1. Methodological background of
language and in the target language,
the definition of translation
Linguistic theory of translation is
a part of translation studies that
deals with norms of interlaguage
correspondences.
Translation studies as a discipline
consists of different trends. The 1st
trend is translation history
includes translation as a process and
translation as a science. The 2nd
trend is a linguistic theory of
translation. The focus is mainly on
language. The 1st approach in the
USSR appeared as a linguistic
theory in the 60-s of 20-ies century.
The 3rd - translation criticism; the 4th
– machine translation.
According to Barkhudarov’s
interpretation translation - is the
process of transformation of text,
message or utterance of the
source language into the text,
message or utterance of the target
language, providing that the norms
of the target language is not
violated and the content remains
unchanged. Barkhudarov was the
first who gave this definition to
the process of interpretation of the
meaning of text in one language and
the production, in another language.
Translation is a peculiar type of
communication – interlingual
communication.
According to the point of view of
Korunets, translation as a term and
notion is of polysematic nature, its
common and most general meaning
being mostly associated with the
action or process of expressing the
content of a source language word,
word-group, sentence or passage in
the target language or with the result
of the process of rendering.
The problem of translatability or
untranslatability is closely related
to man’s understanding of the nature
of language, meaning and
translation. From the sociosemiotic
point of view, “untranslatables” are
fundamentally cases of language use
wherein the three categories of
sociosemiotic meaning carried by a
source expression do not coincide
with those of a comparable
expression in the target language.
Three types of untranslatability,
referential, pragmatic, and
intralingual may be distinguished.
There are 5 normative
requirements which compose the
norm of translation: 1) norms of
translation equivalence, 2) genre and
stylistics norms of translation, 3)
norms of translation speech, 4)
pragmatic norm of translation, 5)
conventional norms of translation.
The pragmatic norm of translation
can be defined as a requirement of
providing of pragmatic value of
translation. It is not a «norm» in
complete sense of this word,
because pragmatic underlying task
of translating act can be individual
and not incident to the translation in
general. However, modification of
results of process of translation for
pragmatic purposes is widespread
phenomenon, without the account of
which the normative estimation of
translations is impossible.
2. Techniques in the process of
translation
Direct Translation Techniques are
used when structural and conceptual
elements of the source language can
be transposed into the target
language. Direct translation
techniques include: Borrowing,
Calque, Literal Translation.
Borrowing is the taking of words
directly from one language into
another without translation. Many
English words are "borrowed" into
other languages; for example
software in the field of technology
and funk in culture.
Calque or loan translation is a
phrase borrowed from another
language and translated literally
word-for-word.Дом культуры –
House of Culture, backbencher –
заднескамеечник, стенная газета –
wall newspaper.
Literal Translation or word
translation is to be employed when
dealing with separate words whose
surface form and structure, as well
as their lexical meaning in the source
fully coincide.
Oblique Translation Techniques
are used when the structural or
conceptual elements of the source
language cannot be directly
translated without altering meaning
or upsetting the grammatical and
stylistics elements of the target
language: Transposition,
Modulation, Reformulation or
Equivalence, Adaptation,
Compensation
Transposition - This is the process
where parts of speech change their
sequence when they are translated
(blue ball becomes boule bleue in
French).
Modulation consists of using a
phrase that is different in the source
and target languages to convey the
same idea.
Reformulation or Equivalence -
expressing something in a
completely different way, for
example when translating idioms or
advertising slogans.
Adaptation occurs when something
specific to one language culture is
expressed in a totally different way
that is familiar or appropriate to
another language culture.
Compensation can be used when
something cannot be translated, and
the meaning that is lost is expressed
somewhere else in the translated
text.
Translation transformation
techniques are complicated inter-
language transferences resulting in
the creation of such a text that at full
scope reveals the information of
original text. The scholars
differentiate between lexical,
grammatical and stylistic
transformations. Divergences in the
structures of the two languages are
so considerable that in the process
of translation various grammatical
transformations indispensable to
achieve equivalence. These
transformations may be classed into
four types: 1. transpositions; 2.
replacements; 3. additions; 4.
omissions.
Lexical transformations are the are the devices of logical process takes notes as it goes on, when the
that reveal the meaning of the speech stops he renders the
devices of logical process that reveal lexical unit of the SL that is speaker’s speech) and simultaneous
the meaning of the lexical unit of the different in the context from the (the interpreter sits in a small sound-
SL that is different in the context dictionary one. Types of lexical proof booth, as the speech goes on,
transformations: differentiation, he rapidly injects the translation,
from the dictionary one. Types of
concretization, generalization, one or two sentences at a time into
lexical transformations: logical development, antonymic the mouthpiece of a telephone).
differentiation, concretization, translation, general reinterpretation, R. Jakobson in his semiotic
compensation. approach distinguishes three types
generalization, logical development,
Stylistic means and devices present of translation: intra-lingual or
antonymic translation, general considerable and varied problems rewording (reinterpretation of verbal
reinterpretation, compensation. for translation. They possess a signs with the help of other signs of
Stylistic means possess a distinct distinct national character although the same language), inter-lingual or
at first sight they may appear to be translation proper (reinterpretation
national character although at first identical. The translator must be of verbal signs of one language with
sight they may appear to be fully aware of the function of a the help of the signs of other
identical. Stylistic equivalence may stylistic device and its effect, to be language), inter-semiotic or
able to reproduce the same effect by transmutation (reinterpretation of
be achieved by different means and other means, if necessary, thus verbal signs by other signs of non-
not necessary by the same device. minimizing the inevitable losses due verbal system.
to inherent divergences. Stylistic There is also some variation
3. Transformation technique in equivalence may be achieved by depending on the purpose of a given
the process of translation different means and not necessary translation. The following three
Translation transformation by the same device. types of translation can be
techniques are complicated inter- distinguished: equivalent, adequate,
language transferences resulting in 4. The definition and classification literal and free translation.
the creation of such a text that at full of translations Adequate translation is the
scope reveals the information of Barchudarov’s definition: translation performed on the level
original text. The problem of Translation is a process of sufficient and necessary to convey
transformation techniques is substitution of the text, message or the information and preserve the
thoroughly elaborated by utterance in the source language by norms of the TL, while equivalent
contemporary scholars. The scholars the text, message or utterance in the translation is one that has a constant
differentiate between lexical, target language provided that the correspondence that exist
grammatical and stylistic contents of the text, message or independently upon the context.
transformations. The utterance remained unchanged and Thus, we may state that adequate
transformations are differentiated the norms of the target language are translation may be non-equivalent
only in the theory, but really they not violated. and equivalent translation can be
are intermingled. In practice, there is considerable inadequate.
