dialects cannot be reproduced in TT, nor can they be replaced by TL dialectal forms. It would be inappropriate if a black American or a London cockney spoke in the Russian translation in the dialect, say, of the Northern regions of the USSR. They can be rendered into Russian by ajudicial employment of low-colloquial elements, e.g.:
'E do look quiet, don't 'e? Dye know 'oo 'e is, Sir? Вид-то у него спокойный, правда? Часом не знаете, сэр, кто он будет?
Contaminated forms are used to imitate the speech of a foreigner.
Me blingee beer. Now you pay. Моя плинесла пиво, твоя типель платить.
To enhance the communicative effect of his message the author of the source text may make use of various stylistic devices, such as metaphors, similes, puns and so on. Coming across a stylistic device the translator has to make up his mind whether it should be preserved in his translation or left out and compensated for at some other place.
Metaphors and similes though most commonly used in works of fiction, are not excluded from all other types of texts.
Many metaphors and similes are conventional figures of speech I regularly used by the members of the language community. Such figurative units may be regarded as idioms and translated in a similar way. Their Russian equivalents may be based on the same image (a powder magazine — пороховой погреб, white as snow - белый как снег) or on a different one (a ray of hope - проблеск надежды, thin as a rake - худой как щепка). Some of the English standard metaphors and similes are rendered into Russian word for word (as busy as a bee - трудолюбивый как пчела), while the meaning of others can only be explained in a non-figurative way (as large as life-в натуральную величину).
More complicated is the problem of translating individual figures of speech created by the imagination of the ST author. They are important elements of the author's style and are usually translated word for word. Nevertheless the original image may prove inacceptable in the target language and the translator will have to look for a suitable occasional substitute.
A similar tactics is resorted to by the translator when he comes across a pun in ST. If the SL word played upon in ST has a Russian substitute which can also be used both literally and figuratively, a word-for-word translation is possible:
Whenever a young gentleman was taken in hand by Doctor Blimber, he might consider himself sure of a pretty tight squeeze.
Когда доктор Блаймбер брал в руки какого-нибудь джентльмена, тот мог быть уверен, что его как следует стиснут.
In other cases the translator tries to find in TL another word that can be played upon in a similar way:
He says he'll teach you to take his boards and make a raft of them; but seeing that you know how to do this pretty well already, the offer... seems a superfluous one on his part.
Он кричит, что покажет вам, как брать без спроса доски и делать из них плот, но поскольку вы и так прекрасно знаете, как это делать, это предложение кажется вам излишним.
A very popular stylistic device is to include in the text an overt or covert quotation. Unlike references in scientific papers the stylistic effect is usually achieved not by citing a complete extract from some other source, but it takes the form of allusions with a premium put on a general impression. It is presumed that the died words are well known to the reader and can readily suggest the sought-for associations.
The translator has to identify the source and the associations it evokes with the SL receptors and then to decide whether the source is also known to the TL receptors and can produce the similar effect.
This can be exemplified by S. Marshak's translation of the popular English nursery rhyme about Humpty Dumpty. In the translation Humpty Dumpty who "sat on the wall and had a great fall" was called «Шалтай-Болтай» and "all the king's men" who "cannot put Humpty Dumpty together again" became «вся королевская рать. So, when C Bernstein and B. Woodward called their famous Watergate story "All the President's Men", it was unquestionably rendered into Russian as «вся президентская рать».
Some stylistic devices may be ignored by the translator when their expressive effect is insignificant and their reproduction in the target text would run counter to the spirit of TL. One of the oldest and most commonly used stylistic devices in English is alliteration. An Englishman seems to be very happy if he can call an artificial satellite "a man-made moon" or invent a headline like "Bar Barbarism in Bars". As a rule, the formal device cannot be reproduced in the Russian translation where it would look rather bizarre and often distort the meaning of the phrase.
Still more infrequent is the reproduction in translation, of another common English stylistic device, the so- called zeugma, when a word enters in several collocations within one sentence each time in a different sense, e.g.:
(The man) ... took a final photograph of Michael in front of the hut, two cups of tea at the Manor, and his departure.
In Russian such usage is outside the literary norm.
A stylistic effect can be achieved by various types of repetitions, i.e. recurrence of the word, word combination, phrase for two times or more.
