19. The passive voice

Some ways of expressing the passive voice in both languages may coincide in form and structure. Others should be transformed, in order to achieve faithfulness in translation. English passive forms referring to present tense have mostly no structural equivalents in Ukrainian where the auxiliary verb to be is usually omitted and the past participle acquires other morphological and semantic expression. One more faithful Ukrainian transformation of this passive sentence construction may be achieved by way of conveying it through the so-called middle voice form or -ся/-сь verb. Depending on the form of the passive construction and still more on the lexical verbal meaning, this voice form may have in Ukrainian some still other transformations, which express the same meaning of the passive construction; they may acquire the following outer forms of expression in Ukrainian: a) that of an indefinite personal sentence/clause; b) that of single predicative word/simple nominal predicate; c) a finite form of the verb/simple verbal predicate:

The common English passive voice constructions with the prepositional object as their subject have generally no equivalent passive constructions in Ukrainian. They are rendered then with the indefinite personal forms of the verb.

Some English passive voice constructions often change their outer and inner form and become active voice forms in Ukrainian.

20. The Word order

A most common example of dissimilarity between the parallel syntactic devices in the two languages is the role of the word order in English and in Russian. Both languages use a "direct" and an "inverted" word order. The predominantly fixed word order in the English sentence means that each case of its inversion makes the object carry a great communicative load. This emphasis cannot be reproduced in translation by such a common device as the inverted word order in the Russian sentence and the translator has to use some additional words to express the same idea.

The first group of problems stems from the broader semantic relationships between the attribute and the noun. The attribute may refer not only to some property of the object but also to its location, purpose, cause, etc. As often as not, translating the meaning of an English attributive group into Russian may involve a complete restructuring of the sentence.

The second group of problems results from the difficulties in handling multi-member attributive structures. The English-speaking people make wide use of "multi-storied" structures with complicated internal semantic relationships. Given the multiplicity of possible translations such structures should be analysed in terms of factors influencing the choice of Russian variants rather than with the aim of listing regular correspondences.

21. Modal Verbs and modal forms

Modality is a semantic category indicating the degree of factuality that the speaker ascribes to his message. Modal relationships make up an important part of the information conveyed in the message. Obviously a translation cannot be correct unless it has the same modality as the source text. The translator must be able to understand various modal relationships expressed by different means in SL and to choose the appropriate means in TL. Modal verbs are widely used in English to express various kinds of modality. The translator should be aware of the fact that an English modal verb can be found in some phrases the Russian equivalents of which have no particular modal forms. Most English modal verbs are polysemantic. So "must" can express obligation or a high degree of probability. "May" implies either probability or moral possibility. "Can" denotes physical or moral possibility, etc.

While handling modal forms the translator should not forget that while the English language has practically no modal particles, the Russian language has. Whenever necessary, Russian particles (ведь, хоть, мол) should be used to express modality which is expressed in the source text by other means or only implied