Divergences in the structures of the variation in the types of translations Literal or word translation is to be
two languages are so considerable produced by translators. employed when dealing with
that in the process of translation Translation is carried on the level of separate words whose surface form
various grammatical transformations speech and any language exists in its and structure, as well as their lexical
indispensable to achieve oral and written forms. Dependent meaning in the source language and
equivalence. These transformations upon the form the SL and the TL are in the target language, fully coincide.
may be classed into four types: 1. used the following forms of Free translation is a special type of
transpositions; 2. replacements; 3. translation are distinguished: oral translation used as a rule in
additions; 4. omissions. and written. Written translation is annotations, précis, abstracts. Free
Language systems of meaning are when both languages – SL and TL translation is rendering of meaning
also different. Any language is able are used in their form. It can be regardless of form. The aim of such
to describe things, notions, literary or specific, depending on its translation is to convey information
phenomena and facts of life. This content. Oral translation is when to people in other countries in a
ability of language ensures both languages are used in their oral most compact and condensed
cognition of the outside world. But forms. There exist two subforms of manner.
the ways of expressing these things oral translation: consecutive (the
and notions usually vary in different interpreter listens to a speech and
languages. Lexical transformations
5. Causes of lexical and
grammatical transformations
Translation transformations are
complicated inter-language
transferences resulting in the
creation of such a text that at full
scope reveals the information of
original text. The scholars
differentiate between lexical,
grammatical and stylistic
transformations.
Grammatical transformations in the
process of translation are accounted
for one main reason: the divergences
in the structure of the two
languages.
While lexical transformations are
caused by a number of interrelated
factors:
1. The peculiarity of word semantic
structures in different languages. A
word may be more widely used in
one language, while in another it
may have a narrow or even
terminological meaning. Besides, all
the words are subdivided into
stylistically neutral and stylistically
coloured. The choice of one of the
meanings of a word depends merely
upon the environment of a given
word. And it is often the context that
makes the translator choose the right
correspondence in the TL, either
stylistically marked or unmarked.
2. The choice of the correspondence
may depend upon different
connotations of a word. It adds to
the primary meaning all those ideas
and emotions which human
experience has attached to the
original meaning. E.g. tiger: primary
meaning – a large beast animal,
connotation – the cunning and
swiftness of the cat combined with
enormous strength and pitiless
ferocity.
3. Polysemy. E.g. keen wind –
резкий ветер, keen joy – большая
радость, keen sportsman – to
страстный спортсмен, keen wit –
острый ум. In case of polysemy
everything depends upon the
environment of the word which
usually motivates the meaning of the
word.
4. Valency – the potential capacity that reveal the meaning of the
of words to occur with other words. lexical unit of the SL that is
E.g. to win a victory, to gain a different in the context from the
victory; to win a war, no equivalent. dictionary one. Types of lexical
It is important to note that the transformations: differentiation,
valency of words take place only in concretization, generalization,
the case of compatibility of the logical development, antonymic
notions denoted by these words. translation, general reinterpretation,
This compatibility may be different compensation.
in various languages. As a rule, one Stylistic means and devices present
of the combined words semantically considerable and varied problems
coincide and is preserved in for translation. They possess a
translation, while other id translated distinct national character although
by a word having another lexical at first sight they may appear to be
meaning, but the same function, e.g. identical. The translator must be
heavy rain – (тяжелый) сильный fully aware of the function of a
дождь, strong tea – (сильный) stylistic device and its effect, to be
крепкий чай. able to reproduce the same effect by
other means, if necessary, thus
minimizing the inevitable losses due
6. Types of transformations: to inherent divergences. Stylistic
lexical, grammatical, stylistic equivalence may be achieved by
Translation transformations are different means and not necessary
complicated inter-language by the same device.
transferences resulting in the
creation of such a text that at full 7. Adequacy in translation
scope reveals the information of Adequate translation, into V.
original text. The problem of Komysarova's idea, translation
transformation techniques is which provides pragmatically
thoroughly elaborated by problems of the translational
contemporary scholars. The scholars certificate on greatest possible for
differentiate between lexical, achievement of this purpose equal
grammatical and stylistic equivalence refers to, not supposing
transformations. The infringement of norms of the use of
transformations are differentiated words and their forms which was
only in the theory, but really they fixed in language of translation,
are intermingled. adhering to tasks – stylistic
Divergences in the structures of the requirements to texts of the given
two languages are so considerable type and answering socially – the
that in the process of translation recognized conventional norm of
various grammatical transformations translation. V. Komysarov's
indispensable to achieve equivalent translation names
equivalence. These transformations translation which recreates the
may be classed into four types: 1. contents of the speaking another
transpositions; 2. replacements; 3. language original on one levels of
additions; 4. omissions. equivalence. By definition any
Language systems of meaning are adequate translation, counts V.
also different. Any language is able Komysarov, should be equivalent
describe things, notions, (on this or that equal equivalence),
phenomena and facts of life. This but not any equivalent translation
ability of language ensures admits adequate, and what answers,
cognition of the outside world. But except for norm of equivalence, and
the ways of expressing these things to other normative requirements
and notions usually vary in different which have been mentioned above.
languages. Lexical transformations The information conveyed by
are the devices of logical process linguistic signs alone, i.e. the
meaning overtly expressed in text,
would not be sufficient for adequate
translation. Some linguists
distinguish between what they call
translation, based solely on the
meanings expressed by linguistic
signs and interpretation, involving
recourse to extralinguistic
information. In fact, the two are
very closely intertwined, and in
most cases effective translation is
impossible without adequate
knowledge of the speech-act
situation and the situation described
in the text( two on the aisle – два
места ближе к проходу) - would
hardly make much sense unless it is
known that the conversation takes
place at a box-office(speech-act
situation). The translation of
technical and scientific text requires
a certain amount of technical and
scientific knowledge. A successful
translator is always a bit of an
ethnographer, historian, politician.
A good example could be brought
from C. P. Snow's novel "Time of
Hope" "Gaping at some dirty tea
leaves, reading the cards and
looking at each other's silly hands
and..." - let the sentence have been
translated word-to-word in any other
language - the language community
of which is totally unaware that in
Britain clairvoyance experience
admits fortunetelling on tea leaves, -
it would have lost sense.
There are also word-realias that are
not translatable and as V. S.