England is a paradise for the well-to-do, a purgatory for the able, and a hell for the poor.
Англия — рай для богачей, чистилище для талантливых и ад для бедняков.
Repetition adds rhythm and balance to the utterance. In most cases the translator takes pains to reproduce it in ТГ.
Stylistic aspects of translation
1. Handling stylistically-marked language units
In different communicative situations the words of different stylistic status can be used.
They are stylistically neutral words, literary (bookish) words, colloquial words.
Neutral words are suitable for any situation.
Literary and colloquial words satisfy the demands of official, poetic messages and unofficial everyday communication.
SL and TL words may have either identical (steed - скакун) or dissimilar (morn - утро) stylistic connotation.
The translator tries to preserve the original stylistic status by using the equivalents of the same style or failing that using neutral words.
The author may qualify each object in his own way thus creating the stylistic phrasing which gives much trouble to the translator.
Some phrases may have permanent equivalents in TL, e.g. dead silence - мертвая тишина, but in most cases the translator has to look for an occasional substitute, which often requires an in-depth study of the broad context.
The transferred qualifier is widely used in English texts. It is syntactically joined to a word to which it does not belong logically. Thus ‘the smiling attention of the stranger’ will be translated as «внимание улыбающегося незнакомца».
The inverted qualifier is not syntactically defining but the defined element. ‘the devil of a woman’ (a devilish woman) may involve an additional element: чертовски умная женщина.
Stylistically marked units may also be certain types of collocations. There are idiomatic phrases (take it from me) and various paraphrases (three R’s) among.
Some of paraphrases are borrowed from the Bible: the Prince of Darkness. A special group of paraphrases are the names of countries, states, etc.: the Empire City (New York). As a rule paraphrases are replaced by official names in the translation.
SL territorial dialects cannot be reproduced in TL. But as they are mostly an indication of the speaker’s low social or educational status, they can be translated into TL with low-colloquial elements.
Contaminated forms are used to imitate the speech of a foreigner.
2. Handling stylistic devices
To enhance the communicative effect of the text the author may use various stylistic devices: metaphors, similes, puns, etc.
The translator has to make up his mind whether a stylistic device should be preserved or omitted and compensated in the translation.
Such figurative units as metaphors and similes may be regarded as idioms and their equivalent in TL may be based on the same image (white as snow - белый как снег) or on a different one (thin as a rake - худой как щепка).
More complicated is the problem of translating speech units created by the imagination of the author (Humpty- Dumpty - Шалтай-Болтай).
A very popular stylistic device is to include an overt or covert quotation. The stylistic effect usually achieved not by citing. The translator should identify the source and the associations it evokes and then to chose the source evoking the same associations with TL receptors (Alice in Wonderland World - питать призрачные иллюзии).
Some stylistic devices as alliterations and repetitions may be ignored when their effect is insignificant.
The translation of pronouns
The pronouns are used to avoid the repetition of nouns. The usage of pronouns (personal, possessive, indefinite) differs in Russian and in English.
The usage of Russian pronouns in translation depends in most of the cases on the specific character of the verb or verbal construction.
Example:
He has a large family; he had a large family.
У него большая семья; у него была большая семья.
Here we see that cases of pronouns are different in English and in Russian.
Examples with passive construction:
I am told — мне сказали;
she was expected — ее ожидали;
he was sent for — за ним послали.
In English the pronoun often precedes the noun it substitutes. In Russian this will lead to misunderstanding.
Example:
Shortly before she left London with other prosecution witnesses, the witness Miss Lyons said she would go straight home.
Незадолго до того, как свидетельница мисс Лайонс уехала из Лондона вместе с другими свидетелями обвинения, она сказала, что поедет прямо домой.
Concerning personal pronouns the pronoun “it” brings most difficulties because it can have different functions. When it serves as a personal pronoun (carries out its main function) it is translated into Russian as “он”, “она”, “оно” depending on the grammatical gender of the Russian noun. Sometimes the pronoun “it” and the substituted noun can be separated by many words or even sentences. “It” can appear even in a new paragraph. In this case it correlates to the noun not grammatically but logically.
In impersonal phrases like “it is known”, “it seems”, “it is essential” “it” is translated by indefinitely-personal (неопределенно-личными) word combinations “как известно”, “очевидно”, “очень важно”.
