7. Translation of polysemantic words. Polysemantic words and the context

A polysemantic word, as has been shown, is a word having several meanings or lexical-semantic variants. These lexical-semantic variants possess both lexical and grammatical features which are closely interwoven. These different meanings or lexical-semantic variants of polysemantic words are revealed in the context. By the term “context” is understood the minimum stretch of speech determining each individual meaning of a word.

The context individualises the meaning of the word, brings it out, reveals the intended lexical-semantic variant. It is in this sense that we say that the meaning of a polysemantic word is determined by the context. The term context comprises both the narrow or micro context and the wide or macro context. The narrow context implies sentence or even a word combination, e.g.: bright star – яскрава зірка; bright wine – прозоре вино; bright day – світлий день; bright reply – блискуча відповідь; a bright boy –здібний, кмітливий хлопчик. The following examples illustrate the importance of the context in translation.

The construction of the UNO was no simple or easy task.

This explains the peculiar construction of the Security Council.

In the first sentence the word “construction” has the meaning of “act of devising and forming” (Webster III), in the second sentence the meaning is “structure”.

These different contexts bring out different lexical-semantic variants of the word “construction” which are reflected in the Ukrainian translation.

Створення ООН було не простим і не легким завданням.

Це пояснює своєрідну структуру Ради Безпеки.

The importance of the context for translation is obvious. The micro context implies not only lexical but also syntactical ambient elements, e.g.: the elm stood before the house – перед домом стояв в’яз; he stood a whisky and soda – він пригостив мене віскі з содовою водою.

The context or the situation not only reveals the intended meaning of a polysemantic word but also its concrete or abstract, its direct or transferred meaning.

A dictator relies upon his army and police force. – direct meaning

Диктатор спирається на свою армію та поліцію.

The whole army of words – уся маса слів – transferred meaning.

An army of insects – хмара комах – transferred meaning

He was crippled in the Vietnam war.

Він був покалічений на війні у В’єтнамі.

The criminal forces of reaction and anti-détente aim at crippling international cooperation.

Мета злочинної підбурювальної політики реакціонерів та супротивників розрядки – підірвати міжнародне співробітництво.

Contextual Meaning of Polysemantic Words

The so-called contextual meaning is always individual, occasional and context-bound. It lives only in its context and disappears if the context is altered.

The contextual meaning of a word is usually semantically richer than the dictionary meaning because of the connections which it arouses.

In an atomic war women and children will be the first hostages.

Першими жертвами в атомній війні будуть жінки й діти.

The dictionary meaning of the word “hostage” is заручник, but in this context it is synonymous with “victim” as every hostage might become a victim and die. Thus the contextual meaning of a word is not arbitrary; it is inherent in its semantic structure and is brought out by the writer who is able to perceive its potentialities.

The vital role of context in bringing out different lexical-semantic variants and its importance in translation are well illustrated by the use of the noun and the verb “frustration, to frustrate”.

That there is a great deal of frustration in the land today is made evident by a proliferation of societies, leagues, committees, councils and crusades which propose to stop the clock or to turn its hands back.

Про наявність у теперішній час глибокого розчарування в країні свідчить велика кількість всіляких товариств, ліг, комітетів, рад і хрестових походів, які прагнуть зупинити час або повернути його назад.

A second common denotation of the Rightist group is that they tend to attribute every frustration to betrayal by traitors.

Другою спільною рисою всіх правих груп є схильність приписувати всі невдачі запроданству і зраді.

It is hard to escape a conclusion that the essential negativism of the “either - or” approach is designed to frustrate rather than forward any kind of agreement.

Не можна не діти висновку, що крайній негативізм підходу «або – або» (все або нічого) розрахований на підрив, а не досягнення будь-якої угоди.