Vinogradov points out, many of
them turn into borrowings. Such a
word-realia may be an exotism,
which in general, is transcribed in
translation.
Misrepresentation and ambivalency
in the TL text arise due to the
selection of semantically inadequate
lexical unit for the pragmatic
meaning of the SL lexical unit.
8. Ways of achieving adequacy in
translation
Adequate translation, into V.
Komisarov's idea, translation which
provides pragmatically problems of
the translational certificate on
greatest possible for achievement of
this purpose equal equivalence
refers to, not supposing
infringement of norms of the use of
words and their forms which was
fixed in language of translation,
adhering to tasks – stylistic
requirements to texts of the given
type and answering socially – the
recognized conventional norm of
translation.
The information conveyed by
linguistic signs alone, i.e. the
meaning overtly expressed in text,
would not be sufficient for adequate
translation. Some linguists
distinguish between what they call
translation, based solely on the
meanings expressed by linguistic
signs and interpretation, involving
recourse to extralinguistic
information. In fact, the two are
very closely intertwined, and in
most cases effective translation is
impossible without adequate
knowledge of the speech-act
situation and the situation described
in the text( two on the aisle – два
места ближе к проходу)- would
hardly make much sense unless it is
known that the conversation takes
place at a box-office(speech-act
situation). The translation of
technical and scientific text requires
a certain amount of technical and
scientific knowledge. A successful
translator is always a bit of an
ethnographer, historian, politician.
Both semantic and pragmatic
inadequacies are flaws which can
pose a recipient reader to the
problem or cultural
misunderstanding and adequate
comprehension of the TL text.
A good example could be brought
from C. P. Snow's novel "Time of
Hope" "Gaping at some dirty tea
leaves, reading the cards and
looking at each other's silly hands
and..." - let the sentence have been
translated word-to-word in any other
language - the language community
of which is totally unaware that in
Britain clairvoyance experience
admits fortunetelling on tea leaves, -
it would have lost sense.
There are also word-realias that are
not translatable and as V. S.
Vinogradov points out, many of
them turn into borrowings. Such a
word-realia may be an exotism,
which in general, is transcribed in
translation.
Realias, which are markers of
solidarity and bear national
colouring should be transcribed or
transliterated, but supplied with
comments in the footnotes.
Realias which are markers of either
solidarity or distance in the language
community other than of the SL text
native reader and are represented in
the SL text as foreignisms, should
be transcribed or transliterated, but
be also supplied with comments in
the footnotes to the TL reader.
Misrepresentation and ambivalency
in the TL text arise due to the
selection of semantically inadequate
lexical unit for the pragmatic
meaning of the SL lexical unit.
9. Adequacy and equivalence in
the theory of translation
The notion of “adequacy” is closely
connected with that of
“equivalence”. Some scholars
identify these terms and use them as
completely interchangeable notions.
For example, Catford’s notion of
“translation equivalence” is treated
as “adequacy of translation” by
R.Levitsky in his article “On the
principle of functional adequacy of
translation”.
Most scholars, such as Komisarov,
Reiss, Vermeer, regard “equivalence
and adequacy” as different and at
the same time closely connected
notions. Komisarov, for instance,
thinks that “adequate translation”
has a broad meaning and is used as a
synonym for a “good translation”
that guarantees sufficient
interlinguistic communication.
“Equivalence” is regarded as
semantic similarity of the SL and
TL and speech units. In Reiss and
Vermeer’s opinion, “equivalence” is
based on the reproduction of the
communicative effect and
“adequacy” stresses adaptation to
factors arising from the secondary
situation. While “equivalence”
regards translation as a result,
“adequacy” tends to view it as a
process.
Adequate translation is the
translation performed on the level
sufficient and necessary to convey
the information and preserve the
norms of the TL, while equivalent
translation is one that has a constant
correspondence that exist
independently upon the context.
Thus, we may state that adequate
translation may be non-equivalent
and equivalent translation can be
inadequate.
There are several types of
equivalence in the theory of
translation:
-Literal equivalence - the case when
everything is translated literally,
omitting the parts which are
impossible to translate, used in draft
poetry or technical translation.
-Contextual equivalence - the author
renders every single unit of the
contents and preserves the norms of
the target language).
-Adequate equivalence - the author
renders all the meaningful units and
preserves the original language
means (units of translation)
-Functional/dynamic equivalence -
trying to achieve the same reaction
of the public. It may be denotative,
syntactic, connotative, and
pragmatic.
-Absolute equivalents (names,
terminology, clichés) - pairs of
language unites which correspond in
most cases, not depending on the
context. E.g. London, chemistry,
how do you do, but: air resistance,
strength of the metal
(сопротивление воздуха,
сопротивление металла)
- Relative equivalents - pairs of
language unites which correspond in
most cases in dependence on the
contextual situation.
-Full equivalents - pairs of language
unites with similar usage
-Partial equivalents - pairs of
language unites with different
combinatory possibilities.
- Zero equivalents - language units
that lack an analogue in the target
language: idiomatic units, slang
words, realia and terminology.
11. Aspects of translation
Modern semiotics dealing with the
problem of sign determines three
types of relations peculiar to every
natural sign. They are as follows:
1. semantic relations that reflect the
relations between a sign and its
object
2. syntactic relations that connect a
sign with other signs of a system
3. pragmatic relations that determine
the relations between a sign and
persons who use it in the process of
communication.
Linguists has borrowed the theory of
three types of relationship between
the natural sign and its surroundings
with regard to the problem of the
language sign. As a result scholars
differentiate between:
1. semantic meaning (denotative,
referential)
2. syntactic meaning (interlinguistic)
3. pragmatic meaning.
Thus, scholars distinguish tree
aspects of translation which deal
with three types of meanings:
semantic, syntactic and pragmatic.
12. Pragmatic aspects of
Translation
The people who use the language
are not impartial to it. And their
subjective attitudes are stuck to the
linguistic units and through them to
objects and phenomena described
and constitute a permanent
component of their semantic
structure. The translator must strive
to create not only linguistically but
also pragmatically relevant TL texts.
Pragmatics of translation is a wide
notion which covers not only
pragmatic meaning of a word, but
some problems connected with
various levels of understanding by
speech acts communicants of certain
meanings or messages, depending
on linguistic or paralinguistic
factors, that is, background
knowledge.
The term pragmatic meaning of a
word is not yet fully investigated.