The anticipatory (предваряющее) “it” is not translated into Russian.
It is hard to judge by his first book.
Трудно судить по его первой книге.
It (the anticipatory “it”) is often used in the emphatic constructions:
And it is capitalism which gives rise to the danger of war.
Именно капитализм и создает угрозу войны.
Here in Russian variant the emphasis is expressed by lexical means. To convey the emphasis when translating constructions like this one can use the following words depending on the context: “именно”, “уже”, “еще”, “только”, “вот”, “как раз” etc.
“It” is not translated also when in the for-phrase.
The Soviet proposals make it extraordinary difficult for the most brazen liars in the service…
Советские предложения фактически лишают самых наглых лжецов, находящихся на службе…
Sometimes the pronoun “it” can carry out different functions and correlate with different nouns in the same sentence.
Example:
It is reliably reported that the board, submitting to Government stagnation policy, instead of publicly fighting it, has about 80 to 100 pit closures in mind if the position, as it sees it doesn’t improve.
Из достоверных источников сообщают, что совет (союза шахтеров), подчинившись политике стагнации, проводимой правительством, вместо того, чтобы открыто бороться с нею, предполагает закрыть от 80 до 100 шахт, если положение, как оно расценивается им, не улучшится.
In the first case “it” is a subject of the impersonal sentence and is translated by the indefinitely-personal phrase (It is reliably reported — Из достоверных источников сообщают); next “it” substitutes the word “policy” (instead of publicly fighting it) and is translated by the personal pronoun in the feminine gender (вместо того, чтобы открыто бороться с нею); then the ”it” substitutes the noun “board” (as it sees it) and later the noun “position” (if the position, as it sees it) and is translated “если положение, как оно расценивается им”.
The pronoun “it” can relate to the subordinate clause as a whole.
Example:
When representatives of 28 newly independent nations came together in Bandung in April 1955 it marked a new stage in the battle.
Когда представители 28 стран, которые недавно обрели независимость, в апреле 1955 г. собрались в Бандунге, это означало новый этап в освободительной борьбе.
Demonstrative (указательные) pronouns are also used to avoid the repetition of nouns and often precede the related noun in English. In Russian it will sound somehow strange…
It is known that as well as those from South Wales…
Как известно, что, как и делегаты Южного Уэльса…
The word “those” is translated as “делегаты” in Russian.
In English possessive pronouns are often used before names of the parts of the body, pieces of clothes etc.
He lighted his pipe and took the gun.
Он закурил трубку и взял пистолет.
In Russian they don’t appear in translation.
English indefinite pronoun “every” is often translated into Russian by the indefinite pronoun in plural “все” (and also “каждый”).
Sentences with a subject, expressed by the indefinite pronoun “one” are often translated using indefinitely- personal sentences in Russian.
At a table outside one of the caf‚s (of Morat) one can sip a glass of wine…
Сидя за столиком перед одним из кафе (города Мора), можно выпить стакан вина…
It’s difficult to translate the pronoun “one” when used to avoid repetition of the noun.
The colonial record was one of repression.
История колониализма — это история угнетения народов.
In Russian impersonal pronouns are not used in this form, so one should repeat the noun.
Relative pronoun (относительное местоимение) when serves as subject as well as object, the so called “condensed relative”, is translated by the demonstrative pronoun with the conjunction or by two pronouns — demonstrative and relative.
Maybe we should be thankful that the unemployed army has swelled by less than 200,000 since last X-mas. That it hasn’t risen by more…
Может быть нам следует быть благодарными за то, что с прошлого Рождества армия безработных увеличилась немногим меньше, чем на 200 тыс. чел. То, что она не увеличилась больше…
The pronoun “what” can also be used in cases like this.
The increase in the weekly wage bill is only three fifths of what it was last week.
Увеличение зарплаты (еженедельной) составляет только три пятых того, что она составляла в прошлом году.
“What” can be a subject. In such a case it’s not translated into Russian.
What is claimed to be the first Indian Rhinoceros born…
Первый, как утверждают, родившийся не на свободе инд. носорог…
When used to express the emphasis “what” is not translated also.
What is more important is the principle of the decision.
Но важнее сам принцип решения вопроса.