But some linguists point out that the
pragmatic component of the word
meaning, which is realized in
various kinds of emotive and
stylistic connotations, is
individually-occasional or
collectively used meanings. They
reflect the conditions of a language
unit use, such as situation and place
of communication, subject and
purpose of communication; social,
ethnic, and individual peculiarities
of communicants, their attitude
towards one another. Irrespective of
the fact whether pragmatic aspects
are singled out into a certain type of
a word meaning or whether it is
considered among other components
of its meaning, pragmatic meaning,
which is fixed in a word, plays an
important role and its retention
ensures complete communicative
adequacy of translation to the
original.
Pragmatics as a linguistic term
means the analysis of language in
terms of the situational context,
within which utterances are made,
including the knowledge and beliefs
of the speaker and the relation
between speaker and listener.
13. The problem of conveying
pragmatic meaning
A well-known linguist Komissarov
points out that pragmatic aspect of
translation should be considered
from three points. One of them is
conveying pragmatic meaning of
words. This point chiefly pertains to
the translation of national realia and
equivalent lacking words that is,
various names.
The term pragmatic meaning of a
word is not yet fully investigated.
But some linguists point out that the
pragmatic component of the word
meaning, which is realized in
various kinds of emotive and
stylistic connotations, is
individually-occasional or
collectively used meanings. They
reflect the conditions of a language
unit use, the conditions such as
situation and place of
communication, subject and purpose
of communication; social, ethnic,
and individual peculiarities of
communicants, their attitude
towards one another.
Pragmatic information is actualized
in translating the equivalent–lacking
lexical units, first of all personal
names, geographical names, national
realia by way of transcription and
transliteration. But in some cases,
while translating the names of
states, boroughs, counties and
provinces explication of their
implicit information is needed. For
example: Georgia – штат
Джорджія (США) (In case the
context indicates that the author
writes or speaks about the USA)
Explication is also required in cases
when one and the same name
designates several notions:
ALBANY – Олбані – поетична
назва Шотландії; Олбані –
чоловіча тюрма на острові Уайт
(Англія); Олбані – річка у
центральній частині Канадu;
Олбані – порт і курортне місто у
південно-західній частині
Австралії.
As a rule, personal names are
translated be means of transcription
or transliteration (or both
combined). But when a proper name
acquires the connotation as an
important pragmatic factor, it should
be translated on a communicative
but not on a semantic level. For
example: MIDAS – 1) Багата
людина; 2) Людина, яка постійно
примножує багатство.
As to the meaning of national realia
it is more often than not rendered by
means of transcription or
transliteration, but very often
explication of their national
meaning is also necessary. Thus,
kulish, borsch are rendered by way
of descriptive translation – thick
meal cooked with grain.
While translating the names of
national holidays the pragmatic
approach is also required. For
example, Easter Monday translated
word-for-word does not give any
notion of this holiday. Its
interpretation as перший понеділок
після Пасхи is more understandable
for the Ukrainian recipient.
Some additions in the translation
help to make it more accurate and
exact.
There are cases when generalization
is used for replacing the proper
name, usually of shops, clubs,
colleges, schools etc. For example: I
could see my mother going in
Warren’s Sports and Games – Я
бачив, як моя мама заходила у
спортивний магазин.
In some cases the word which
designates national realia is not
important in the semantic structure
of the text. Then the translator may
employ the method of omission.
Pragmatic task of the translation
aims at ensuring maximal
equivalency with the original.
Pragmatic aspect of the translation is
very important especially in
translation of nationally-biased units
of lexicon.
14. Pragmatic factors and the
problem of translation
(Shveitser’s approach)
Pragmatic meaning is the relation
that exists between the user of the
linguistic unit and through the
linguistic unit to phenomena or
reality of life. It includes all
extralinguistic phenomena.
Shveitser starts from the point that
the goal of translation remains the
same in different situations – to
convey the identity between the SL
and the TL texts. Nevertheless the
translation usually moves away
from the close linguistic
equivalency in order to try to
achieve the same communicative
(and artistic) effect.
The pragmatic factors according to
Shveitser include:
1. the sender’s communicative
intention
2. orientation towards the receptor
3. the translator’s personality
4. functional facet of the text
The transformations involved are
replacement, addition, omission,
explanatory translation and
compensation.
In this respect we may speak of
pragmatically adequate TL text but
not semantically adequate.
15. Pragmatic adaptation and
pragmatic reconstruction
Pragmatic meaning is the relation
that exists between the user of the
linguistic unit and through the
linguistic unit to phenomena or
reality of life. It includes all
extralinguistic phenomena.
Pragmatic adequacy in translation is
the process of finding similarities
between the stylistic and emotional
characteristics of the SL and TL text
with the corresponding elements of
the target language.
The investigation of the process of
conveying pragmatic meaning is
reduced to pragmatic adaptation that
is to find similarity in pragmatic
situations of the SL and TL text.
E.g. “Brief Candles” – сборник
Хаксли «Огарки»
Pragmatic reconstruction is the
process of transference of stylistic
and emotional characteristics of the
text according to the general pattern
but not to the exact items that
constitute the text. E.g. Lords reject
“opting out” Corporal Punishment
Bill – Палата Лордов
отказывается принимать закон об
отмене телесных наказаний.
16. Pragmatic meaning and its
constituent parts
The people who use the language
are not impartial to it. And their
subjective attitudes are stuck to the
linguistic units and through them to
objects and phenomena described
and constitute a permanent
component of their semantic
structure. The translator must strive
to create not only linguistically but
also pragmatically relevant TL texts.
Pragmatic meaning is the relation
that exists between the user of the
linguistic unit and through the
linguistic unit to phenomena or
reality of life. It includes all
extralinguistic phenomena.
The term pragmatic meaning of a
word is not yet fully investigated.
But some linguists point out that the
pragmatic component of the word
meaning, which is realized in
various kinds of emotive and
stylistic connotations, is
individually-occasional or
collectively used meanings. They
reflect the conditions of a language
unit use, such as situation and place
of communication, subject and
purpose of communication; social,
ethnic, and individual peculiarities
of communicants, their attitude
towards one another.
The main components of pragmatic
meaning:
1. stylistic characteristics of the
word
2. register
3. emotional colouring
4. expressive components.
17. The problem of conveying
intralinguistic meaning
Words influence each other and
presuppose choice of their
neighboring dependants. They
cannot combine if they belong to
different styles (*светлоокая
девка, a boozy-woozy lady). Words
do not combine if they do not match
speech norms, i.e. their word
combinability is beyond the norm.