Scientific and technical texts
Different types of translation can be singled out depending on the predominant communicative function of the source text or the form of speech involved in the translation process. Thus we can distinguish between literary and informative translation, on the one hand, and between written and o r a I translation (or interpretation), on the other hand.
Literary translation deals with literary texts, i.e. works of fiction or poetry whose main function is to make an emotional or aesthetic impression upon the reader. Their communicative value depends, first and foremost, on their artistic quality and the translator's primary task is to reproduce this quality in translation.
Informative translation is rendering into the target language non-literary texts, the main purpose of which is to convey a certain amount of ideas, to inform the reader. A literary text may, in fact, include some parts of purely informative character. Contrariwise, informative translation may comprise some elements aimed at achieving an aesthetic effect.
Literary works are known to fall into a number of genres. Literary translations may be subdivided in the same way, as each genre calls for a specific arrangement and makes use of specific artistic means to impress the reader. Translators of prose, poetry or plays have their own problems.
The translator of a belles-lettres text is expected to make a careful study of the literary trend the text belongs to, the other works of the same author, the peculiarities of his individual style and manner and so on. This involves both linguistic considerations and skill in literary criticism. A good literary translator must be a versatile scholar and a talented writer or poet.
For informative translations: we may single out translations of scientific and technical texts, of newspaper materials, of official papers and some other types of texts such as public speeches) political and propaganda materials, advertisements, etc.,
Translation of scientific and technical materials has a most important role to play in our age of the revolutionary technical progress. Even the "purely" literary translator often comes across highly technical stuff in works of fiction or even in poetry.
In technical translation the main goal is to identify the situation described in the original. The predominance of the referential function is a great challenge to the translator who must have a good command of the technical terms and a sufficient understanding of the subject matter to be able to give an adequate description of the situation even if this is not fully achieved in the original. The technical translator is also expected to observe the stylistic requirements of scientific and technical materials to make text acceptable to the specialist. English newspaper reports differ greatly from their Russian counterparts due to the frequent use of colloquial, slang and vulgar elements, various paraphrases, eye-catching headlines, etc.
Apart from technical and newspaper materials it may be expedient to single out translation of official diplomatic papers as a separate type of informative translation. These texts make a category of their own because of the specific requirements to the quality of their translations. Such translations are often accepted as authentic official texts on a par with the originals. They arc important documents every word of which must be carefully chosen as a matter of principle. That makes the translator very particular about every little meaningful element of the original which he scrupulously reproduces in his translation.
Journalistic (or publicistic) texts dealing with social or political matters are sometimes singled out among other informative materials because they may feature elements more commonly used in literary text (metaphors, similes and other stylistic devices) which cannot but influence the translator's strategy.
There are also some minor groups of texts that can be considered separately because of the specific problems their translation poses to the translator. They are film scripts, comic strips, commercial advertisements and the like. In dubbing a film the translator is limited in his choice of variants by the necessity to fit the pronunciation of the translated words to the movement of the actor's lips. And in dealing with commercial advertisements he must bear in mind that their sole purpose is to win over the prospective customers. Since the text of translation will deal with quite a different kind of people than the original advertisement was ment for, there is the problem of achieving the same pragmatic effect by introducing the necessary changes in the message
As the names suggest, in written translation the source text is in written form, as is the target text. In oral translation or interpretation the interpreter listens to the oral presentation of the original and translates it as an oral message in TL. As a result, in the first case the Receptor of the translation can read it while in the second case he hears it.
There are also some intermediate types. The interpreter rendering his translation by word of mouth may have the text of the original in front of him and translate it "at sight". A written translation can be made of the original recorded on the magnetic tape that can be replayed as many times as is necessary for the translator to grasp the original meaning.
The line of demarcation between written and oral translation is drawn not only because of their forms but also because of the sets of conditions in which the process takes place. The first is continuous, the other momentary. In written translation the original can be read and re-read as many times as the translator may need or like. The same goes for the final product. The translator can come back to the preceding part of the original or get the information he needs from the subsequent messages. Here we can expect the best performance and the highest level of equivalence.
The conditions of oral translation impose a number of important restrictions on the translator's performance. Here the interpreter receives a fragment of the original only once and for a short period of time. His translation is also a one-time act with no possibility of any return to the original or any subsequent corrections. The users have sometimes to be content with a lower level of equivalence.
There are two main kinds of oral translation - consecutive and simultaneous. In consecutive translation the translating starts after the original speech or some part of it has been completed. If the segment is just a sentence or two the interpreter closely follows the original speech. If interpreter is expected to translate a long speech he has to remember a great number of messages and has to take notes of the original messages,
Sometimes the interpreter is set a time limit to give his rendering, selecting and reproducing the most important parts of the original and dispensing with the rest.
In simultaneous interpretation the interpreter is supposed to be able to give his translation while the speaker is uttering the original message. This can be achieved with a special radio or telephone-type equipment.
Handling translator's false friends (Introductory Notes)
There are words in the source and target languages which are more оr less similar in form. Such words are of great interest to the translator since he is naturally inclined to take this formal similarity for the semantic proximity and to regard the words that look alike as permanent equivalents
The formal similarity is usually the result of the two words having the common origin, mainly derived from either Greek or Latin. Since such words can be found in a number of languages, they are referred to as "international".
As a matter of fact, very few international words have the same meanings in different languages. In respect to English and Russian we can cite the words like the English "parliament, theorem, diameter" and their Russian counterparts «парламент, теорема, диаметр». In most cases, however, the semantics of such words in English and in Russian do not coincide and they should rather be named "pseudointernational". Their formal similarity suggesting that they are interchangeable, is, therefore, deceptive and may lead to translation errors. For that reason they are often referred to as the translator's false friends.
The pseudointernational words can be classified in two main groups. First, there are words which are similar in form but completely different in meaning. Here the risk of making a bad mistake is very great whenever the translator fails to consult his dictionary. Lots of mistakes have been made translating such English words as "decade, complexion, lunatic, accurate, actual, aspirant" and the like. E.g.:
(1) It lasted the whole decade.
(2) She has a very fine complexion.
(3) Well, he must be a lunatic.
The respective Russian words «декада, комплекция, лунатик» are pseudointernational and cannot be used in translation. Cf.:
(1) Это продолжалось целое десятилетие.
(2) У нее прекрасный цвет лица.
(3) Да он, должно быть, сумасшедший.
Second, there are many pseudointernational words which are not fully interchangeable though there are some common elements in their semantics. They may become the false friends if the translator substitutes one of them for the other without due regard to the difference in their meaning or to the way the English word is used in the particular context. The translator should bear in mind that a number of factors can preclude the possibility of using the formally similar word as an equivalent. Among these factors the following are most important:
1. The semantic factor resulting from the different subsequent development of the words borrowed by the two languages from the same source. For instance, the English "idiom" can be well rendered by its Russian counterpart to convey the idea of an expression whose meaning cannot be derived from the conjoined meanings of its elements but has developed such additional meanings as dialect (local idiom) and individual style (Shakespeare's idiom). When the word is used in either of these meanings its equivalent in Russian will not be «идиом», but «диалект, наречие» or «стиль», respectively.
As often as not, the translator may opt for an occasional equivalent to a pseudointernational word just as he may do while dealing with any other type of the word:
South Vietnam was a vast laboratory for the testing of weapons of counter-guerrilla warfare.
Южный Вьетнам стал полигоном для испытания оружия, используемого в войне против партизан.
2. The stylistic factor resulting from the difference in the emotive or stylistic connotation of the correlated words. For example, the English "career" is neutral while the Russian «карьера» is largely negative. The translator has to reject the pseudointernational substitute and to look for another way out, e.g.:
Davy took on Faraday as his assistant and thereby opened a scientific career for him.
Дэви взял Фарадея к себе в ассистенты и тем самым открыл ему путь в науку.
3. The co-occurrence factor reflecting the difference in the lexical combinability rules in the two languages. The choice of an equivalent is often influenced by the usage preferring a standard combination of words to the formally similar substitute. So, a "defect" has a formal counterpart in the Russian «дефект» but "theoretical and organizational defects" will be rather «теоретические и организационные просчеты». A "gesture" is usually translated as «жест» but the Russian word will not be used to translate the following sentence for the combinability factor:
The reason for including only minor gestures of reforms in the program...
Причина включения в программу лишь жалкого подобия реформ...