Thus, in Russian we say молодой
картофель but we cannot say in
English *young potatoes, as the
word potatoes requires the adjective
new (new potatoes). Words in their
primary meaning cannot be
combined together if their near
context is not taken into
consideration. The Russians say
“Не пейте сырой воды”, which
cannot be rendered by the phrase
“Don’t drink *raw water.” because
English-speaking people use in this
case quite a different word
combination: “unboiled water”. So
in translation we have to substitute
one word for another that naturally
fits the context.
Intralinguistic meaning – the
relation between the linguistic signs
of one and the same language.
Aspects of intralinguistic meaning:
- Sound similarity: alliteration,
assonance (for ex: in “The Raven”
by Poe);
- Morphemic similarity ("Do you
know anything about books?" "Yes,
sir, I'm a good bookkeeper." - Вы
что-нибудь смыслите в книгах? -
Да, сэр, я умею вести конторские
книги)
- Intralinguistic meaning is also
revealed in puns, or plays upon
words, which make most puzzling
tasks for a translator. In this case a
translator cannot use translation
equivalents but has to compensate a
word by another one that can be also
played upon. For example, to
translate a children’s riddle into
English: Why is a book like a king?
– Because it has many pages.
(where the word page is associated
with two homonymous meanings: 1)
страница, 2) паж), a translator
compensated the homonymous page
by the Russian homonym глава
(1.head, 2.chapter): Что общего
между книгой и драконом? – У
обоих несколько глав).
18. Grammatical aspect of
translation
Equivalence is achieved by different
transformations: grammatical,
lexical, stylistic. The causes
generating grammatical
transformations are not always
purely grammatical but may be
lexical as well, though grammatical
causes naturally prevail due to
differences in the SL and TL
grammatical structures.
Divergences in the structures of the
two languages are so considerable
that in the process of translation
various grammatical and lexical
transformations indispensable to
achieve equivalence. These
transformations may be classed into
four types: 1. transpositions; 2.
replacements; 3. additions; 4.
omissions.
Transposition- is a change in the
order of the target sentence syntactic
elements (Subject, Predicate,
Object, etc.) as compared with that
of the source sentence dictated
either by peculiarities of the target
language syntax or by the
communication intent. (e.g. The
flight will be boarding at Gate 17 in
about fifteen minutes.
Приблизительно через 15 минут
на этот рейс будет посадка у
выхода номер 17)
Replacement - is any change in the
target text at the morphological,
lexical and syntactic levels of the
language when the elements of the
certain source paradigms are
replaced by different elements of
target paradigms. (e.g. He used to
come to Italy each spring. Обычно
он приезжал в Италию каждую
весну.)
Addition - is a device intended for
the compensation of structural
elements implicitly present in the
source text or paradigm forms
missing in the target language. (e.g.
The policeman waved me on.
Полицейский помахал мне рукой,
показывая, что я могу проезжать).
Omission - is reduction of the
elements of the source text
considered redundant from the
viewpoint of the target language
structural patterns and stylistics.
(e.g. Summer rains in Florida may
be violent, while they last. Летом во
Флориде бывают сильные дожди).
We also omit words that are not
necessary for understanding or
expressing a certain coloring.One of
the cases or superfluity is the use in
English of twin-pair synonyms
mostly typical of judicial
documents. (E.g. regular and normal
session – обычная сессия)
This classification, however, should
be applied with reservation. In most
cases they are combined with one
another, moreover, grammatical and
lexical elements in a sentence are so
closely interwoven that one change
involves another.
19. The object of Translation
Theory as a discipline
The object of theory of translation is
translation as a process, i.e. a certain
type of human activities resulting in
a new target language text and as a
result of a certain action, process,
i.e. the translated text itself. By the
word “process” we mean a certain
kind of translation from a SL text
into a TL text, i.e. the linguistic
aspect proper, rather than
psychological or mental work going
on in the mind of the translator. By
”text” we mean any stretch of
language spoken or written, that is
under discussion. Thus, for example,
N.Enkwist reduces the notion of
“text” to three fundamental
linguistic parameters, characterizing
it as:
1. topic (the message of the text or
its content)
2. forms (the marked units of the
text – words, phrases, sentences)
3. linkage (a means of linking
various stretches of the utterance)
According to circumstances a text
may thus be a whole library of
books, a chapter, a paragraph, a
sentence etc.
20. Concretization.
Generalization.
Concretization is a linguistic case
when the SL word or word
combination with wide primary
meaning is replaced by the TL word
or word combination with narrow
meaning. It may be divide into:
1. linguistic (e.g. student, pupil;
thing (abstract meaning) – вещь,
предмет, дело, дело, факт)
2. contextual (e.g. the clouds fled
before the wind - ветер рассеял
облака)
Abstract words in English form a
numerous group. Words belonging
to this group require lexical and
grammatical replacements by words
possessing a concrete meaning:
Ageing Speaker cannot take the
burdens of the
presidency.Стареющий спикер не
может принять на себя всю
тяжесть президентской власти.
Words of abstract meaning which
for some reason or other have no
equivalents in the Russian language
are translated by some concrete
word determined by the context.
Their meaning is usually conveyed
with the help of replacements or
additions.
Another group is formed by a large
number of words of wide meaning.
Their reference has widened to such
an extent that they have come to be
used in a variety of contexts. Some
of them move towards
desemantization, such as piece,
place, thing, affair, stuff, stunt etc:
The place was full, and they
wandered about looking for a table.
Ресторан был переполнен; они
ходили по залу в поисках
свободного столика.
Desemantized words form one more
group.The word place which is
practically desemantized is
translated by the concrete word
ресторан.
Special attention should be paid to
the translation of verbs of wide
meaning, such as: to come, to go, to
turn, to say, to tell, to get, to die and
others. They are rendered either by
concrete words suitable to the
context or by verb equivalents used
in corresponding collocations:The
canary got out of the cage.
Канарейка выпорхнула из клетки.
Hi is a man of taste
Он человек со вкусом
all the king's men
все королевские солдаты
Generalization is a case when the
SL word with some special narrow
meaning is substituted by the TL
word with general wide semantic
meaning. E.g. He visits Jane every
weekend – каждую неделю.
This type is not so wide-spread and
occurs less frequently than
concretization. May be this is due to
the fact that abstract and
desemantized words in English
form, a numerous and diversified
group, thus supplying a linguistic
base to this type of transformation,
whereas generalization appears to be
lacking a similar linguistic
foundation. Sometimes
generalization is resorted to for
pragmatic reasons in order to avoid
expanded explanations or footnotes.