4. The pragmatic factor reflecting the difference in the background knowledge of the members of the two language communities which makes the translator reject the formal equivalent in favour of the more explicit or familiar variant. The reader of the English original will usually need no explanation concerning the meaning of such terms as "the American Revolution", "the Reconstruction" or "the Emancipation Proclamation" which refer to the familiar facts of the US history. In the Russian
translation, however, these terms are usually not replaced by their pseudointemational equivalents. Instead, use is made of the descriptive terms better known to the Russian reader:
The American Revolution was a close parallel to the wars of national liberation in the colonial and semi- colonial countries.
Война за независимость в Америке была прямым прототипом национально-освободительных войн в колониальных и полуколониальных странах.
This counter-revolutionary organization was set up to suppress, the Negro-poor white alliance that sought to bring democracy in the South in the Reconstruction period.
Эта контрреволюционная организация была создана для подавления совместной борьбы негров и белых бедняков, которые добивались установления демократии на юге после отмены рабства. The Senator knew Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation by heart. Сенатор знал наизусть провозглашенную Линкольном декларацию об отмене рабства.
With the knowledge of, and due regard to, these factors, the translator stands a good chance of making the pseudointemational words his good friends and allies.
Impersonal verb forms (неличные формы глагола)
Impersonal Verb Forms: the gerund, the participle, the infinitive, and constructions containing them.
The Gerund. In Russian there is no grammatical form like the gerund. In translations from English into Russian gerunds appear as nouns or verbs, the gerundial turn (оборот) is transformed into subordinate clause.
He advocates using this method. Он ратовал за использование этого метода.
Before mentioning this, Lord Russell says he has read a Russian book on space travel, which "was the reverse of warlike". Прежде, чем упомянуть этот факт, лорд Рассел сказал, что он читал русскую книгу о космических полетах, которая отнюдь не была воинственной.
In some cases the gerund is conveyed by means of the adverbial participle (деепричастие) or the participle.
Judy Grinham, the British Champion, put up her own best time ever in breaking the old record.
Английская чемпионка Джуди … показала наилучшее время, улучшив свой личный рекорд.
The Participle. P is used in English much more often than in Russian. In the latter it sounds more bookish. English has no active voice past participle (причастие прошедшего времени действительного залога), nor does it have the adverbial participle. The Russian language in its turn does not have the perfect participle (перфектная форма причастия). The differences cause certain problems in translation.
The English Present Participle is far from always translated by the Present Participle in Russian.
Fleur suddenly stood up leaning out of the window, with her chin on her hands.
Флер внезапно встала и, подперев руками подбородок, высунулась из окна. (глагол в личной форме)
He said that the strike movement "may turn into a national general strike bringing about the downfall of the dictatorship".
Он сказал, что забастовочное движение может превратиться во всеобщую забастовку, которая приведет к падению диктатуры.
Some Russian verbs having no adverbial participial form (деепричастия) , the Pr. Participle has to be conveyed by the personal form of the verb:
She sat sewing. - Она сидела и шила.
The Participle in the so called absolute form is always translated by the personal verb form, and the construction as a whole is usually translated by a subordinate clause or by a сочиненное предложение, as there is no absolute turn in Russian.
Agatha having stayed in with a cold, he had been to service himself.
Так как А из-за простуды осталась дома, он пошел в церковь один.
The following example (an elliptic construction) requires full syntactic rearrangement, even though analogous participial constructions are used.
When shot, Mrs. … was apparently taking a walk.
Миссис … была убита, очевидно, во время прогулки.
It is very characteristic of modern English definitions to employ compound adverbs composed of a past participle as the second part. Sometimes they match Russian definitions(1), but sometimes they do not(2).
Much-advertised policy. - Широко рекламируемая политика.(1)
Tory-directed policy. - Политика, направляемая консерваторами(2).
The Infinitive in English has a number of functions that do not come as functions of the Russian infinitive. The Continuous and Perfect infinitive forms are not present in Russian either. Therefore far from always can we translate the English infinitive by the indefinite form of a russian verb.
"The accusative case and the infinitive"(оборот "винительный падеж с инфинитивом") is usu. translated by a subordinate clause:
The chairman wanted the members of the commission to consider the report.
Председатель комиссии хотел, чтобы члены изучили доклад.
We can often come across "the nominative case (именительный)and the infinitive" in newspapers:
Three fishing boats are reported to be missing.
Сообщают, что три английские рыбачьи лодки пропали без вести.
The infinitive in its attributive function is usu. translated by a subordinate clause. Here it often has a modality and it must be conveyed too.
A council to be nominated by the governor of Malta…
Совет, который будет назначен …
The Perfect Infinitive is translated by the past tense.
These roads must have been built by the Romans.
Эти дороги, по-видимому, были построены римлянами.
The infinitive is often used to denote a future action.(especially in newspapers) This is usu. translated by the personal form of the verb:
Pritt to defend Macharia. - Притт будет защищать Макария.
But sometimes:
Bill and Boris to confer. - Предстоящее совещание Билла и Бориса. (Nouns are more common in Russian headlines than verbs)
Some problems may also arise from for-phrases:
I have closed the window for you not to catch cold. - Я закрыл окно, чтобы вы не простудились.
Translation of Causative Constructions.
Three-part constructions (saw him run) make up an important integral part of verbal syntactic complexes. In traditional grammar theory, they are viewed as combinations of a verb and a complex object. Constructions of the type comprise a predicate verb, an object, and an object predicate (объектный предикативный член).
The general term of complex object encompasses a broad variety of constructions. Theory of translation from English into Russian takes a special interest in that type of three-part constructions which bears causative implications. We call them imperative or causative constructions.
The theory distinguishes between:
a) constructions first unit of which is a causative verb;
b) constructions first unit of which are verbs to have or to get;
c) constructions first unit of which is a non-causative verb.
A. Causative Verb Constructions.
First unit is vividly causative in its meaning. (Verbs like to force, to compel, to cause, to make, etc.)
They forced him to leave the town. Они заставили его уехать из города.
(A) is not difficult for translation. Sometimes literal translation is possible.
In certain cases, the context may thoroughly eliminate the imperativeness of a causative verb:
I made polite conversation to make her feel "at home", but she was hard going.
Я завязал вежливую беседу, желая помочь ей почувствовать себя "как дома", но это оказалось нелегким делом.
A special type: an adverbial modifier (обстоятельство) takes the third position and the verb is only implied. The verb must be made out and mentioned in the translation.
Nothing could force him back. Ничто не могло заставить его вернуться назад.
B. To Have and To Get Constructions.
The special feature is that to have and to get are of somewhat lesser causative value. At the same time, it is the most common way of expressing causativity in modern English.
a) to have/to get + infinitive as the 3rd part;
b) to have/to get + participle II.
(a) the subject of the action is expressed;
(e.g.: We must get him to help the old people. Мы должны заставить его помочь этим старикам.)
(b) the subject of the action isn't expressed.(e.g.: She made a new dress. Она пошила себе платье.
She had a new dress made. Она пошила себе платье.)
Constructions of the type, especially the ones with to have, may be non-causative:
He had his horse killed. 1) Он приказал убить свою лошадь. Or
2) Под ним убили лошадь.
C. Non-causative Verbs Constructions.
The Russian language does not have such structures.
The Tories declare that we cannot spend ourselves into prosperity.
Консерваторы заявляют, что увеличением расходов нельзя добиться процветания.
Seldom, but they do, intransitive verbs occur at the first position. They are especially hard to translate, and even to understand:
The servant bowed him into the parlour. Слуга с поклонами провел его в гостиную.
So: Structure alterations, смысловая конкретизация, and other methods of contextual alterations (замен) are used most often here.
Basic types of changing sentence structure
Choice of the aspect form of the verb in translation
Handling translator's false friends (Introductory Notes)
Impersonal verb forms (неличные формы глагола)
Scientific and technical texts
Stylistic aspects of translation
Stylistic aspects of translation
The translation of pronouns
The subject-matter of the theory of translation
The main directions in the contemporary linguistic theory of translation
The nature or translation
Linguistic and extralinguistic aspects of translation
The role of semantic, syntactic and pragmatic relations
The effect of the pragmatic motivation of the original message
The effect of the receptor to text relation
The effect of the translator's angle of view
Nonuniqueness of the translator's decisions
The problem of translatability
Levels of equivalence
Adequate, literal and free translation
Losses and their compensation
Grammatical equivalence in translation
Grammatical transformation in translation
Transpositions
Replacements
Additions
Omissions
Translation of the prefix verb constructions from native language into English
Перевод сложных предложений различних типов
Сказуемое, выраженное (не)переходным глаголом