There is a tendency in the English
language to use nouns denoting
measures of weight, distance,
length, etc. in describing people and
things which do not require such
precision in their description. This
method of description is foreign to
the Russian practice and recourse is
usually taken to generalization: He
was a young man of 6 feet two
inches.Это был высокий молодой
человек.
I mean it. - Я не шучу.
That killed me.
Я чуть не сдох
Hurry up.
Только не копайся!
21. Omission. Addition.
Omission is a type of
transformations by means of which
some units are omitted in case they
violate the norms of the TL. We also
omit the words that are not
necessary for understanding or
expressing a certain colouring. One
of the cases of superfluity is the use
in English of twin pair synonyms
mostly typical of judicial
documents. E.g. regular and normal
session – обычная сессия, with the
advice and Consent of the Senate – с
согласия сената
Some typical cases of redundancy
may be mentioned here:
synonymous pairs, the use of
weights and measures with emphatic
intent, subordinate clauses of time
and place. Homogeneous
synonymous pairs are used in
different styles of the language:
Equality of treatment in trade and
commerce. – Равные
возможности в торговле. Words
denoting measures and weights are
frequently used in describing people
or abstract notions. They are either
omitted or replaced in translation:
Every inch of his face expressed
amazement. На его лице было
написано изумление.
Subordinate clauses of time and of
place are frequently felt to be
redundant in Russian and are
omitted in translation: The storm
was terrific while it lasted. Буря
была ужасная.
Sometimes semantic units available
or implied in the deep structure drop
out when it is transformed into the
surface structure. These semantic
units should be deduced from the
deep structure and added in the
process of translation. This process
is called addition. E.g. oil countries
– страны-производители нефти,
wages demand – требование
повысить зарплату, solid engine –
двигатель на твердом топливе.
There are particular cases when
additions are caused by compressed
structures such as the absolute
possessive, attributes formed by
juxtaposition N1 + N2 structures and
by attributive groups.
The model N1 + N2 often requires
additions in translation: death
vehicle – автомашина, убившая
прохожего. Sometimes additions
are required by pragmatic
considerations: pay claim – purpose. Transcription is not
требование повышения
заработной платы. Attributive
groups are another case in point.
The elements forming such groups
vary in number, their translation into
Russian as a rule requires additions,
e.g. oil thirsty Europe – Европа,
испытывающая нехватку нефти.
Additions are also caused by
discrepancy in the use of the plural
and singular forms of certain nouns:
Delegates from various industries –
представители различных
отраслей промышленности.
Another cause of additions is
English word building, e.g.
conversation and the use of some
non-equivalent suffixes: We
showered and dressed.Мы приняли
душ и оделись.
22. Loan translation
Translation loans are words and
expressions formed from the
material existing in the TL but
according to the patterns taken from
the SL. E.g. Дом культуры – House
of Culture, backbencher – SL word by means of the more or
заднескамеечник, стенная газета –
wall newspaper.
Literal translation should not be
confused with translation loans. A
translation loan is a peculiar form of
word-borrowing by means of literal
translation. Translation loans are
built on the pattern of foreign words
or phrases with the elements of the
borrowing language, e.g. collective
farm is a translation loan of the
Russian колхоз but in a full and not
in an abbreviated form; oil dollars -
нефтедоллары; goodneighbourly
relations – добрососедские
отношения (a full loan); war effect
(a partial loan as number does not
coincide).
23. Transcription. Transliteration
There are two ways of rendering
proper names in translation:
transcription and transliteration.
Transcription - The representation
of the sound of the words in a
language using another alphabet or
set of symbols created for that
concerned with representing
characters: it strives to give a
phonetically (or phonologically)
accurate representation of the word.
This may differ, depending on the
language or set of symbols into
which the word is being transcribed.
Because transcription attempts to
recreate the meaning-bearing sounds
of the original using the alphabet(s)
and spelling conventions of the
language into which it is
transcribed, multiple spellings of the
same word are possible for a single
language, and dozens may be
encountered if searching across
languages.
Transcription is now universally
accepted: Mary – Мэри. Phonetic
peculiarities, however, sometimes
interfere and modify this principle
by causing certain departures, e.g.
the name of the well-known novelist
Iris Murdoch is rendered with the
inserted letter (and sound) “p” –
Айрис Мэрдок.
Transliteration or representing a
less corresponding TL characters,
that is, in a graphic way, is no
longer regarded as an acceptable
method of rendering proper names
in translation.Transliteration is not
concerned with representing the
phonetics of the original: it only
strives to accurately represent the
characters.
But tradition has preserved it in
some cases and therefore this
method still survives, e.g. Lincoln is
rendered as Линкольн and
Wellington as Веллингтон.
O’Henry – О’Генри.
Hollywood - Голливуд
Beatles – Битлз
24. Occasional lacuna and the
problem of translation
Non-equivalents are SL words
which have no corresponding lexical
units in the TL vocabulary.
The absence of equivalents may be
explained both by extralinguistic
and linguistic reasons. Accordingly,
non-equivalents may be divided into
two groups. The first group consists
of words denoting referents
unknown in the target language –
things, objects, notions, features of
national life, customs, habits, etc.
the words of this group bear a
distinctly national character and are
tied up with the history of the people
speaking that language, the growth
of its culture, its way of life and
traditions. The words belonging to
this group cover a wide range of
denotation, e.g. speaker, parliament,
public school, landslide, coroner,
teach-in, drive-in, know-how,
striptease, brain drain,
backbencher, grill-room, as well as
titles of politeness, etc.
The second group embraces words
which for some linguistic reason
have no equivalents in the target
language, the so-called linguistic
lacuna, e.g. privacy, involvement,
glimpse, conservationist,
environmentalist, oralist,
readership, riser, bedder, vote-
getter, statehood, etc.
There are three ways of rendering
non-equivalents in translation.
1. By Borrowings
The borrowed words may be either
transliterated or transcribed, e.g. ale
–эль, roastbeef – ростбиф, sweater
– свитер (transliterated
borrowings). Parliament – Ukrainian. So their lexical meaning
парламент, striptease – стриптиз,
speaker – спикер, know-how – ноу-
хау, establishment – their
истэблишмент (transcribed
borrowings).
2. By translation loans
House of Commons – Палата
Общин, backbencher – клубу «Ноттінгем Форест» у
заднескамеечник, brain trust –
мозговой трест.
3. By Descriptive or Interpreting
Translation
Landslide – победа на выборах с
огромным перевесом голосов;
a stringer (америк.) – частично
занятый корреспондент, труд
которого оплачивается из
расчета количества слов;
a conservationist (environmentalist)
– человек, озабоченный
загрязнением или уничтожением
окружающей среды.
25. Antonymic translation
Antonymic translation is employed
for the sake of achieving faithfulness
in conveying content or the
necessary expressiveness of sense
units. It represents a way of
rendering when an affirmative in
structure language unit (word, word-
combination or sentence) is conveyed
via a negative in sense or structure
but identical in content language
unit, or vice versa: a negative in
sense or structure sense unit is
translated via an affirmative sense
unit. E.g. to have quite a few friends -
мати багато (немало) друзів;
mind your own business - не
втручайся не в свої справи; take it
easy - не хвилюйся; not
infrequently - часто; я не
нездужую нівроку - І feel perfectly
well.
The antonymic device is employed words through phrases and
in the following cases: sentences right up to entire
1. when in the target language there paragraphs.
is no direct equivalent for the sense Linguistic hierarchy:
unit of the source language. For 1. phoneme/grapheme
example, the noun «inferiority» and 2. morpheme
the adjective «inferior» (like the verb 3. word
phrase «to be inferior») have no 4. phrase/word combination
single-word equivalents in 5. sentence
6. text
can be conveyed either in a Levels of translation:
descriptive way or with the help of 1. phonemic level
antonyms «superiority», 2. morphemic level
«superior»: The defeat of the Notts in 3. word level
last season's cup semi-finals was 4. phrase/word combination level
certainly the result of their physical 5. sentence level
and tactical inferiority... Поразка 6. text level
торішньому півфінальному матчі на
кубок країни була наслідком 27. The Levels of Equivalence
переваги їхніх супротивників у (Komisarov’s theory)
фізичній і тактичній підготовці. The theory of levels of equivalence
The meaning of some English word- is the model of translation based on
groups can also be conveyed in the assumption that relations of
Ukrainian antonymically only:
equivalence are established between
Baines was sitting in his shirt- the analogues levels of the contents
sleeves. Бейнз сидів без піджака. of the SL and TL texts.
Do you mind this? Ви не V.N. Komisarov distinguishes the
заперечуєте? following levels of equivalence
2. When the sense unit of the viewed as different stages of
source language has two
semantic similarity between the TL
negations of its own which create and SL texts:
an affirmation: In those clothes she1. the level of language signs
was by no means non-elegant. У (words)
цьому вбранні вона була досить 2. the level of the utterance
елеґантна. (syntactic structures)
3. In order to achieve the necessary3. the level of the structure of
expressiveness in narration: I don'tinformation
think it will hurt you. Думаю, вам 4. the level of the description
воно не зашкодить. A shell fell (identification) of the situation
close. Неподалік вибухнув снаряд. 5. the level of the aim of
4. In order to avoid the use of the communication.
same or identical structures close to
The aim of the process of translation
each other in a text (stylistic aim and
is to convey the whole contents of
means): She was a woman of the SL text. To achieve this aim it is
character. Вона була жінкою не necessary to establish the relations
без характеру. Most of the staff is of ultimate (maximum) equivalence
not away. Більшість співробітників between the corresponding levels.
ще на роботі. Savina said nothing. The mechanism of the theory of
Савіна промовчала. translation is the following:
At the first stage an interpreter
26. Unit of translation consecutively determines all the
Unit Of Translation - The smallest levels of the contents of the SL text
entity in a text that carries a starting from language signs to the
discrete meaning. It varies all the aim of communication.
time, ranging from individual
At the second stage using the
language code of the TL text the
interpreter studies the level
hierarchy in the reverse order. He
tries to determine whether each level
of the text contents presents the final
variant of translation. In case any
level requires some definite forms
the interpreter chooses the variant of
translation irrespective of the SL
text. If there is no limit of this kind
the interpreter starts to choose
variants of translation on the level of
language signs trying to establish
relations of equivalence with the
corresponding level of the SL text.
The variant chosen by the interpreter
should not contradict the contents of
the higher levels. In case it’s
impossible to establish the relations
of equivalence between the units on
the level of language signs the
interpreter shifts to the next level
and so on. Thus, the units of the SL
and TL texts will be equivalent to
each other on different levels of the
contents. The upper limit of
translatability will be the
equivalence on the first level (the
level of language signs) and vice
verse – the lower limit will be on the
upper level (the level of the aim of
communication). At the same time
equivalence on the lower level
automatically implies the
equivalence on the higher level.
The theory of levels of equivalence
overcomes the incompleteness of
the denotational and
transformational models of
translation. It describes this process
completely, divides the semantic
complex and gives the criteria for
the general evaluation of the
translation quality.
28. Ways of conveying referential
meaning
As one of the main tasks of
translation is to render the exact
meaning of words, it is important to
consider here the three types of
lexical meaning which can be
distinguished. They are: referential,
emotive and stylistic.
Referential meaning (also called
nominative, denotative or cognitive)
has direct reference to things or
phenomena of objective reality,
naming abstract notions and
processes as well. Referential
meaning may be primary and
secondary thus consisting of
different lexical Semantic Variants
(LSV).
Lexical transformations which are
practically always required in the
rendering of referential meaning in
translation are caused by various
factors. They may be classed as
follows:
a) different vision of objects and
phenomena and different approach
to them;
It is common knowledge that one
and the same object of reality may
be viewed by different languages
from different aspects: the eye (of
the needle – ушко иголки).
All these words (naked eye –
невооруженный глаз; fortnight –
две недели; next door – соседний
дом) describe the same facts and
although formally not correlated
they are equivalents.
b) different semantic structure of a
word in the SL and in the TL;
Divergences in the semantic
structure of words of the S and T
languages are one of the primary
cases of lexical transformations.
These divergences are connected
with certain peculiar features of a
word or a group of words.
c) different valency or collocability;
The aptness of a word to appear in
various combinations is described as
its lexical valency or collocability
which amounts to semantic
agreement. Collocability implies the
ability of a lexical unit to combine
with other lexical units, with other
words or lexical groups. A word as a
lexical unit has both paradigmatic
and syntagmatic collocability.
d) different usage.
Traditional usage of words of word
combinations is typical of each
language. Traditional S.L. and T.L.
usage or clichés do not coincide.
The words forming such clichés
often have different meanings in the
two language but they are
traditionally used to describe similar
situations. The problem of the
proper selection of equivalent words
and clichés can be solved only if the
peculiarities of the correlated
languages are taken into
consideration, e.g: She never drank
boiled water. Она никогда не пила
сырой воды.
This factors usually presents little
difficulty for the translator but it
must never be overlooked, otherwise
the translator may lapse into literal
translation.
29. Ways of conveying realia
Realia – a lexical element which
indicate ethnic notions (notions,
which are common only for one
culture). Realias are considered to
be non-equivalent lexis.
This group consists of words
denoting referents unknown in the
target language – things, objects,
notions, features of national life,
customs, habits, etc. the words of
this group bear a distinctly national
character and are tied up with the
history of the people speaking that
language, the growth of its culture,
its way of life and traditions.
Cultural discrepancy accounts for
the appearance of words which are
untranslatable in the literal sense of
the word. Yet there are different
ways of rendering these words in
translation and of overcoming the
so-called “barrier of
untranslatability” (cultural
untranslatability). The words
belonging to this group cover a wide
range of denotation, e.g. speaker,
parliament, public school, landslide,
coroner, teach-in, drive-in, know-
how, striptease, brain drain,
backbencher, grill-room,etc.
There are three ways of rendering
realias in translation.
1. by Borrowings
The borrowed words may be either
transliterated or transcribed, e.g. ale
–эль, roastbeef – ростбиф, sweater
– свитер (transliterated
borrowings). Parliament –
парламент, striptease – стриптиз, that reveal the meaning of the phenomena and facts of life. This
speaker – спикер, know-how – ноу- lexical unit of the SL that is ability of language ensures
хау, establishment – different in the context from the cognition of the outside world. But
истэблишмент (transcribed dictionary one. Types of lexical the ways of expressing these things
borrowings). transformations: differentiation, and notions usually vary in different
2. By translation loans concretization, generalization, languages. Lexical transformations
House of Commons – Палата logical development, antonymic are the devices of logical process
Общин, backbencher – translation, general reinterpretation, that reveal the meaning of the
заднескамеечник, brain trust – compensation. lexical unit of the SL that is
мозговой трест. General reinterpretation - It is the different in the context from the
3.By Descriptive or Interpreting replacement of the SL unit by the dictionary one. Types of lexical
Translation TL one that is quite different in its transformations: differentiation,
Landslide – победа на выборах с referential meaning but is similar in concretization, generalization,
огромным перевесом голосов; pragmatic. It is a kind of logical logical development, antonymic
a stringer (америк.) – частично development, but in most cases we translation, general reinterpretation,
занятый корреспондент, труд can’t reveal logic connections compensation.
которого оплачивается из between the SL and TL words. E.g. Logical development - The essence
расчета количества слов; never mind – не стоит of this transformation device is the
a conservationist (environmentalist) беспокоится, well-done – браво, replacement of one notion by
– человек, озабоченный don’t mention – не стоит another provided that they are
загрязнением или уничтожением благодарности, Hear! Hear! – connected as cause and
окружающей среды. правильно! As a rule it is connected consequence. E.g. acid test –
Differences in cultural background with the translation of лакмусовая бумажка, process –
frequently require detailed additions phraseological units, when the object, thing, I gave the horse his
which are explanatory. What is correspondence to it is found in the head (metonymy) – Я отпустил
familiar to the native reader may be target language taking into account поводья. As a rule, it is connected
unfamiliar to the reader of the general meaning of the with the stylistic of the context. For
translation. Additions in this case phraseological unit. Taking into example: I dоn't blame them. Я їх
make up for the implicit account the meaning of the не звинувачую. Я їх розумію (with
information, contained in the text. phraseological unit translator either the help of logical development).
find the phraseological equivalent in Hе's dead now. Він мертвий. Він
the target language or takes away уже небіжчик. (with the help of
the imagery of the phraseological logical development
30. General reinterpretation unit and gives the translation which Then this girl gets killed, because
Translation transformation has only the meaning of the she's always speeding.
techniques are complicated inter- phraseological unit. А потом девушка гибнет,
language transferences resulting in For example: «make ends meet» - потому что она вечно нарушает
the creation of such a text that at full сводить концы с концами, правила.
scope reveals the information of “costing the earth” – очень дорого
original text. The problem of 32. Differentiation of meaning in
transformation techniques is 31. Logical development translation
thoroughly elaborated by Translation transformation Translation transformation
contemporary scholars. The scholars techniques are complicated inter- techniques are complicated inter-
differentiate between lexical, language transferences resulting in language transferences resulting in
grammatical and stylistic the creation of such a text that at full the creation of such a text that at full
transformations. scope reveals the information of scope reveals the information of
Language systems of meaning are original text. The problem of original text. The problem of
also different. Any language is able transformation techniques is transformation techniques is
to describe things, notions, thoroughly elaborated by thoroughly elaborated by
phenomena and facts of life. This contemporary scholars. The scholars contemporary scholars. The scholars
ability of language ensures differentiate between lexical, differentiate between lexical,
cognition of the outside world. But grammatical and stylistic grammatical and stylistic
the ways of expressing these things transformations. transformations.
and notions usually vary in different Language systems of meaning are Language systems of meaning are
languages. Lexical transformations also different. Any language is able also different. Any language is able
are the devices of logical process to describe things, notions, to describe things, notions,
phenomena and facts of life. This the context) and lack of equivalence
ability of language ensures (doesn’t have analogs)
cognition of the outside world. But
the ways of expressing these things
and notions usually vary in different
languages. Lexical transformations
are the devices of logical process
that reveal the meaning of the
lexical unit of the SL that is
different in the context from the
dictionary one. Types of lexical
transformations: differentiation,
concretization, generalization,
logical development, antonymic
translation, general reinterpretation,
compensation.
Differentiation is the case when a
word with wide semantic meaning
in the SL has no corresponding TL
words with the same semantic
colouring and peculiarity. (e.g.
Ruthless – 1.Безжалостный, 2.
Оголтелый). English possesses
many words with wide meaning
which sometimes don’t have full
correspondence in the Russian
language. For example Russian
word лестница – “staircase” in
English can also be translated as
“ladder”, it means that they can
mean one and the same object
represented in different forms
(внутренняя лестница и
стремянка).
For example car «автомобиль»,
car «вагон», car «колесница» in
this case we can easily defined the
common meaning to all of these
words – transport facility, but in
other cases it may be impossible, for
example crew «экипаж, легкая
повозка», «экипаж, команда
корабля, танка».
Only with the help of context and
communication situation the
difference between nonidentity
meanings can be neutralized. For
conveying of differentiation
meaning the system of levels of
correspondences is used. Constant
correspondence that exists
independently upon the context is
absolute equivalence (proper names,
terms, rare animals). There can also
be partial equivalence (depends on